Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

1.0 Standards and References

The following main standards shall be standard to be considered for design.
 General Guidelines /norms
 Basis of structural design; Eurocodes

 Actions on structures Eurocodes

 Concrete structures design specifications, Eurocodes
 Geotechnical design specifications; Eurocodes

 Earthquake resistant structures requirements; Eurocodes

 Road standards Nepal Road Standard 2070
 Guidelines/norms for tunnel design

 Electrical standard; Eurocodes /Swiss Guidelines

 Road signalling standards; Traffic Safety Manuals of DoR
 Tunnel specifications; Eurocodes /Swiss Guidelines

 Road tunnel safety systems specification. Eurocodes /Swiss Guidelines

 Minimum Safety Requirements for Road Tunnels as per Explained un Employer’s
Requirements
The Project standards adopted for design are detailed in the following paragraphs.
 Nepal Road Standard – 2070, 2013
 Nepal Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge works – 2073, 2013
 IRC:37-2018 :Guidelines For The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth
Revision),INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
 Nepal Safety Barrier, 1997
 Nepal Delineation Measures, 1996
 Nepal Design Safe Side Drains, 1996
 Nepal Traffic Sign Manual, 1997
 EN 1990:2002, Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design.
 EN 1991 - all parts, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures.
 EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures. General rules and
rules for buildings.
 EN 1992-2:2005, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 2: Concrete
bridges - Design and detailing rules
 EN 1997-1:2004, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design. General rules.

 EN 1998-1:2004, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance.

General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings.

 EN 1998-2:2005, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part

2: Bridges
1|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

 EN 1998-5:2004, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance.

Foundations, retaining structure and geotechnical aspects.
 ASTRA 12006 (2008), effects of stone chips on protective galleries.
 ASTRA 11001 (2017), guideline: normal profiles. Federal Roads Office.
 ASTRA 13001 (2008), Guidelines: Ventilation of the road tunnels.
 ASTRA technical manual for operational and safety equipment 23 001.
 ASTRA technical manual tunnel / geotechnical 24 001.

 SIA 197 (2004), project planning tunnel, basics.

 SIA 197/2 (2004), project planning tunnel, road tunnel.
 ASTRA 12006 (2008), effects of rockfalls on protective galleries (rockfall load) [as
applicable]

 VSS 640 202 (2017) – Road geometrical normal profile.

 CEB N°187 - Comité-Euro-International du Béton (1988). Concrete Structures under
Impact and Impulsive Load, Bulletin d’information N° 187, Draft TG V/14, Lausanne.
 EOTA (2012). ETAG 027 – Falling rock protection kits. Guideline for european
technical approval.
 EN 206:2016, Concrete – Specification, performance, production and conformity
 EN 197-1:2011, Cement – Part 1: Composition, specifications and conformity criteria
for common cement
 EN 12620:2008, Aggregates for concrete

 EN 1537– Execution of special geotechnical works - Ground anchors

 EN ISO 22477-5:2018 - Geotechnical investigation and testing - Testing of
geotechnical structures - Part 5: Testing of grouted anchors
Swiss Federal road administration (FEDRO) directives for design of tunnel operating and safety
systems (supplement to Minimum Safety Requirements for Road Tunnels as per
Explained un Employer’s Requirements):

 FEDRO 13001 ventilation of the road tunnels (2008 V2.03)

 FEDRO 13002 ventilation of the safety tunnels of road tunnels (2008 V1.06)
 FEDRO 13004 fire detection in road tunnels (2007 V2.10)
 FEDRO 13005 video systems (2012 V1.01)
 FEDRO 13006 radio systems in road tunnels (2018 V5.00)
 FEDRO 13010 signaling of safety devices in road tunnels (2011 V2.06)
 FEDRO 13011 doors and gates in road tunnels (2009 V1.05)
 FEDRO 13015 lighting systems (2017 V1.11)

2|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Standard for tunnel ventilation system

 Road Tunnels: Vehicle Emissions and Air Demand for Ventilation, Technical
Committee D.5 Road Tunnels, PIARC, World Road Association, 2018R038EN
 Swiss Tunnel Ventilation Design Code (Federal Roads Office “FEDRO”; Richtlinie
Lüftung der Strassentunnel, Systemwahl, Dimensionierung und Ausstattung), V2.03,
2008

 Jet fans in portals and in niches, arrangement and efficiency, CFD, Franz Zumsteg,
2007
2.0 Recommended Software
 MIDAS/Civil 2019, Ver. 1.1. Developed by MIDAS Information Technology Co., Ltd.
(Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, 463-824, Korea).
 Plaxis 2D 2019, Plaxis bv, The Netherlands
 Unwedge, Rockscience, Toronto
 Larix 7, Cubus AG, Zürich
 Statik 7, Cubus AG, Zürich
 Fagus 7, Cubus AG, Zürich
 WXDEF, for section checks
 ecorisQ Rockyfor3D
 2D RocFall
 Elastic Multi – Layer software KENPAVE (University of Kentucky)
3.0 Input Data Provided by the Client
 Road Width
 Traffic Data
 Precipitation Data
 Temperature Data
 Wind Data
4.0 Geotechnical Characterization and Rockfall Hazard
4.1 Geotechnical and geomechanical characterization of the rock mass
Tunnel alignment : The tunnel shall be divided into homogeneous sections (“TO”).
Each section shall be characterized by specific rock mass parameters (such as RMR,Q-Value,
RQD, GSI, Jv, Jc, ecc.), as well as geotechnical parameters according to the chosen failure
criterion, joint parameters and permeability values.
Note : While preparing the section, Geotechnical Design Memorandum (GDM) based
Geotechnical Data Report (GDR) shall be used.

Road alignment : The road shall be divided into homogeneous sections (“TO”). Each
section shall be characterized by specific rock mass parameters (such as RMR,Q-Value, RQD,
GSI, Jv, Jc, ecc.), as well as geotechnical parameters according to the chosen failure criterion,
joint parameters and permeability values.

3|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

4.2 Tunnel hazard scenarios

The prognosis hazard scenarios shall be assessed. At least the following hazards shall be
evaluated :
 Rock falling/wedges

 Shear zone and fault gouge

 Detachment of slabs
 Tunnel face instability

 Loosening
 Plastic deformation
 Rockburst

 Water inflow
 Gas fields
4.3 Rockfall hazard evaluation (if applicable)
4.3.1 Evaluation of rockfall hazard probability
3D analyses and simulations to detect the trajectories for the rockfall process shall be
performed, in order to evaluate all areas subjected to rockfall risk, based on a detailed
topographic 3D model of the whole mountain side (from the top to the river) where the existing
road is located.
4.3.2 Design rock block dimension
Characteristic and, hence, design rock block dimension must be evaluated, based on field data
(geological mapping and recording, analysis of orthophotos,…) and statistic analysis of
recorded block sizes along the existing road.
4.3.3 Design rockfall energy
Based on 2D/3D rockfall simulations in different characteristic sections along the road
alignment and on the assumed design boulder volume, the design impact energy for rock
protections must be estimated along the road alignment. For the rockfall simulation, proper
surface parameters must be assumed based on proper site surveys.
4.4 Hydrogeology
Hydrogeology of the project area must be investigated, considering that:
o The morphology presents multiple streams that run along the slope, whose water
flow rate varies greatly depending on the season.
o During periods of heavy and persistent rainfall, the presence of a ground water
circulation at the interface bedrock - soil cover can be expected.
o Suspended aquifers and water pockets in the rock mass are possible, locally and/or
seasonally.
o The conditions of the joints, in particular the opening and the interlocking degree of
the rock mass, are the determining factors for water circulation in the bedrock.

4|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.1 Materials
The main properties of the materials foreseen within the project are detailed in the following
paragraphs for the different specific civil works and then summarized in table within paragraph
5.1.7.
5.1.1 Tunnel
5.1.1.1 Concrete
Temporary Shotcrete (Tunnel) for rock excavation support
• Reference Code: UNI EN 1992 1-1, EN 206:2016
• Concrete Class: C25/30
• fck = 25 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Exposure Class: XC2
• Slump Class: S4
• Maximum Aggregate: 8mm (EN 12620)
• Steel fibres (where foreseen):
- Diameter/Length: 0.55 mm/33 mm
- L/D aspect ratio: 60
- Tensile strength: > 1100 MPa
- Elongation at break: < 4%
- Dosage: 50 kg/m3
Permanent shotcrete for Portal Excavation Support
• Reference Code: UNI EN 1992 1-1, EN 206:2016
• Concrete Class: C30/37
• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (UNI EN 197-1)
• Exposure Class: XC4 and XD1
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
• Slump Class: S4
• Maximum Aggregate: 16mm (EN 12620)
Concrete for inner lining
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XD1 and XF1
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant

5|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Lean Concrete
• Concrete class, C12/15
• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 15 MPa
• Min. cement content: 150kg/m3
Cement-Based Grout For Rock bolts/Anchors Injection
• Type: High strength, non-shrink cementitious construction grout with aggregate size
suitable for the effective pouring thickness
• Plasticizer: 1% - 2% on weight
• Strength: 5MPa after 48h, 25MPa after 28d

5.1.1.2 Steel
Steel for reinforcement
a. STEEL RIBBED BARS:
• Bar diameter, D = according to calculations (between 14 mm and 22 mm)
• Steel grade B500 B
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 500 MPa
b. WIRE MESH
• Bar diameter, D = 5mm
• Steel grade min. B500 A
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 500 MPa

Structural Steel
a. STEEL RIBS: for excavation support
• Profile: HEB 180
• Steel grade S355
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 355 MPa
b. LATTICE GIRDERS for tunnel excavation support
• Profile: according to tunnel support classes
• Type: JB-3-Gurt or similar
• Steel grade S235; S500
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 235MPa; 500 MPa

Rock bolts
a. ROCK BOLTS, SWELLEX PM 16 for tunnel rock excavation support
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 160 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 130 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 50 mm
b. ROCK BOLTS, SWELLEX PM 24 for tunnel rock excavation support
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 240 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 200 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 50 mm
c. CEMENTED ROCK BOLTS, M33 for tunnel rock excavation support
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 460 kN
6|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 364 kN

• Type: Belloli Belcem M33 or similar
• Drilling diameter ≥ 60 mm
d. CEMENTED ROCK BOLTS, M27 for tunnel rock excavation support
• Ftk ≥ 350 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 280 kN
• Type: Belloli Belcem M27 or similar
• Drilling diameter ≥ 60 mm
e. CEMENTED ROCK BOLTS, M24 for tunnel rock excavation support
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 250 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 200 kN
• Type: Belloli Belcem M24 or similar
• Drilling diameter ≥ 60 mm
f. PERMANENT ROCK BOLTS, GEWI BAR 32 for portal excavation support
1. Nominal Diameter : 32mm
2. Cross Sectional Area: 804mm2
3. Steel grade: S500/550
4. Yield Strength, Fyk≥500 MPa
5. Tensile Strength, Ftk ≥550 MPa
6. Load at yield Py: 402 kN
7. Ultimate load Pt: 442 kN
8. Weight: 6.31 kg/m
9. Other requirements: DCP
10. Weight DCP: 9.50 kg/m
11. Drilling Diameter: 120mm
g. PERMANENT ROCK BOLTS, GEWI PLUS 43, for portal excavation support
1. Nominal Diameter : 43mm
2. Cross Sectional Area: 1452mm2
3. Steel grade: S670/800
4. Yield Strength, Fyk≥ 670 MPa
5. Tensile Strength, Ftk≥ 800 MPa
6. Load at yield: 973 kN
7. Ultimate load: 1162 kN
8. Weight: 11.40 kg/m
9. Other requirements: DCP
• Weight DCP: 15.80 kg/m
• Drilling Diameter: 120mm

7|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Steel for Pre-tensioned Anchors

TEMPORARY PRE TENSIONED GROUTED ANCHOR for portal excavation support
• Harmonic Steel: 0.6’’
• Steel grade: S1670/1860
• Yield Strength, Fyk≥ 1670 MPa
• Tensile Strength, Ftk≥ 1860 MPa
• Number of strands: 5
• Nominal Strand area, Ai: 140 mm2
• Load at yield, Py: 234 kN/strand
• Ultimate Load, Pt: 260 kN/strand
• Prestress Load: 70 kN/strand
• Drilling Diameter: 200mm

Steel for Forepoling

a. FOREPOLING BARS for rock tunnel excavation support
• fyk ≥ 550 MPa
• Type: Minova MAI SDA R51L or similar
b. FOREPOLING TUBES
• Steel grade S355
• External diameter 114.3 mm, thickness 16 mm
5.1.1.3 Fiberglass anchors
• Ftk ≥ 800 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 100mm
• Type: tubes 60 mm (external diameter) / 40 mm (internal diameter) or similar
5.1.1.4 Waterproofing
The waterproofing system will be considered in the calculation of the final lining. According to
our experience into similar projects, waterproofing layer can be modelled by means of elastic
springs, having the following stiffness: kwtpf = 60000 KN/m3

5.1.2 Tunnel technical Buildings (if applicable)

5.1.2.1 Concrete
a. Concrete for foundations
• Concrete class, C25/30
• Exposure classes XC2
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 30 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4

8|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• Concrete cover = 50mm

• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
b. Concrete for external walls
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XD1 and XF1
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
c. Concrete for internal walls and slab
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC3
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
d. Concrete for top slab
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XF3
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
e. Lean Concrete
• Concrete class, C12/15
• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 15 MPa
• Min. cement content: 150kg/m3
5.1.2.2 Steel reinforcement
Steel ribbed bars for reinforcement:
• Bar diameter, D = according to calculations (between 10 mm and 22 mm)

9|P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• Steel grade B500 B

• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 500 MPa
• Tensile Strength, ftk ≥ 550 MPa
• Minimum value k, ftk/ fyk ≥ 1.08
• Elastic Modulus, E, 210000 MPa
5.1.3 Rockshed (if applicable)
5.1.3.1 Concrete
a. Concrete for foundations
• Concrete class, C25/30
• Exposure classes XC2
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 30 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
b. Concrete for walls
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XD1 and XF1
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
c. Concrete for top slab
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XF3
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant

10 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Lean Concrete
• Concrete class, C12/15
• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 15 MPa
• Min. cement content: 150kg/m3
5.1.3.2 Steel reinforcement
Steel ribbed bars for reinforcement:
• Bar diameter, D = according to calculations (between 10 mm and 28 mm)
• Steel grade B500 B
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 500 MPa
• Tensile Strength, ftk ≥ 550 MPa
• Minimum value k, ftk/ fyk ≥ 1.08
• Elastic Modulus, E, 210000 MPa
5.1.3.3 Cushion layer
Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregate type Leca 0-30mm or similar, placed in stratum 50cm
high, compacted by vibrating plate.
• Specific weight of the supplied material = 390 kg/m3
• Design specific weight = 6 kN/m3
• Grains resistance to crushing ≥ 1.5 N/mm2
• Water absorption after 24 hours < 25%
• Design Young Modulus: E = 25000 kPa
• Friction angle: Φk= 40°
• Max granulometry dimension: Dmax= 30 mm
5.1.4 Culverts
5.1.4.1 Concrete
a. Concrete for foundations
• Concrete class, C25/30
• Exposure classes XC2
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• Cubic Characteristic strength Rck ≥ 30 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (EN 197-1)
• Slump Class: S4
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
b. Lean Concrete
• Concrete class, C12/15

11 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• Cubic compressive strength Rck ≥ 15 MPa

• Min. cement content: 150kg/m3
5.1.4.2 Steel
a. Steel for reinforcement – Ribbed Bars:
• Bar diameter, D = according to calculations (between 14 mm and 22 mm)
• Steel grade B500 B
• Yield Strength, fyk ≥ 500 MPa
5.1.5 Retaining Walls
5.1.5.1 Concrete
• Concrete class, C30/37
• Exposure classes XC4, XD1 and XF1
• Maximum aggregate diameter, 32 mm
• fck = 30 MPa
• Concrete cover = 50mm
• Alkali Aggregate Reaction (AAR) resistant
5.1.5.2 Steel for reinforcement
• Bar diameter, D = according to calculations
• Steel grade B500 B
• Yield Strength, fyk = 500 MPa
5.1.5.3 Rockbolts
a. CEMENTED BOLTS FOR ANCHORS
• Type: Permanent Gewi diam. 25 mm (steel grade B500B) with preinjected corrugated
sheating or equivalent
• Tensile Strength, Ftk ≥ 285 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 246 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm
5.1.5.4 Micropiles
b. CEMENTED BOLTS FOR MICROPILES
• Type: Permanent Gewi diam. 32 mm (steel grade B500B) with preinjected corrugated
sheating or equivalent
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 466 kN
• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 402 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm
c. CEMENTED BOLTS FOR MICROPILES
• Type: Permanent Gewi diam. 40 mm (steel grade B500B) with preinjected corrugated
sheating or equivalent
12 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 728 kN

• Yield Strength, Fyk ≥ 628 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm
5.1.6 Slope Stabilisation with Shotcrete + anchor bolts
5.1.6.1 Shotcrete (Permanent)
• Reference Code: UNI EN 1992 1-1, EN 206-1
• Concrete Class: C30/37
• Characteristic Cubic Strength: Rck >37 MPa
• Cement Type: III-IV (UNI EN 197-1)
• Exposure Class: XC4/XD1/XF1
• Resistant at AAR
• Slump Class: S4
• Maximum Aggregate: 8 mm (EN 12620)
• Steel fiber (where applicable) : minimum 50kg/cum
5.1.6.2 Steel for reinforcement
a. STEEL WIRE MESH
• Bar diameter, D = 6mm
• Mesh spacing = (100x100)mm
• Steel grade min. B500 A
• Yield Strength fyk = 500 MPa
5.1.6.3 Steel for bolts
a. ROCKBOLTS:
• Type: Permanent Gewi diam. 25 mm (steel grade B500B) with preinjected corrugated
sheating or equivalent
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 357 kN
• Yield Strength Fyk ≥ 308 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm

13 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.1.7 Summary of materials

5.1.7.1 Cementitious Materials
Table 5.1 : Lean and Structural Concrete

Table 5.2 : Shotcrete

Table 5.3: Cement-based grout for rock bolts/anchor

14 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.1.7.2 Steel Materials

Table 5.4 : Steel for reinforcement

Table 5.5: Structural Steel

Table 5.6: Temporary Rockbolts for tunnel excavation

15 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Table 5.7 : Permanent rock bolts for slope stability

Table 5.8 : Temporary Pre-tensioned anchor for excavation stability at portals

Table 5.9: Forepoling

>

5.1.7.3 Fiberglass
Table5.10 : Fiberglass

16 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.2 Design Working Life

Design Working Life of structures is defined as “the period of time during which the construction
is assumed to be used for intended purposes, with anticipated maintenance, but without
substantial repairs”.
According to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0) the design working lives (Tunnel and Rock Shed) of
Category 5 – Monumental building structures, bridges and other civil engineering
structures – 100 years.
According to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0) the design working lives (Technical Building and
Other Road structures,Slope stabilization and mitigation related) of Category 4 –
Building structures and other common structures – 50 years.
According to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0) the design working lives of civil engineering structures with
low or moderate economic repercussion is 50 years.
This requirement has to be met by means of a design that includes an appropriate selection of
the structural solutions and construction materials, a careful construction compliant with the
design and a suitable inspection of the design, where appropriate. Construction and operation
activities, together with an appropriate use and maintenance of the structures are as well of
major importance to guarantee such requirement.
For temporary structures, such as for the excavation works at the tunnel portals, a design
working life of 10 years has been considered.
Table 5.11 Design Working Life (EN 1990)
Design working life
Elements Design working life category
(years)
Tunnel and Rock Shed
related structures 5 100
(Technical Building and
Other Road
structures,Slope
stabilization and
mitigation related) 4 50

5.3 Design Approach

Structural and geotechnical design is carried out according to Eurocodes, with reference to the
semi-probabilistic method (limit state). Load Combinations, safety and partial factor coefficients,
design and verifications are considered both at the Ultimate Limit State (USL) and at the
Serviceability Limit State (SLS), according to Eurocodes.
5.3.1 Design conditions
The relevant design conditions are considered taking into account the circumstances under
which the structure is requested to fulfil its function, which can be classified as:
o transient situations, with reference to temporary conditions applicable to a structure,
e.g. an executive phase or repair;
o persistent situations, which refer to normal service conditions;

17 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

o accidental or exceptional situations, which refer to exceptional conditions applicable

to a structure, ex. rockfall, collisions, fires, explosions, etc..;
o seismic situations, which refer to conditions applicable to the structure when
subjected to seismic events.
Table 5.12 Design Conditions
Design conditions Description
Persistent Condition of normal use
Transient Temporary conditions, e.g. during execution or repair
Accidental Exceptional conditions structure/exposure, e.g. fire, explosion
Seismic Condition when structure subject to seismic events
Note that each category requires a specific analysis of the time horizon in which it occurs; the
design situations can occur throughout the design life of a structure or be limited to a specific
executive phase or repair.
5.3.2 Principles of Limit State Design
5.3.2.1 Ultimate Limit State (ULS) – Structure design
The Ultimate Limit States (ULS) for structural design concern:
· The safety of people, and/or
· The safety of the structure.
The following ultimate limit states are relevant for structures design (EN 1990):
· EQU: loss of equilibrium of structure, considered as rigid body;
· STR: internal failure or excessive deformation of the structure or structural
members,
When considering a limit state of static equilibrium of the structure (EQU), it shall be verified
that:
Ed,dst ≤ Ed,stb
where:
Ed,dst is the design value of the effect of destabilising actions ; Ed,stb is the design value of
the effect of stabilising actions.
When considering a limit state of rupture or excessive deformation of a section, member or
connection (STR), it shall be verified that:
Ed ≤ Rd
where:
Ed is the design value of the effect of actions such as internal force, moment or a vector
representing several internal forces or moments;
Rd is the design value of the corresponding resistance.
When considering a limit state of rupture or excessive deformation of a section, member or
connection (STR), it shall be verified that:
Ed ≤ Rd
where:

18 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Ed is the design value of the effect of actions such as internal force, moment or a vector
representing several internal forces or moments;
Rd is the design value of the corresponding resistance.
ULS load combinations considered for design are here briefly summarized.
5.3.2.2 Ultimate Limit State (ULS) – Geotechnical design
When defining the design situations and the limit states, the following factors should be
considered:
o site conditions with respect to overall stability and ground movements;
o nature and size of the structure and its elements, including any special requirements
such as the design life;
o conditions with regard to its surroundings (e.g.: neighbouring structures, traffic,
utilities, vegetation, hazardous chemicals);
o ground conditions;
o ground-water conditions;
o regional seismicity;
o influence of the environment (hydrology, surface water, subsidence, seasonal
changes of temperature and moisture).
Limit states can occur either in the ground or in the structure or by combined failure in the
structure and the ground.
The following ultimate limit states are relevant for project structures (EN 1997):
o EQU: loss of equilibrium of the ground, considered as a rigid body, in which the
strengths of the ground are insignificant in providing resistance.
o GEO: failure or excessive deformation of the ground where the strengths of soil are
significant in providing resistance.
When considering a limit state of static equilibrium or of overall displacements of the structure
or ground (EQU), it shall be verified that:
Ed,dst ≤ Ed,stb + Td
where:
Ed,dst is the design value of the effect of destabilising actions ;
Ed,stb is the design value of the effect of stabilising actions;
Td is design value of total shearing resistance that develops around a block of ground in which
a ground of tension piles is placed, or on the part of the structure in contact with the ground.
When considering a limit state of rupture or excessive deformation of a section, member or
connection (GEO), it shall be verified that:
Ed ≤ Rd
where:
Ed is the design value of the effect of actions such as internal force, moment or a vector
representing several internal forces or moments;

19 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Rd is the design value of the corresponding resistance.

According to EN 1997-1 ultimate state limit design for STR and GEO the manner in which
equations of “design resistance” and “design effects on action” are applied shall be determined
using one of three Design Approaches.

Design Approach 1 has been considered in the project and it is detailed in the following.

5.3.2.2.1 Design Approach 1

According to Eurocode EN 1990, design of structural members (STR) involving geotechnical
actions and the resistance of ground (GEO) should be verified using only one of the different
three approaches supplemented for geotechnical actions and resistances, by EN 1997.
For the structural verifications in this DPR, Approach 1 has been adopted, where partial factors
are applied to actions and to ground strength parameters.
Except for the design of axially loaded piles and anchors, it shall be verified that a limit state of
rupture or excessive deformation will not occur with either of the following combinations of sets
of partial factors:
Combination 1: A1 “+” M1 “+” R1
Combination 2: A2 “+” M2 “+” R1
where “+” implies: “to be combined with”.
For the design of axially loaded piles and anchors, it shall be verified that a limit state of rupture
or excessive deformation will not occur with either of the following combinations of sets of
partial factors:
Combination 2: A2 “+” M2 “+” R4
In Combination 1, partial factors are applied to actions and to ground strength parameters. In
Combination 2, partial factors are applied to actions, to ground resistances and sometimes to
ground strength parameters.
In Combination 2, set M1 is used for calculating resistances of piles or anchors and set M2 for
calculating unfavourable actions on piles owing e.g. to negative skin friction or transverse
loading.
If it is obvious that one of the two combinations governs the design, calculations for the other
combination need not be carried out. However, different combinations may be critical to
different aspects of the same design..

5.3.2.3 Serviceability Limit State (ULS) – Structure design

The Serviceability Limit State (SLS) concerns:
o the functioning of the structure or structural members under normal use;
o the comfort of people;
o the appearance of the construction works.

20 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

The verification of serviceability limit states is based on criteria concerning the following
aspects:
a) deformations that affect
o the appearance,
o the comfort of users, or
o the functioning of the structure, or that cause damage to finishes or non-structural
members;
b) damage that is likely to adversely affect
o the appearance,
o the durability, or
o the functioning of the structure.
The combination of actions to be taken into account in the relevant design situation should be
appropriate for the serviceability requirements and performance criteria being verified:
Ed ≤ Cd
Ed design value of the effects of actions specified in the serviceability criterion, determined on
the basis of the relevant combination.
Cd limiting design value of the relevant serviceability criterion: stress limitation, crack control
and deformation control.
5.3.2.4 Serviceability Limit State (ULS) – Geotechnical
Verification for serviceability limit states in the ground or in a structural section, element or
connection, shall either require that:
Ed ≤ Cd
Ed design value of the effects of actions specified in the serviceability criterion, determined
on the basis of the relevant combination.
Cd limiting design value of the relevant serviceability criterion: stress limitation, crack control
and deformation control.
A limiting value for a particular deformation is the value at which a serviceability limit state is
deemed to occur in the supported structure. For retaining structures, such as wall as according
to Swiss standard,
5.3.3 Combination of Actions
For each critical load case, the design value of the effect of actions shall be determined by
combining the values of actions are considered to occur simultaneously. Each combination of
actions should include a leading variable action, or an accidental action.
The combination of actions for ULS are defined symbolically by the following expressions.
5.3.3.1 ULS fundamental static load combination

21 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

where:
x partial factor taking account of possible unfavourable deviations of the action from the
representative values of the actions
Ψ partial factor depending on the limit state considered.
Ψ 0Qk combination value, chosen so that the probability the effects caused by the combination
will be exceeded is approximately the same as by the characteristic value of an individual
action
Gk characteristic value of permanent action
Qk characteristic value of variable action
P relevant representative value of a prestressing action = 0

5.3.3.2 ULS accidental load combination

where:
γ partial factor depending on the LS considered;
Ψ1Qk frequent value of the variable action to be considered
Ψ2Qk quasi-permanent value of the variable action to be considered
Gk characteristic value of permanent action;
Qk characteristic value of variable action;
P relevant representative value of a prestressing action = 0;
Ad design value of the accidental action considered (rockfall)
5.3.3.3 ULS seismic load combination

where:
Ψ partial factor depending on the LS considered;
Ψ2Qk quasi-permanent value, chosen so that the total period of time for which it will be
exceeded is a large fraction of the reference period;
Gk characteristic value of permanent action;
Qk characteristic value of variable action;

22 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

P relevant representative value of a prestressing action = 0;

AEd design value of the seismic action.

5.3.3.4 Serviceability Limit states

The combinations of actions to be taken into account in the relevant design situations should be
appropriate for the serviceability requirements and performance criteria being verified.
Characteristic combination (adopted for irreversible limit state)

Frequent combination (adopted for reversible limit state)

Quasi-permanent combination (adopted for long-term effects and appearance of the structure)

5.3.4 Partial Safety Factors

5.3.4.1 Ultimate Limit States Partial Factors
The partial factors are briefly summarized in the following tables. For further details and specific
situations, see the relevant reports.
Table 5.13 STR/GEO ULS static condition coefficients

STR/GE STR/GE
Coefficient O O
γF EQU A1 A2

Favorable 0.90 1.00 1.00

Permanent load (structures) Unfavorable γG1 1.10 1.35 1.00

Favorable 0.90 1.00 1.00

Permanent load
(not structures) (defined) Unfavorable γG2 (A) 1.10 1.35 1.00

Favorable 0.00 0.00 0.00

Live load: wind, snow, others Unfavorable γQi 1.50 1.50 1.30

Favorable 0.00 0.00 0.00

γε2, γε3, γε4

Shrinkage, creep, settlements Unfavorable 1.20 1.20 1.00
Table 5.14 For traffic load, where relevant, the following coefficients have been considered.
STR/GEO STR/GEO
Coefficient, γF EQU A1 A2
Live load: Traffic load Favorable γQ(TS) 0.00 0.00 0.00

23 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

(if relevant, where applied) Unfavorable 1.35 1.50 1.15

According to EN 1997-1 the same partial factors on actions are applied in geotechnical
structures design for verification of equilibrium limit sate (EQU).
The partial factors for actions for the ultimate limit states in the accidental and seismic design
situations have been assumed equal to 1.0, according to Eurocode EN 1990.
Table 5.15 Partial coefficient for nominal soil/rock nominal parameters (M)
Material Normal Strength EQU STR/GEO M1 STR/GEO/M2
Ground Friction Angle tanΦ’k γΦ’ 1.25 1.00 1.25
γc’
Cohesion c’k 1.25 1.00 1.25
γcu 1.00
Undraind Strength cuk 1.40 1.40
γ 1.00
Unit Self Weight, γT 1.00 1.00
For the ground partial factors, for the ultimate limit states in seismic design situations, M2
values are adopted, according to EN 1998-5, par. 3.
Table 16 Partial coefficient for nominal material strengths (M) (EN 1992-1-1)
Transient/ Seismic/
Material Nominal strength
Permanent Accidental

Concrete
Compression/tension/ γc 1.50 1.20
shear strength fck, fctk , vk

Steel reinforcement Yield strength fyk γs 1.15 1.0

Table 17 Partial coefficient for global strengths (R)

Element Strength Symbol R1 R4

Shallow foundation Bearing capacity γR 1.00 -

(EN 1997, A.5) Sliding γR 1.00 -
Base Bearing capacity γR,b 1.00 1.3
Lateral Bearing capacity
Piles foundation
(compr.) γR,s 1.00 1.3
(EN 1997, A.6) Total bearing capacity (compr.) γR,s 1.00 1.3

Lateral Bearing capacity

(tensile) γR,s,t 1.25 1.6
Transient γR,a,t 1.1 1.1
Pre-tensioned
Anchoring
(EN 1997, A.12) Permanent γR,a,p 1.1 1.1

Bearing capacity γR,V 1.00 -

Retaining structures
(EN 1997, A.13)
Sliding γR,H 1.00 -
Downstream Earth Strength γR,E 1.00 -
24 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Global stability -
Earth Resistance γR,E 1.00
(EN 1997, A.14)

For verifications of structural (STR) and geotechnical (GEO) limit states of pile foundations, the
following correlation factors ξ shall be applied to derive the characteristic resistance of axially
loaded piles:
o ξ3 on the mean values of the calculated resistances from ground test results;
o ξ4 on the minimum value of the calculated resistances from ground test results;
Correlation factors ξ3, ξ4, to derive characteristic values from ground test results (n - the
number of profiles of tests).

Table 18 Correlation factors for piles

ξ for n = 1 2 3 4 5 7 10

ξ3 1.40 1.35 1.33 1.31 1.29 1.27 1.25

ξ4 1.40 1.27 1.23 1.20 1.15 1.12 1.08

5.3.4.2 Serviceability Partial Factors

Table 19 SLS actions partial factors
Category Actions Description Ψ0 Ψ1 Ψ2

Imposed loads in
B buildings office areas 0.70 0.50 0.30

Imposed loads in
E buildings storage areas 1.00 0.90 0.80

Traffic area,
G 0.70 0.50 0.30
roads on surface
30kN < vehicle weight ≤160 kN

- Snow loads on buildings 0.70 0.50 0.20

- Wind loads on buildings 0.60 0.20 0.00

0.60 0.50 0.00

- Temperature
(non-fire) in buildings

Actions (construction) Description Ψ0 Ψ1 Ψ2

Construction loads Qc 1.00 - 1.00

Ψ- values are valid also for seismic and accidental conditions, but considering that during
accidental events other live loads such as snow and wind have not to be considered as
simultaneously with the accidental action.
25 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.3.5 Durability
The structure is designed such that deterioration over its design working life does not impair the
performance of the structure below that intended, having due regard to its environment and the
anticipated level of maintenance.
In order to achieve an adequately durable structure, the following should be taken into account:
o the intended or foreseeable use of the structure;
o the required design criteria;
o the expected environmental conditions;
o the composition, properties and performance of the materials and products;
o the properties of the soil;
o the choice of the structural system;
o the shape of members and the structural detailing;
o the quality of workmanship, and the level of control;
o the particular protective measures;
o the intended maintenance during the design working life.
The environmental conditions is identified at this design stage, so that their significance can be
assessed in relation to durability and adequate provisions can be made for protection of the
materials used in the structure.
5.3.5.1 Environmental exposure classes
According to standards EN 206-1, EN 1992-1-1, the following classes of environmental
exposure and minimum strength class of concrete have been considered for the different
structural elements of the main protective structures, as reported in the following table. The
maximum water-cement ratio and minimum cement or combination content are given referring
to normal-weight concrete with 20 mm maximum aggregate size. For further details on
materials see specific report and drawing.
Table 20 Exposure classes and concrete strength classes for durability according to EN 206
Exposure Class Min. Concrete Max Min Cement
strength class Water/Cement Content
Ratio (kg/cum)
Rockshed
Foundations XC2 C25/30 0.60 280
Walls and Columns XC4, XD1, XF1 C30/37 0.50 300
Top Slab XC4, XF3 C30/37 0.50 320
Tunnel

Shotcrete (temporary) XC2 C25/30 0.60 280

Inner lining XC4, XD1, XF1 C30/37 0.50 300
Excavation supports
Shotcrete XC4, XD1, XF1 C30/37 0.50 300
(permanent)
Retaining Walls
Concrete XC4, XD1, XF1 C30/37 0.50 300
Tunnel technical building
Foundations XC2 C25/30 0.60 280
26 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Perimetral Walls XC4, XD1, XF1 C30/37 0.50 300

Top Slab XC4, XF3 C30/37 0.50 320
Internal Slab/Walls XC3 C30/37 0.50 300
5.3.5.2 Concrete cover
The concrete cover equal to the distance between the surface of the reinforcement closest to
the nearest concrete surface (including links and stirrups) and the nearest concrete surface.
Nominal cover cnom = cmin + Δcdev
where:
Δcdev additional cover for tolerances (= 10mm)
cmin minimum cover = max[cmin,b; cmin,dur+Δcdur,γ-Δcdur,st-Δcdur,add;10mm]
cmin,b minimum cover due to bond requirements: reinforcement steel -> separated rebars:
cmin,b = diameter of bar (cmin,b,max = 28mm)
cmin,dur minimum cover due to environmental conditions (cmin,dur = 35mm for XD1)
Δcdur,γ additive safety element = 5mm
Δcdur,st ,stainless steel (= 0)
Δcdur,add ,additional protection (e.g. coating) (= 0)
Concrete cover value is given for reinforcement steel just for durability assessment.
The following concrete covers for main reinforcement have been adopted, according to the
considered exposure classes and providing an unified specification for all structural elements:
50 mm for all formed concrete exposed to weather or in contact with the ground or weather.
50 mm for concrete slabs and walls and for bars and girders neither exposed to weather nor in
contact with the ground.
5.3.6 Design verifications
Ultimate limit states (ULS) and serviceability limit state (SLS) verifications have been
considered according to Eurocodes.
Safety checks are performed by means of the Partial Factors Method: for all relevant design
situations, verifying if the limit states are not exceeded when design values of the actions,
material properties and geometric dates are introduced in structural and load models.
The non-exceedance limit check allows to state that the probability of reaching a certain limit
situation is less than the value set by the standard during the structure life or during a
timeframe of reference in case of execution/constructive phase.
The verifications ensure that:
 Assumed design actions do not cause the collapse of the structure or the ground (even
in exceptional/accidental situations);
 Effects of the assumed design actions do not exceed the design strength of the
structure at the ultimate limit state;
 Effects of the assumed actions do not exceed the functionality criteria for the service
limit state.
Ultimate limit states connected both to the structure collapse (or the whole structure-ground)
and to a partial failure are considered; Service ultimate states that match the conditions beyond
27 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

which specific operational requirements connected to the structure or its elements are no longer
met are taken into account. For geotechnical verifications refer also to 5.6.
5.3.6.1 Performance Level of structures
ULS
For the design of new structures these performances are considered at ULS for
permanent/transient loads conditions
Table 21 ULS permanent/transient structures performance.

Behaviour Performance

Non-linear materials/sections.
Safety, no collapse: Ed ≤ Rd
Linear/Non-linear structure behaviour.
For the design of new structures these performances are considered at ULS for accidental
loads conditions:
Table 22 ULS accidental structures performance.

Behaviour Performance

Non-linear materials/sections. Safety, no collapse: Ed ≤ Rd

Linear/Non-linear structure behaviour. Fire, REI
SEISMIC PERFORMANCE
According to EN 1998 to the design and construction of civil engineering works in seismic
regions, structures and geotechnical structures of new structures should ensure that in the
event of earthquakes:
 human lives are protected;
 damage is limited;
 structures important for civil protection remain operational.
5.3.6.2 SLS verifications
5.3.6.2.1 SLS Stress limits for concrete structures
According to EN 1992-1 the compressive stress in the concrete is limited in order to avoid
longitudinal cracks, micro-cracks or high levels of creep, where they could result in
unacceptable effects on the function of the structure.
Characteristic load combination: σc ≤ k1×fck = 0.60 × fck
Quasi-permanent load combination: σc ≤ k2× fck = 0.45 × fck
According to EN 1992-1 the tensile stresses in the reinforcement are limited in order to avoid
inelastic strain, unacceptable cracking or deformation.
Characteristic load combination: σs≤ k3× fyk = 0.8 × fyk
Imposed deformations: σs≤ k4× fyk = 1.0 × f yk
5.3.6.2.2 SLS Crack control for concrete structures

28 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

A limiting calculated crack width, wmax, taking into account the function and nature of the
structure and the costs of limiting cracking, is established according to EN 1992-1-1 (Table
7.1N), for the different exposure classes.
For steel reinforced concrete, suggested values are reported.
Table 23 Concrete crack control

Exposure class Reinforced members

Quasi-permanent load combination
XC2 –XC4 - XD1 W max = 0.3 mm
For temporary structures, that develops loads for short time of construction, crack control will be
neglected.
Measures to control leakage such as drains and water stops shall be used.

5.3.6.2.3 Deflection control

According to Eurocode EN 1992-1-1, deflections of slabs and beams should satisfy the
following limits to avoid irreparable damages of the element and of adjacent parts of the
structure, respectively:
δ ≤ L/250, for quasi-permanent load combinations during constructions;
δ ≤ L/500, for quasi-permanent load combinations after constructions (live load).
The appearance and general utility of the structure could be impaired when the sag of a beam,
slab or cantilever subjected to quasi-permanent loads exceeds span/250. The sag is assessed
relative to the supports.
Deflections that could damage adjacent parts of the structure should be limited. For the
deflection after construction, span/500 is normally an appropriate limit for quasi-permanent and
frequent loads. Other limits may be considered, depending on the sensitivity of adjacent parts.
5.4 Design Load
Design loads for all structures will be determined in accordance with the criteria described
below, unless the applicable building code requirements are more stringent.
5.4.1 Tunnel
5.4.1.1 Concrete dead load
Characteristic value of the shotcrete self-weight is: 25 KN/m 3
Characteristic value of the cast in situ concrete is: : 25 KN/m 3
5.4.1.2 Unstable blocks
The weight of the rock shall be assumed for all lithologies according to the
geological/geotechnical evaluations.Moreover, parameters for joints resistance shall be
assumed in the calculations, based on performed geomechanical characterization.
5.4.1.3 Rock loosening and soil pressure
Loosening of the rock mass around the tunnel shall be estimated through well recognized
design approaches as a parabolic-linear load, according to Terzaghi’s theory) or derived by
FEM calculations. Loosening heights and the resulting maximum loads (at the tunnel key) both

29 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

on primary lining and on inner lining must be defined according to geomechanical

characteristics estimated along the tunnel.

0.5P 0.5P

Figure 5.1: Example of loosening load at the tunnel contour

5.4.1.4 Seismic load
Earthquake is not considered for the underground part of the tunnel, as no shear lines (faults)
has been detected along the tunnel.
5.4.2 Tunnel Technical Building
5.4.2.1 Dead load
Characteristic value of the cast in situ concrete is:
Characteristic value of the shotcrete self-weight is: 25 KN/m 3
Characteristic value of the cast in situ concrete is: : 25 KN/m 3
Moreover, loads from permanent equipments and installations shall be considered according to
the final design to be provided by the Contactor.
5.4.2.2 Overburden
The following minimum self weight of the filling ground shall be assumed: 2 KN/m 3
Overburden loads follow the geometry of the filling ground according to the project.
5.4.2.3 Earth thrust
Earth pressure at rest is calculated based on the filling ground parameters, by means of the
Jaky’s formula:
K0 = 1- sin (Φd)
where Φd = design angle of friction.
5.4.2.4 Live load
On the buildings slabs, a minimum distributed live load equal to 3 kN/m 2 has to be assumed.
Moreover, live loads according to technical specifications of the equipment designed by the
Contractor shall be considered.
5.4.2.5 Seismic load
Earthquake horizontal and vertical acceleration shall be considered, based on a peak value of
ground horizontal acceleration for reference period of 475 years for the project area a g [Specify
as per project area, ex. 0.31g].
5.4.3 Cut & Cover tunnel
5.4.3.1 Dead load

30 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Characteristic value of the cast in situ concrete is: 25 KN/m3

5.4.3.2 Overburden
The following minimum self weight of the soil shall be assumed: 21 KN/m 3
Overburden loads follow the geometry of the filling ground according to the project.
5.4.3.3 Live load
The following surface live load shall be considered in the cut & cover tunnel stretch: 5 KN/m 3
5.4.3.4 Earth thrust
Earth pressure at rest is calculated based on the filling ground parameters, by means of the
Jaky’s formula:
K0 = 1- sin (Φd)
where Φd = design angle of friction.

5.4.3.5 Seismic load

Earthquake horizontal and vertical acceleration must be considered.
Pseudo static analyses, with the peak horizontal acceleration expected for a given return
period, shall be performed.
The peak value of ground horizontal acceleration for reference period of 475 years for
the project area is ag [Specify as per project area, ex. 0.31g].
According to EC8:

According to provided geological information indicating a ratio between components of the

seismic action av/ah=0.67, kv will be assumed as:
kv = 0.7 kh.
The following parameters shall be assumed:
α = ag / g (i.e. 0.31g/g = 0.31);
S =1.2 (soil factor on rock shall be 1.0. In the present case 1.2 is assumed as a conservative
value);
r = 1.0 (rigid structure).
Therefore:
Ex.: Kh = 0.37; Kv = 0.26.
5.4.4 Rockshed
5.4.4.1 Dead Load
Self-Weight
The self-weight of the structural members has been calculated assuming a characteristic unit
weight of reinforced concrete of 25 kN/m3.
31 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Cushion material on top slab

The equivalent distributed loads over the top slab have been determined in relation to the
effective design cushion layer thickness “Hl” upon the top slab and assuming a lightweight
expanded clay unit weight equal to γ = 6 kN/m 3 (dry unit weight).
The resulting pressure is given by:
P=γ H
Surcharge on ground
The vertical pressure acting on ground level is evaluated considering the contribution of the
Leca cushion and backfill material loading the ground level at the top slab level. Considering
the relevant height and
unit weight equal to γFill = 6 kN/m3 for the Leca and γFill = 20 kN/m3 for the filling material , the
resulting pressure is given by:
P=γH
Backfill horizontal earth pressure
Based on the vertical pressure due to the surcharge on ground, earth pressure acting on the
mountain wall side has been calculated as hydrostatic pressure acting on the total wall height,
according to equation:
P = γ H(z) k0
Where :
γ= backfill unit weight (kN/m 3)
K0 = 1 – sin(Φ’) = at rest coefficient of lateral earth pressure
Φ’ = internal friction angle of the backfill
H = calculation total height of the rockshed
For design, a selected granular filling, well compacted and placed in stratum 50cm high, with
Self weight =20 kN/m3 and Angle of friction Φ≥ 40° have been assumed.

5.4.4.2 Live Load

Traffic Load
According to Eurocode surface traffic load due to pedestrian has been considered as an
uniform pressure acting on the bottom slab.
Snow Load
According to Nepal weather conditions, different climates according to altitude can be observe.
Since according to temperature temperatures during the year except altitude 3000m,are
generally greater than 0°C, snow load could been neglected.
Wind Load
Horizontal forces due to the wind action, both inward (towards mountain side) and outward
(towards valley side) has been assumed negligible for this kind of structure.

5.4.4.3 Temperature

32 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

A temperature variation on the top slab, given by two components:

A uniform temperature component ΔTU = +/- 15°C
A linearly varying temperature difference component along z-axis, ΔT MZ = +/-5°
shall been considered, assuming a thermal expansion coefficient for concrete equal to α=1.2E -5
[1/°C],

5.4.4.4 Shrinkage
The shrinkage effects have been considered according to Standards approaches and a uniform
temperature component ΔT, equal to:
∆T = ε sh / α
has been applied to the concrete top slab, where the thermal expansion coefficient for concrete
equal to α = 1.2 E-5 [1/°C], and εsh is the shrinkage coefficient.

5.4.4.5 Accidental Load

Rockfall Load
According to the rockfall hazard analysis, the following assumptions has to be considered to
estimate the rockfall design energy:
 The calculation volume is equal to the characteristic volume (Vcal = Vk) if the rockfall
trajectories do not show significant rebounds;
 if the rockfall trajectories show at least 2 significant rebounds, it can be assumed that
the characteristic boulder is shattered into elements equal in size to the average
volume (Vm) of the boulders resulting by the static analysis of the recorded volumes
by site surveys. This phenomenon is considered plausible considering the degree of
interlocking of the rock mass and the conditions of the joints. In this case, the design
coulder volume shall be increased by a partial factor equal to 1.5: V cal = 1.5 x Vm
Impact energy has to be determined according to the rockfall hazard analysis but the
characteristic impact energy assumed for design should be at least Ec ≥ 15670 kJ (minimum
design value). [Specify as per project area].
The load estimation has been carried out according to ASTRA Swiss Guidelines, considering a
pseudo-static approach based on an equivalent static force Ad that considers the impact load
Fk of the rockfall on the rockshed, according to the following Equations:

where:
• Ad Static equivalent force on design level [kN]
• C Coefficient to account for ductile (C=0.4) or brittle (C=1.2) failure of the structure [-]
• Fk Impact load [kN]
• e Thickness of cushion layer [m]
• r Radius of an equivalent sphere [m]
33 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

• ME,k Soil modulus of the cover layer [kN/m2]

• ϕk Internal friction angle of the cover layer [°]
• mk Characteristic block mass [t]
• vk Characteristic impact velocity [m/s]
It is worth noting that the application of the guideline is limited to a penetration depth in the
cushion layer of smaller than half of the cushion thickness; thus it is evident that cushion layer
properties are of great importance to gain the potential enhancement of the loading capacity of
existing structures.
This model is based on the following assumptions:
• The concrete structure is sufficiently rigid to neglect, in the elastic range, the influence of
structure on the transmitted impact force;
• The concrete slab is sufficiently rigid to allow the impact load redistribution along the
transversal and the longitudinal dimensions;
• The horizontal component of impact can be regarded separately;
• The loading surface is plane;
• The soil stiffness is independent from the impact velocity;
• The direct shear failure in soil is not considered;
• The concentrations of the transmitted forces do not exhibit premature punching failure;
• The diameter of the punching cone is determined with the maximum possible
penetration, that must be smaller than half of the cushion thickness.

Figure 5.2 - Load distribution of the equivalent static load according to [ASTRA, 2008]
34 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

A transversal and longitudinal redistribution of the design equivalent static force on a square
area given by the rockfall analyses and according to the damping cushion thickness and Swiss
guidelines recommendations, has to be considered. The load has to be assumed to distribute
with an angle of 45° up to the top slab medium plane.
An horizontal component of the impact has to be considered conservatively as 10% of the
vertical load.
In order to evaluate a complete scenario of presumable rockfall impact locations, different
location of the rock boulder have to be analysed.
5.4.4.6 Seismic Load
According to EN 1998-1/5, the structure has to be designed to fulfil its function during and after
an earthquake, without suffering significant structural damage.
A pseudo-static method has to be used for assessing the safety of the structure, the seismic
action is represented by a set of horizontal and vertical static forces equal to the product of the
gravity forces and a seismic coefficient.
The peak ground design acceleration has to be assumed according to the maximum value
provided by the Geological Report, considering a reference period for the ground horizontal
peak acceleration equal to 475 years and a proper soil factor.
The horizontal (kH) and vertical (kV) seismic coefficients affecting all the masses have to be
evaluated as:
kH = α S/r
kV = +/- 0.5 kH (avg/ag) > 0.6
where:
· α, is the ratio of the design ground acceleration, ag, to the acceleration of gravity, g
· S, is the soil parameter (S=1)
· r, factor depending on the type of retaining structure (r=1 for rigid structure)
The components of the seismic forces have been calculated through seismic coefficients, k H, kV
and applied to the relevant structural element according to the pseudo-static approach
• FH = kh (γds V), Horizontal Inertia forces of concrete elements
• Fv = kv (γds V), Vertical Inertia forces of concrete elements
where V is the volume of the concrete element
• FV,= kH (γcushion V) Horizontal Cushion layer Inertia force on the top slab
• FH = kv (γcushion V) Vertical Cushion layer Inertia force on the top slab
• ΔSE = kH γ H2 Backfill soil increment of pressure, according to Wood assuming a
perfectly rigid wall
5.4.5 Retaining Wall
5.4.5.1 Dead load
Characteristic value of the cast in situ concrete is: 25 kN/m3
5.4.5.2 Traffic load

35 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Traffic load on the existing road has to be assumed equal to: 20 kN/m 3
5.4.5.3 Earth thrust
Earth pressure at rest is calculated based on the filling ground parameters, by means of the
Jaky’s formula:
K0 = 1- sin (Φd)
where Φd = design angle of friction.
Active earth pressure is calculated based on the filling ground parameters, by means of the
Rankine’s theory.
5.4.5.4 Seismic load
See 5.4.3.5.
5.4.6 Excavation stabilisation
5.4.6.1 Self-weight
Characteristic value of the shotcrete self-weight is: 25 kN/m 3
The weight of reinforcement by wiremeshes is considered included.
5.4.6.2 Soil and rock thrust
The rock thrust acting on the excavation surface is the main load component for the
excavation walls stabilization measures.
Weight, resistance and stiffness parameters shall be considered according to geotechnical-
geomechanical evaluations (see chapter 4).
5.4.6.3 Earthquake load
Earthquake horizontal and vertical acceleration has to be considered.
Pseudo static analyses, with the peak horizontal acceleration expected for a given return
period, will be performed to determine seismic stability of the excavation.
The peak value of ground horizontal acceleration for reference period of 475 years for the
project area is ag [Specify as per project area, ex. 0.31g].
The response of ground slopes to the design earthquake can be calculated using pseudo-static
methods of stability analysis, where the design seismic inertia forces Fh and Fv acting on the
ground mass, are defined:

Assuming S (soil factor) equal to unit, the value of peak ground acceleration is equal to 0.155g.
In the ratio between components of the seismic action is defined as aV =67% aH: this leads to a
definition of design acceleration values, as:
- agH_permanent = 0.155 g
- agV_permanent = 0.5 x agH = 0.078 g
5.4.7 Culverts
5.4.7.1 Hydraulic dimensioning
36 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Precipitation data
………………”Insert Project Specific Details”……………………….………………………….
Example:
“Precipitation data of DHM’s Hydrological Station no. 703 at Butwal was adopted, according to
value reported in ch. 3.3. Since the precipitation station is nearby the study area, it has been
assumed that the characteristic precipitation of the area under study are correctly represented
by the station recording.
Precipitation data of the selected station over 61 years, from 1957 to 2017 has been used in
calculation. The data observed in this station is 24 hours accumulated rainfall over the year for
61 years; from the available data 24 hour maximum rainfall has been chosen for frequency
analysis.”

Design Intensity
Considering the life period of the crossing structures, probable risk during heavy rainfall and
overall investment on the construction, generally 25 year of return period intensity is adopted
for crossing design, according to Nepal Road Safety Notes 2, “Design Safe Side Drains”.
The max forecasted intensity of 25 years of return period predicted by different common
methods (Gumbel, log Person III, Log Normal) has been considered for analysis and design of
crossing by-passes.
Exception to this assumption has been considered for watershed presenting very high
possibility of debris flow, considering a 100 years flood, with about 40% extra space for debris
flow (against the generally assumed 30% of extra space).
Design Flood
Design flood has been evaluated using rational method, commonly adopted for computing peak
discharge for small basins.
To generally consider the debris presence, highlighted also by the site visit, and to guarantee
an optimal working of crossing structures in the accidental case of partial obstruction, the
design flood has been increased of 30%. Therefore, final design flood is:
Qd = 1.30 x Q catchment
To ease construction stage at site, the cross-sections of culverts was uniformed as far as
possible.
Catchment Area
Main catchment area have to be evaluated on the basis of the available topography survey
map. Area intercludes between main catchment basins has to be evaluated on the basis of the
topography study.

5.4.7.2 Structure dimensioning

Dead Load

37 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Self-Weight
The self-weight of the structural members has been calculated assuming a characteristic unit
weight of reinforced concrete of 25 kN/m3.
Ground pressure on top slab
The equivalent distributed loads over the top slab have been determined assuming a design
cushion “hfill” upon the top slab and backfill unit weight equal to γ = 20 kN/m 3 (dry unit weight).
The resulting pressure is given by:
P=γH
Surcharge on ground
The vertical pressure acting on ground level is evaluated considering the contribution of soil
loading the ground level at the top slab level, assuming γ = 20 kN/m 3. For the assumed height
the resulting pressure is given by:
P=γH

Backfill horizontal earth pressure

Based on the vertical pressure due to the surcharge on ground, horizontal earth pressure acting
on the wall has been calculated as hydrostatic pressure acting on the total wall height,
according to equation:
P = γ H(z) k0
Where :
γ = backfill unit weight (kN/m3), assumed equal to = 20 kN/m3
K0 = 1 – sin(Φ’) = at rest coefficient of lateral earth pressure
Φ’ = internal friction angle of the backfill
H = calculation total height of the wall
Internal water pressure
Vertical water pressure acting on the foundation slab has been considered according to the
following equation:
P=γH
assuming H equal to the whole internal free height of the culvert, to be on the safe side and G =
10 kN/m3.
Horizontal earth pressure acting on the wall has been calculated as hydrostatic pressure acting
on the total wall height, according to equation:
P = γ H(z)
Live Load
Traffic Load
According to Eurocode surface traffic load due to pedestrian has been considered as an
uniform pressure acting on the top slab.
Snow Load

38 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

According to Nepal weather conditions, different climates according to altitude can be observe.
Since according to temperature temperatures during the year except altitude 3000m,are
generally greater than 0°C, snow load could been neglected.
Wind Load
Wind Load has not been considered.
Temperature
A temperature variation on the top slab, given by two components:
· A uniform temperature component ΔTU = +/- 15°C
· A linearly varying temperature difference component along z-axis, ΔT MZ = +/-5°
has been considered, assuming a thermal expansion coefficient for concrete equal to α= 1.2E -5
[1/°C]
Shrinkage
The shrinkage effects have been considered according to Standards approaches and a uniform
temperature component ΔT, equal to: ∆T= εsh /α
has been applied to the concrete top slab, where the thermal expansion coefficient for concrete
equal to α = 1.2 E-5 [1/°C], and &' is the shrinkage coefficient.
Seismic Load
According to EN 1998-1/5, the structure has to be designed to fulfil its function during and after
an earthquake, without suffering significant structural damage.
A pseudo-static method has to be used for assessing the safety of the structure, the seismic
action is represented by a set of horizontal and vertical static forces equal to the product of the
gravity forces and a seismic coefficient.
The peak ground design acceleration has to be assumed according to the maximum value
provided by the Geological Report, considering a reference period for the ground horizontal
peak acceleration equal to 475 years and a proper soil factor.
The horizontal (kH) and vertical (kV) seismic coefficients affecting all the masses have to be
evaluated as:
kH = α S/r
kV = +/- 0.5 kH (avg/ag) > 0.6
where:
· α, is the ratio of the design ground acceleration, ag, to the acceleration of gravity, g
· S, is the soil parameter (S=1, ground type A)
· r, factor depending on the type of retaining structure (r=1 for rigid structure)

39 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

5.5 Methods of Analyses

5.5.1 FEM Models
The structural design has to be performed by means of 2D and 3D finite elements model
representing the arrangement of the structures to estimate the resulting internal actions and
deformations of the different elements.
Generally, models has to be developed considering:

 mono-dimensional elements (beam element type)

 bi-dimensional elements (plate type)
Nodes between concrete elements are generally considered rigid connections.
Design loads have to be generally modelled as:
 point load on nodes
 uniform/variable forces on mono-dimensional elements;
 uniform pressure on bi-dimensional elements.
Soil-structure interaction has to be evaluated by means of elastic boundaries (linear or
nonlinear), with properties defined according to geotechnical characterization.
Linear and non-linear analyses has to be performed.

5.6 Specific design criteria

5.6.1 Tunnel support measures
5.6.1.1.1 Unstable blocks scenario
Assuming the tunnel axis, rock discontinuities and joints orientations, the unstable blocks
stability analyses and anchors verifications must be run.
It can be assumed that blocks with a volume < 1m3 will detach during excavation operations or
will be safely supported by the first shotcrete layer.

40 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Joint dips and dip directions shall be evaluated, as well as joints properties.
The design of stabilization measures for tunnel excavation profile shall check the following
conditions:
· Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
O Internal resistance of reinforced shotcrete layer (shear, bending moment and
punching);
O Internal resistance of redistribution plates at the bolts head;
O Internal resistance of bolts.
· Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:
O External resistance (anchorage) of bolts.
5.6.1.1.2 Loosening
Anchors verification
Considering the geometry of the primary lining, it shall be assumed that loosening will be
supported by means of anchors, loaded by tensile forces.
It will be verified that:
· effective anchorage is beyond the loosened rock mass.
· the maximum applied design load is lower than both internal and external (friction)
resistance, i.e.:
- Structural verification (STR):
Internal resistance of redistribution plates at the bolts head; Internal resistance of
bolts.
- Geotechnical verification (GEO): External resistance (anchorage) of bolts.
Shotcrete verification
It shall be assumed that shotcrete lining, reinforced with lattice girders, steel ribs, wire meshes
or a combination of them, will support actions imposed by the rock mass. Punching, bending
moments and shear load will be checked according to Eurocodes.
Tunnel face stability
Verification of tunnel face stability shall be provided according to the Kovari & Anagnostou
theory.
Forepoling umbrella verification
Verification of the forepoling umbrella shall be provided, where foreseen.
Invert verification
Where necessary, invert can be adopted to face strong lateral pressures.
Shotcrete invert lining shall be verified as well, by means of bending moments and shear load
verifications according to Eurocodes.
5.6.2 Tunnel final lining and technical buildings
Reinforced concrete lining bears the total loosening load. By means of a proper static model the
following shall be verified according to Eurocodes:
41 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

 ULS (Ultimate limit states)

- Bending moments (interaction domain MN);
- Shear load.
 SLS (Serviceability limit states)
- deformations;
- cracking.
Asymmetry of the loosening load shall be considered in the analyses.
Structural and geotechnical verifications (STR/GEO) must be provided for the foundation of all
structures.
5.6.3 Tunnel specific design basis
For the design basis regarding tunnel parts and elements such as inner space, safety systems,
auxiliary systems and draining systems, please refer to the BASIC PREREQUISITES FOR
TUNNEL OPERATION and MINIMUM SAFETY REQUIREMENT FOR ROAD TUNNEL section
of the Employer’s Requirements of the Contract Document.
5.6.4 Rockshed
By means of a proper static model the following shall be verified for the reinforced concrete
elements according to Eurocodes:
· ULS (Ultimate limit states)
- Bending moments (interaction domain MN);
- Shear load.
· SLS (Serviceability limit states)
- deformations;
- cracking.
Structural and geotechnical verifications (STR/GEO) must be provided for the foundation of all
structures. Moreover, the Global stability (EQU) of the slope have to be considered.
As for design approach, load combinations and partial safety factors, reference is made to
previous point «design approach» (point 5.3). All verifications shall be in accordance to relevant
Eurocodes.
5.6.4.1 Rockfall Energy
According to Rockfall analyses the design energy has been evaluated assuming that the
calculation volume is equal to the characteristic volume (Vcal = Vk), if the rockfall trajectories do
not show significant rebounds; otherwise it is equal to the average "factorised" volume (Vcal =
1.5xVm =5m3 “ Project Specific Input”) if the rockfall trajectories show at least 2 significant
rebounds.
Thus, it assumed that during the fall of the boulders from imported heights, where the boulder,
due to the steep topography, bounces several times, these are shattered into elements equal in
size to the average volumes of the boulders listed. This phenomenon is considered plausible
considering the degree of interlocking of the rock mass and the conditions of the joints.
5.6.5 Retaining walls
Wall structure, micropiles and anchors shall be verified according to Eurocodes.

42 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

The design of permanent micropiles and anchors shall check the following conditions:
· Structural verification (STR):
O Internal resistance of reinforced concrete (shear and bending moment);
O Internal resistance of permanent anchors and micropiles.
· Geotechnical verification (GEO):
O External resistance (anchorage) of permanent anchors and micropiles ;
O Foundation verifications wherever necessary.
· Global stability (EQU) of the slope.
As for design approach, load combinations and partial safety factors, reference is made to
previous point «design approach» (point 5.3). All verifications shall be in accordance to relevant
Eurocodes.
5.6.6 Excavation walls stabilisation
The design of stabilization measures for permanent excavation walls along the road shall check
the following conditions:
· Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
O Internal resistance of reinforced shotcrete layer (shear, bending moment and
punching);
O Internal resistance of redistribution plates at the bolts head;
O Internal resistance of permanent bolts
· Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:
O External resistance (anchorage) of permanent bolts
· Global stability (EQU) of the slope at every excavation phase.
As for design approach, load combinations and partial safety factors, reference is made to
previous point «design approach» (point 5.3). All verifications shall be in accordance to relevant
Eurocodes.

5.6.7 Culverts
5.6.7.1 Hydraulic design
To get verification of culverts, Manning’s equation was applied:
Qmax = Ks . A. R2/3 . j1/2
Where:
· Qmax = maximum discharge through crossing structure (m3/s);
· Ks = 1/n = Stickler coefficient;
· n = Manning coefficient;
· A = wet area (m 2);
· R = hydraulic radius (m) = A/P;
· P = wet perimeter (m);
· j = culvert longitudinal slope (m/m).
43 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

In table below, all adopted design parameters are resumed.

Table 24: Design and verification parameters
Parameter Value

Return period (TR) 25 years

Rainfall time 24 hours
Rainfall distribution LogNormal
Rainfall maximum height Data analyses
Run-off coefficient (C) 0.80
Culvert percentage storage 80%
Manning coefficient (n) From standard charts

5.6.7.2 Structure design

For structural verifications, by means of a proper static model the following shall be verified for
the reinforced concrete elements according to Eurocodes:
· ULS (Ultimate limit states)
- Bending moments (interaction domain MN);
- Shear load.
· SLS (Serviceability limit states)
- deformations;
- cracking.
Structural and geotechnical verifications (STR/GEO) must be provided for the foundation of all
structures. Moreover, the Global stability (EQU) of the slope have to be considered.
5.6.7.3 Additional protection measures
The construction of a protection wall between the road and the water pit to protect the road
from boulder has to be envisaged together with proper measures to limit and, possibly, avoid
the debris flow obstruction of these structures.
Proper maintenance has to be addressed to keep correctly working the structure.
To avoid erosion phenomena along the valley slope, proper protection measures from the
localized water flow coming from the culverts outlet, have to be foreseen along the valley and
mountain side.

44 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

6 ROAD ALIGNMENT DESIGN

……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example :
“The project, focused on the rockfall protection of the Siddhababa Section along the Siddhartha
Highway, foresees both the rehabilitation of the existing road, from chainage 28+200.00 to
29+100.00 (called Main Road 1 (MR1)) and from chainage 30+050.00 to 30+600.00 (called
Main Road 2 (MR2), North), and the variation of the alignment lay-out to connect the new
tunnel road approximately 1126 m long, by deviating from the old alignment towards East
around chainage 29+100, near the existing «Siddhababa Mandir» and towards West around
chainage 30+050, near the existing «Ramapithecus Park» .
The rehabilitation of the existing road has been developed and design to limit rock excavation
along the mountain side and rock stabilization/earth retaining structures along the valley side, to
reduce costs and time of construction.
An existing track diversion in a new two lanes tunnel for cars only (one lane for each direction),
along the whole high hazard sections, departing from the existing road near the Siddha Baba
Mandir and reconnecting to it near the hydropower plant, with a total length of about 1126 m,
has been foreseen.
The new tunnel extends between chainages 0+908.46 (south portal) and 2+034.52 (north
portal) and the position of the tunnel portals has been chosen considering a suitable site to
minimize necessary excavation, hence entering the mountain almost perpendicularly to the
slope, as well as to avoid the whole high hazard stretch.
The U-shape of the tunnel horizontal alignment has been chosen in order to reach as soon as
possible a sufficient depth (tunnel overburden) to minimize the tunnel excavation in low
overburden areas, where weaker and altered rock can be foreseen, as well as larger water
income.
Bicycles and pedestrian keep on following the existing road alignment (called Pedestrian Road
(PE)), but protected, along the identified high hazard section, by a rockshed with reduced

45 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

internal dimensions of 5.0mx3.5m, suitable to house only pedestrians and ambulance (or
emergency car), in case of emergency situations. Thus, the existing road has been converted
into a pedestrian-only road around chainage 29+100 and 30+050, comprehensive of two
emergency aprons for reversal of traffic direction in case of tunnel closure during emergency.
Moreover, each apron could be used as heliport in case of emergency. On the pedestrian road,
the construction of a covered path with a rockshed has been foreseen from chainage around
29+215 to 29+995. The rockshed is connected to the three pedestrian by-passes foreseen
along the tunnel, with a spacing smaller than 300m, so that, in case of emergency, the tunnel
users can evacuate in the shortest possible time from the danger zone, leading directly to a
safe space within the bypass tunnel itself and, from there, to the pedestrian rockshed along the
existing road. No emergency escape route for vehicular access is foreseen due to the length of
the tunnel (< 1.2 km).
The design parameters adopted for the road design of the Siddhababa stretch follow DoR
Nepal Rural Road Standard (2070), 2013. Cross sections every 10m chainage have been
considered to study and obtain the presented design alignment; however sections every 20m
are reported.
The design of this pedestrian road and escape route does not undergo car traffic road design
presented in the following paragraphs for the main road.
Please note that the general absolute chainage referred to the existing Siddhartha Highways
has to be abandoned for this project due to the new alignment of the Siddhartha stretch,
including the new tunnel road.
In the following are briefly summarized the road design main characteristics; for further details
refer to the relevant specific reports.
Table 25:Principal stretches of main road

ABSOLUTE CHAINAGE* DESIGN CHAINAGE

AXIS TYPE OF
INTERVENTION
From To (km)
From (km) To (km) (km)
Main road 1 (MR1) Adjustment 28+200.00 29+104.55 0+000.00 0+904.55
Tunnel (MT) Variation 29+104.55 30+050.00 0+904.55 2+034.52
Main road 2 (MR2) Adjustment 30+050.00 30+600.00 2+034.52 2+587.40
* Absolute chainages referred to the existing Siddhartha Highways must be abandoned; here
are reported just as general reference, not to be adopted for design.
Table 26:Principal stretches of pedestrian road

Pedestrian Road (PR)

ZONE ABSOLUTE CHAINAGE* DESIGN CHAINAGE

46 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

From (km) From (km) From km To km

South apron About 29+114 About 29+214 0+000.00 0+110.00

Rockshed About 29+214 About 29+994 0+110.00 0+890.00

North apron About 29+994 About 30+051 0+890.00 0+944.70

* Absolute chainages referred to the existing Siddhartha Highways must be abandoned; here
are reported just as general reference, not to be adopted for design. “

6.1 Road Classification

Road main features limits according to DoR Nepal Road Standard 2070 have to be assumed.
……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example :
“The design road falls under the category of National Highway1 since the Siddhababa sections
belongs to the Siddharta highway, which is a major highway in Nepal connecting the Terai
region in southern Nepal with the mountain region in northern Nepal. The highway starts at
Nepal–India border near Siddharthanagar and terminates at Pokhara. This highway intersects
with the east–west Mahendra Highway at Butwal.
According to the technical and functional classification provided by Nepal Road Standard 2070,
the design road falls within Class II 2, in mountainous and steep terrain, strongly depending on
the harsh conditions of the surroundings and the alignment of the existing road.”
6.2 Design Speed
The design speed has a crucial role in geometric parameters of the roads. The design speed
depends on various factors like; super elevation, sight distance, radius and length of horizontal
curve, extra widening of pavement, and the length of vertical curve (summit and valley) etc.
……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example :
“According to the design standards (Nepal Road Standard 2070), the ruling design speed
adopted along the Siddhababa section of the rehabilitated road and the new road tunnel has
been defined according is 40 km/h along the rehabilitated existing road stretches before and
after the new tunnel, with exception of the road sections between chainages 2+320.00 and
2+420.00, where the design speed has to be limited to 25 km/h, according to the existing road
geometrical alignment limits.

47 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Indeed, within the tunnel, a design speed of 60 km/h has been adopted since this new road
section can be designed according to the design speed for class II in mountainous terrain being
a alignment; the upgraded speed of 60m/h at the south portal starts within the rock tunnel, at
the begin of the tunnel road line.”

6.3 Alignment Design Requirements

Main design parameters are briefly summarized in the following table, according to Nepal Road
Standard 2070.
……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example:
“Table 27 Design parameters for Siddhababa section according to Nepal Road Standard 2070

S.N. Design parameters National Highway, Mountainous

Design Capacity - in both directions

1 (Vehicle per day/P.C.U. per day)3 20000
40 (MR1 and MR2)
25 (MR2 from ch. 2+320.00 to 2+420)
2 Design speed (km/h) 60 (Tunnel)
3 Lanes width (m) 3.75
4 Carriageway width (m) 7.50
5 Shoulder width, either side (m) 0.50
6 Stopping distance (m) 50.00
7 Minimum radius of horizontal curves (m) 40.00
8 Maximum super elevation (%) 7.00
9 Minimum length of transition curves (m) 40.00

48 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

9.00 (for 40 km/h)

7.00 (for 60 km/h)

10 Maximum gradient (%) 200.00 (for 9.00%)

300.00 (for 7.00%)

29.00
11 Maximum length of gradient(m) (for 40 km/h)

12 Minimum value of K for summit curves (m/%) 94.00 (for 60 km/h)

13 Minimum value of K for valley curves (m/%) 17.00 (for 40 km/h); 42.00 (for 60 km/h)

6.3.1 Excavation and fill

Excavation and Fill Excavation has been balanced and limited as far as possible.

6.4 Safety Barriers, Pavement Marking and Traffic Signs

Dimensioning of safety barrier shall be provided according to the requirements of Nepal Safety
Barrier, 1997. Marking/Signing shall be provided accordingly to Nepal Road Standard (2070),
Nepal Traffic Sign Manual, 1997

6.4.1 Additional requirements for Tunnel Road alignment

For additional requirements for the Tunnel Road alignment please refer to the BASIC
PREREQUISITES FOR TUNNEL OPERATION and MINIMUM SAFETY REQUIREMENT FOR
ROAD TUNNEL section, and other relevant sections of the Employer’s Requirements of the
Contract Document.

49 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

6.5 Pavement Design

6.5.1 Design Life
According to Nepal Design Guidelines for flexible pavement 15 years have to be considered for
highways pavement. In addition 5 years have been considered to account for the estimated
design and construction time, so that a total design life of 20 years.
6.5.2 Traffic Study
According to traffic data provided by the Client and presented in ch. 3.1, all traffic in the
classified count has been classified into the following types of vehicles as per the DoR practice:
· Heavy truck (three axles or more);
· Heavy two axles;
· Mini truck/tractor;
· Large bus;
· Bus.
For analytical purpose, the AADT at the road is expressed both in terms of vehicle per day
(CVPD) and daily passenger unit (PCU/day):
……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example:
Table 28:Traffic data according to survey on site

Traffic data

AADT 12444 CVPD

50 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

AADT excluding motorcycle and rickshaw 3336 CVPD

AADT 9478 PCU
AADT in PCU excluding motorcycle and
rickshaw 4912 PCU
The traffic spectrum derived from survey is:
Table 29: Traffic spectrum according to survey on site

Vehicle type %

Heavy truck (three axles or more) 0.93%

Heavy two axles 8.28%
Mini-truck/tractor 0.85%
Large bus 9.80%
Bus 8.97%
“
According to Nepal Road Standard 2070, the following converting factors has been assumed to
correlate PCU to AADT,

The traffic forecast is computed according the growth formula mentioned in the IRC:37-2018
:Guidelines for The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth Revision),INDIAN ROADS
CONGRESS

6.5.2.2 Vehicle Damage Factor (Vdf)

For Vdf, IRC:37-2018 :Guidelines for The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth
Revision),INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS relevant clause shall be followed.

6.5.2.3 Lane Distribution Factor (D)

Total traffic AADT (both way) is distributed over the whole carriageway for design of pavement.
For D, IRC:37-2018 :Guidelines for The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth
Revision),INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS relevant clause shall be followed.

6.5.2.4 Design Traffic

51 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

The design traffic load in terms of cumulative number of standard axles (ESA) shall be
calculated as per IRC:37-2018 :Guidelines for The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth
Revision),INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS relevant clause.

6.5.3 Subgrade properties

……………………..”Insert Project Specific Information”…………..……………………………..
Example :
The proposed pavement for the main road has been designed considering a subgrade made of
the rock outcrop according to properties detailed in the geotechnical report.
Where the rock is not present as a sub-grade and it is necessary to fill it with granular material,
it must have a minimum CBR = 5 (E = 50 MPa) as the bearing capacity.
6.5.4 Pavement Design
The pavement design for both roadway section and tunnel section shall be designed as per
IRC:37-2018 :Guidelines for The Design of Flexible Pavements, (Fourth Revision),INDIAN
ROADS CONGRESS relevant clause.

6.6 Road water management system

6.6.1 Rainfall data
Rainfall data and catchment area are assumed according to data reported in ch. 3.3
6.6.2 Main Road
For surface water management, the mountain side camber principle has to be adopted for
proper management of surface water and side drains on the road mountain side has been
adopted along the whole road stretches.
Side drains are assumed to receive the road surface water and the water coming from next
mountain ridge that is not regimented by culverts.
A carriageable concrete cover has to be foreseen on side drains, allowing them to be used as
walkaways in order to reduce the road total width, thus limiting earth works and rock
excavation.
6.6.3 Tunnel Road
Dirty and polluted waters coming from the inner tunnel space are collected by a linear drainage
channel, thanks to the transversal gradient of the carriageway and transported to the first
chamber of the syphoned wells.
Special provisions has to be considered to allow to avoid direct communication between the
inner space of the tunnel and the main water collector and, hence, avoid propagation of fire
liquids along the tunnel in case of accidents/fire.
Since some waters could also leak under the carriageway and seep through the filling gravel, a
dedicated drainage system has to be considered
Water basin, that allows to collect waters and, whenever necessary, to avoid the direct
discharge into the local sewage systems has to be considered
6.6.4 Pedestrian Road
52 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Before and after pedestrian rockshed, proper side drains has to be foreseen, considering a
carriageable cover also for pedestrian traffic, where they have to be used as walkaways such
as at the tunnel south portal near the Siddhaba Temple.
Along the road sections interested by the rockshed structure, a proper drainage system has to
be designed for the possible rain water incoming due to the wall openings along the valley side.
A proper drainage system of the cushion layer and backfill materials due to water coming from
the mountain, not collected into culverts has to be foreseen.

7 ROCKFALL MITIGATION MEASURES DESIGN

7.1 Materials
7.1.1 Rockfall protection Barriers (Geobrug RXE type or equivalent)
a. Barrier type GEOBRUGG RXE 2000 or similar
• Absorption capacity 2000 kJ
• Energy class EOTA 5
• Height 4m
• Post spacing 8-12 m (average 10 m)
b. Barrier type GEOBRUGG RXE 3000 or similar

• Absorption capacity 3000 kJ

• Energy class EOTA 6
• Height 4m
• Post spacing 8-12 m (average 10 m)
c. Barrier type GEOBRUGG RXE 5000 or similar

• Absorption capacity 5000 kJ

• Energy class EOTA 8
• Height 5m
• Post spacing 8-12 m (average 10 m)
7.1.2 Adherence Net system (Tecco type)
Adherence net
High-tensile steel wiremesh type Tecco G65/4 or equivalent

53 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

Rock bolts
• Type: Gewi diam. 32 mm (steel grade B500B) or equivalent
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 466 kN
• Yield Strength Fyk ≥ 402 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm
7.1.3 Additional measures for mudstone layers
Permanent shotcrete:
• Reference Code: UNI EN 1992 1-1, EN 206-1
• Concrete Class: C30/37
• Characteristic Cubic Strength: Rck >37 MPa
• W/C: 0.5
• Cement Type: III-IV (UNI EN 197-1)
• Exposure Class: XC4/XD1/XF1
• Resistant at AAR
• Slump Class: S4
• Maximum Aggregate: 8 mm (EN 12620)
Steel wiremesh (shotcrete reinforcement):
• Bar diameter, D = 6mm
• Mesh spacing = (100x100)mm
• Steel grade min. B500 A
• Yield Strength fyk = 500 MPa
Rockbolts:
• Type: Permanent Gewi diam. 28 mm (steel grade B500B) with preinjected corrugated
sheating or equivalent
• Tensile Strength Ftk ≥ 357 kN
• Yield Strength Fyk ≥ 308 kN
• Drilling diameter ≥ 110 mm

7.2 Design Working Life

See previous para. 5.2

7.3 Design Approach

See previous para. 5.3

54 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

7.4 Design Loads

7.4.1 Rockfall protection barriers
Rockfall protection barriers shall be designed in order to withstand the design impact energy
foreseen by rockfall simulations, based also on the design rock block dimensions.
All structural elements, including foundation micropiles and retaining anchors, shall be
dimensioned to withstand actions consequent to such impact events.
Reference to the rockfall barrier supplier technical specifications shall be also made.
7.4.2 Slope stabilization systems (adherence mesh and shotcrete layer)
The adherence net as well as the shotcrete layer on mudstone layers must be designed to
stabilize superficial blocks that can be unstable between provided bolts, accordingly to
performed geomechanical characterization of the slope.
As for the rock bolts, they must be dimensioned considering different load conditions:
o to support, by tension and shear, the adherence nets and shotcrete layers,
assuming the above mentioned load condition;
o to support, by shear, possible unstable blocks, accordingly to performed
geomechanical characterization of the slope
7.4.3 Slope below road works
Rock stabilization shall be provided where highly fractured rock is observed on the slope below
the existing road, where erosion and weathering cause the gradual fall of boulders and/or
detachment of rock slabs.
Anchors shall be designed to stabilize superficial blocks or slabs that can be unstable.
They are dimensioned considering to support, by shear, possible unstable blocks/slabs.
As unstable block, the average block dimension can be considered, as resulting by geological
mapping and survey, and the main joint families orientation shall be considered in order to
estimate block shape.
As example, based on such analysis, the design block estimated in the project has a volume of
10 m3/m. Such assumption shall be checked and confirmed or revised by Tenderer/Contractor
based on its own evaluation and possible additional surveys.
Shotcrete layer design follows what suggested in 7.4.2

7.5 Specific design criteria

7.5.1 Rockfall protection barriers
The design of slope stabilization systems shall check the following types of failure/resistances:
· Protection barrier
O Structural verification according to the supplier certified system, based on impact
energy.
· Anchors and micropiles (rope anchorage and barrier foundation):
O Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
 Internal resistance of anchors and micropiles (axial and shear).

55 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

O Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:

 External resistance of anchors and micropiles.
· Global stability (EQU) of the existing slope considering the load transfer by the
barrier foundation micropiles to the rock.

7.5.2 Slope stabilization systems (adherence mesh and shotcrete layer)

The design of slope stabilization systems shall check the following types of failure/resistances:
· adherence mesh system (Tecco net type of equivalent and its bolts) :
O Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
 Internal resistance of the net itself, including redistribution plates;
 Internal resistance of the perimetric rope ;
 Internal resistance of perimetric wire anchors;
 Internal resistance of bolts (axial and shear).
O Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:
 External resistance (anchorage) of perimetric wire anchors
 External resistance (anchorage) of bolts ;
· Shotcrete layer on mudstone layers and its bolts :
O Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
 Internal resistance of the reinforced shotcrete (shear, bending moment
and punching);
 Internal resistance of redistribution plates at the bolts head;
 Internal resistance of bolts (axial and shear).
O Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:
 External resistance (anchorage) of bolts ;
· Global stability (EQU) of the existing slope.
As for design approach, load combinations and partial safety factors, reference is made to
previous point «design approach» (point 5.3); all verifications shall be in accordance to relevant
Eurocodes.

7.5.3 Slope below road works

The design of slope stabilization systems shall check the following types of failure/resistances:
· Shotcrete and Anchors:
O Structural verification (STR) of all structural elements:
 Internal resistance of the reinforced shotcrete (shear, bending moment
and punching);
 Internal resistance of redistribution plates at the bolts head;
 Internal resistance of bolts (axial and shear).

56 | P a g e
Employer’s Requirements : ANNEX A: CIVIL WORKS - DESIGN BASIS

O Geotechnical verification (GEO) of all structural elements:

 External resistance (anchorage) of bolts;
· Global stability (EQU) of the existing slope (existing situation and final situation
with rockshed loads).
As for design approach, load combinations and partial safety factors, reference is made to
previous point «design approach» (point 5.3); all verifications shall be in accordance to relevant
Eurocodes.

57 | P a g e