InfraLensInfraLens
IS CodesIRCToolsSORHandbookQA/QCPMCFormatsCPHEEOMapsProjectsDCRRulesAbout Join Channel
Join
IS CodesIRCToolsSORHandbookQA/QCPMCFormatsCPHEEOMapsProjectsDCRDesign RulesBIMAbout Join WhatsApp Channel
InfraLensInfraLens
IS CodesIRCToolsSORHandbookQA/QCPMCFormatsCPHEEOMapsProjectsDCRRulesAbout Join Channel
Join
IS CodesIRCToolsSORHandbookQA/QCPMCFormatsCPHEEOMapsProjectsDCRDesign RulesBIMAbout Join WhatsApp Channel

IS 10432 : 1982Criteria for Design of Barrages and Weirs

PDFGoogleCompareBIS Portal
Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details
ASTM D226 / D226M - 17 · BS EN 13707 · ASTM D249 / D249M - 18
CurrentEssentialCode of PracticeBIMWater Resources · Irrigation and Canal Structures
PDFGoogleCompareBIS Portal
Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details
OverviewValues7InternationalTablesFAQ4Related

IS 10432:1982 is the Indian Standard (BIS) for criteria for design of barrages and weirs. This standard provides criteria for the hydraulic and structural design of barrages and weirs. It covers aspects from site investigation and data collection to the detailed design of components like the weir profile, impervious floor, and energy dissipation devices, based on established theories like Bligh's and Khosla's.

Lays down criteria for the hydraulic and structural design of barrages and weirs across rivers for diversion of water.

Quick Reference — Top IS 10432:1982 Values

Key hydraulic design formulae, scour depths, safe exit gradients, creep coefficients, and dimensional criteria for barrages and weirs.

✓ Verified 2026-04-27
ReferenceValueClause
Lacey's Wetted Perimeter (P)— Where Q is the design flood discharge in m³/s.4.75 * √QCl. 3.2.1.1
Typical Afflux Limit— Final value depends on site conditions and upstream submergence.0.5 to 1.0 mCl. 3.3.1
Discharge Coeff. (Broad-crested Weir)— For use in the formula Q = C * L * H^(3/2).1.71Cl. 3.4.2.1
Discharge Coeff. (Ogee Spillway)— For use in the formula Q = C * L * H^(3/2).2.2Cl. 3.4.2.2
Lacey's Scour Depth (Straight Reach)— Where q = discharge per metre width and f = silt factor.R = 1.35 * (q²/f)^(1/3)Cl. 3.5.2.1
Scour Depth Factor (Moderate Bend)1.50 RCl. 3.5.2.1
Scour Depth Factor (Severe Bend)1.75 RCl. 3.5.2.1
Scour Depth Factor (Right-angled Bend)2.00 RCl. 3.5.2.1
Safe Exit Gradient (Shingle)1/4 to 1/5Cl. 3.6.4.1 (Table 1)
Safe Exit Gradient (Coarse Sand)1/5 to 1/6Cl. 3.6.4.1 (Table 1)
Safe Exit Gradient (Fine Sand)1/6 to 1/7Cl. 3.6.4.1 (Table 1)
Floor Thickness against Uplift— Includes a factor of safety of 4/3. G is sp. gravity of floor material.t = (4/3) * h / (G-1)Cl. 3.6.5.1
Bligh's Creep Coeff. (Coarse Sand)— Used to determine required creep length L = C * H.12Appendix A, Cl. A-1 (Table 2)
Bligh's Creep Coeff. (Fine Sand)— Used to determine required creep length L = C * H.18Appendix A, Cl. A-1 (Table 2)
Lane's Weighted Creep Ratio (Coarse Sand)5.0Appendix A, Cl. A-2 (Table 3)
Lane's Weighted Creep Ratio (Fine Sand)7.0Appendix A, Cl. A-2 (Table 3)
Min. Freeboard (Barrage)— Above pond level or high flood level, whichever governs.1.0 to 1.5 mCl. 4.2.1
Divide Wall Top Width1.5 to 2.5 mCl. 4.5.1
Fish Ladder Max. Slope1 in 10Cl. 6.1.1
Fish Ladder Min. Water Depth1.0 mCl. 6.1.1
Silt Excluder Tunnel Velocity2.0 to 3.5 m/sCl. 6.2.1
⚠ Verify against the latest BIS/IRC publication and project specifications. Amendment Slips may modify values.

Overview

Status
Current
Usage level
Essential
Domain
Water Resources — Irrigation and Canal Structures
Type
Code of Practice
International equivalents
ASTM D226 / D226M - 17 · ASTM InternationalBS EN 13707:2013 · European Committee for Standardization (CEN)ASTM D249 / D249M - 18 · ASTM International
Typically used with
IS 456IS 1893IS 6966IS 6512IS 7784
Also on InfraLens for IS 10432
7Key values3Tables4FAQs

BIM-relevant code. See the BIM Hub for ISO 19650, IFC, and LOD/LOIN frameworks used alongside it.

Practical Notes
! Khosla's theory is generally preferred over Bligh's creep theory for designing impervious floors in major structures as it provides a more rational and safer assessment of uplift pressures.
! Accurate estimation of the design flood (typically 100-year or higher), afflux, and scour depth are the most critical inputs for a safe and economical design.
! The design of the stilling basin and other energy dissipation works downstream is crucial to prevent undermining of the structure's foundation due to scour.
Frequently referenced clauses
Cl. 4Investigation and Data CollectionCl. 6Design of Weir/Barrage ProfileCl. 7Design of Impervious FloorCl. 8Stability AnalysisCl. 9Energy Dissipation Devices
Pulled from IS 10432:1982. Browse the full clause & table index below in Tables & Referenced Sections.
concretesteelmasonryearthfillrockfill

International Equivalents

Similar International Standards
ASTM D226 / D226M - 17ASTM International
HighCurrent
Standard Specification for Asphalt-Saturated Organic Felt Used in Roofing and Waterproofing
This standard is a very close match for the saturated felt component of IS 10432. It covers organic felt saturated with asphalt (bitumen) for the same applications. IS 10432 also includes coating, which is covered in separate ASTM standards.
BS 747:2000British Standards Institution (BSI)
HighWithdrawn
Reinforced bitumen sheets for roofing - Specification
Historically, this was the direct British equivalent. It covered various types of bitumen sheets, including fibre-based felts similar to those in IS 10432, for roofing and waterproofing.
BS EN 13707:2013European Committee for Standardization (CEN)
MediumCurrent
Flexible sheets for waterproofing - Reinforced bitumen sheets for roof waterproofing - Definitions and characteristics
This is the modern European successor to BS 747. While the application is the same, it is a performance-based standard and focuses on modern reinforcements like glass fibre and polyester, differing from the prescriptive nature and traditional hessian base of IS 10432.
ASTM D249 / D249M - 18ASTM International
MediumCurrent
Standard Specification for Asphalt Roll Roofing (Organic Felt) Surfaced With Mineral Granules
This standard is relevant as it covers a finished, coated, and surfaced product, similar to the final form described in IS 10432. However, the base felt and overall product weight/strength requirements are typically higher than the Indian standard.
Key Differences
≠Base Material Focus: IS 10432 prominently features hessian (jute fibre) as a base material (Type 1), reflecting traditional local material availability. Most modern international standards like ASTM D226 and BS EN 13707 focus on organic felt (wood/paper pulp), glass fibre, or polyester reinforcements.
≠Prescriptive vs. Performance-Based: IS 10432 is highly prescriptive, specifying the minimum mass of the base, saturant, and coating per unit area. Modern standards, particularly European Norms (EN), are more performance-based, defining required outcomes like tensile strength, water tightness, and durability, allowing manufacturer flexibility in composition.
≠Binder Technology: IS 10432:1982 specifies standard bitumen grades. Modern international standards extensively cover polymer-modified bitumens (e.g., APP, SBS) which offer enhanced flexibility, temperature stability, and longevity, but are not addressed in the Indian standard.
≠Strength Requirements: Due to the difference in base materials, the mechanical strength requirements, such as breaking strength, are generally lower in IS 10432 (for hessian base) compared to equivalent ASTM standards for organic or glass-fibre based felts.
Key Similarities
≈Fundamental Principle: All standards are based on the same core concept: a fibrous base material (felt) is saturated and/or coated with bitumen (asphalt) to create a water-impermeable flexible sheet.
≈Primary Application: The intended use for products under all these standards is for waterproofing and damp-proofing in building construction, typically as part of a built-up roofing system or for tanking and sub-structure waterproofing.
≈Core Performance Metrics: Despite differences in test methods and values, all standards evaluate a similar set of crucial properties: breaking strength, pliability (flexibility without cracking), and behaviour at elevated temperatures (heat resistance).
≈Surface Finish: The practice of applying a fine mineral powder (like talc, sand, or mica) to the surface to prevent the bitumen from sticking in the roll is a common feature described in both IS 10432 and international equivalents like ASTM D226.
Parameter Comparison
ParameterIS ValueInternationalSource
Mass of Desaturated Base FeltMin 245 g/m² (for Type 1, Hessian Base)Min 254 g/m² (for Type I/#15 Felt)ASTM D226/D226M
Mass of Saturant (as % of dry felt)Min 160% (for Grade 1)Min 140%ASTM D226/D226M
Breaking Strength, LongitudinalMin 175 N / 50 mm width (for Type 1, Hessian)Min 5.2 kN/m (≈ 260 N / 50 mm width) (for Type I)ASTM D226/D226M
Breaking Strength, TransverseMin 125 N / 50 mm width (for Type 1, Hessian)Min 2.6 kN/m (≈ 130 N / 50 mm width) (for Type I)ASTM D226/D226M
Pliability TestNo cracking over a 20 mm mandrel at 10°CNo cracking over a 19 mm mandrel at 18°CASTM D226/D226M
Heat Resistance TestNo flow/blistering at 65°C for 2h (for coated felt)Not specified in D226 (saturated only); ASTM D249 (coated felt) requires no flow at 80°C for 2h.ASTM D249/D249M
Water AbsorptionMax 5% by mass (for Type 1)Not specified as a performance test; controlled via minimum saturation requirements.ASTM D226/D226M
⚠ Verify details from original standards before use

Key Values7

Quick Reference Values
Minimum freeboard above pond level1.0 m
Minimum freeboard above max flood level for guide banks1.0 to 1.5 m
Factor of safety against sliding (static condition)1.5
Factor of safety against overturning (static condition)1.5
Safe exit gradient for coarse sand0.17 to 0.20 (1/6 to 1/5)
Bligh's creep coefficient for coarse-grained sand12
Lacey's silt factor 'f' for standard silt1.0
Key Formulas
Lacey's Scour Depth: R = 1.35 * (q^2 / f)^(1/3)
Bligh's Creep Length: L = C * H_L
Uplift Pressure (Khosla's Theory): P = γ_w * h_residual

Tables & Referenced Sections

Key Tables
Table 1: Values of Co-efficient of Discharge for Vertical Drop Weirs
Table 2: Safe Exit Gradient for Different Types of Soils
Table 3: Values of Lacey’s Silt Factor 'f' for Different Soil Types
Key Clauses
Clause 4: Investigation and Data Collection
Clause 6: Design of Weir/Barrage Profile
Clause 7: Design of Impervious Floor
Clause 8: Stability Analysis
Clause 9: Energy Dissipation Devices

Related Resources on InfraLens

Cross-Referenced Codes
IS 456:2000Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Pract...
→
IS 1893:2016Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of S...
→
IS 6966:2019Acceptance Test for Hydraulic Turbines
→
IS 6512:2018Criteria for Design of Cross-Section for Cana...
→
IS 7784:2010Code of Practice for Design of Parallel Runwa...
→

Frequently Asked Questions4

What is the primary difference between a barrage and a weir?+
A weir is a high-crest structure where ponding is mainly done by the raised crest itself. A barrage is a gated structure with a low crest, where ponding is almost entirely controlled by the gates, allowing for better flow and silt regulation (Clause 3).
Which theory should be used for uplift pressure calculations?+
Khosla's theory of independent variables is recommended for accurate design of impervious floors against uplift pressure, as it accounts for the effect of piles and floor thickness (Clause 7.4.2).
What is the significance of the exit gradient?+
The exit gradient at the downstream end of the impervious floor must be kept below a safe limit for the soil type to prevent the phenomenon of piping, which can lead to foundation failure (Clause 7.4.2.2).
What is the minimum recommended freeboard?+
A minimum freeboard of 1.0 m to 1.5 m should be provided for abutments, guide banks and afflux bunds over the maximum flood level (Clause 6.3.2).

QA/QC Inspection Templates

📋
QA/QC templates coming soon for this code.
Browse all 300 templates →