Gevra-Pendra : List of MJB, MNB and RUB

Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
1 1028 1020 8.28 42D Major 3x6x6 1 x 18.3 1x18.3 composit Girder 1x18.3* Extension Span As per existing Bridge. Detiail DIMTS decided for extension bridge for new single track, 1x18.3
Bridge of existing substructure and foundation not for new bridge for both track.
required
2 1523 1520 5.00 29D RUB 1x6x3.5 1 x 6 x 5 NTPC Crossing ROR/Proposed 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit LC can be avoided by exploring the possibility of taking the 1x6x5.15
RUB will Justified if Road will road through NTPC embankment by Box pushing and
Divert 1 x 6 x 5 subsequently crossing the CEWRL track through RUB -
difficult / tedeous proposition (3 level traffic)

3 2095 2080 20.33 - Major 9x6x6 3 x 18.3 3x18.3* Extension Span As per existing Bridge. Detiail DIMTS decided for extension bridge for new single track, 3x18.3
Bridge of existing substructure and foundation not for new bridge for both track.
required
4 2526 2520 10.35 - MNBR 2x5x5 2x5x5 2x5x5 OK Existing 2x4.57x4.57. 2x5x5
5 2933 2940 1.80 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK Existing 1x1.83 1x2x2
3620 LC-3 Maintaining LC due to congested area as intimated by ??????
DIMTS. Site confirmation is required.

6 3922 3947 5.19 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK As per exisitng 1x1.83 1x2x2
7 4414 4400 3.00 - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK DIMTS will revise to 1x2x2 as per existing 1x1.83 1x2x2
5020 LC-4 Maintaining LC due to congested area as intimated by ??????
DIMTS. Site confirmation is required.

8 5110 5100 0.86 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK Size will revise to 1x3x3 as per existing str. 1x3x3
5820 LC-5 Maintaining LC due to congested area as intimated by 1x6x5.15
DIMTS. But as per kmz file, its completely unpopulated
area - RUB can be thought of avoiding LC. Site
confirmation is required.

9 5886 5880 0.88 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK As per exisitng 1x0.91 1x2x2
10 5992 5980 1.02 - MNBR 2x5x5 2x5x5 2x5x5 OK As per existing str. of 1x1.83 1x2x2
11 6326 6320 11.87 - MNBR 2x5x5 2x5x5 2x5x5 OK As per exisitng str 2x4.57 2x5x5
6717 Existing str. But no proposal of new str. 1x2x2
6877 Existing str. But no proposal of new str. 1x2x2
from km 6326 to 7856 (1.5km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
12 7856 7860 3.25 RUB 2x6x6 2x6x6 2x6x6 OK as per DPR 2x6x6
13 9587 9600 4.76 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5.15
14 9747 9744 60.55 Major 2x18.3 2 x 30.5 2x 30.5 composite Girder OK 2x30.5
Bridge
15 9903 9920 10.04 RUB 1x6x3 2 x 6 x 6 2x6x6 is ok 2x6x6
16 10109 10120 4.42 MNBR 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6
17 10537 10580 6.97 44D Major 2x12.2 2 x 12.2 2x12.2
Bridge
18 11179 11200 3.76 71D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x5 1x6x6 is ok may be combined with br. at ch. 11271 toaccomodate 2x24.4
road as well as drain by providing br. of 2x24 and diverting
drain.
19 11271 11280 3.08 32D Major 1x12.2 1 x 12.2 1x12.2
Bridge
1
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
20 12148 12148 ROB 1x16 1x16 1x16
21 12665 12665 ROB 1x16 1x16 1x16
from km 12665 to 14786 (2.121km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
22 14778 14786 4.77 RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6
23 15554 15558 10.29 Major 1x12.2 1 x 12.2 1x12.2
Bridge
24 15839 15843 23.05 33D Major 2x12.2 2 x 12.2 2x12.2
Bridge
from km 15843 to 18200 (2.357km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
25 18200 18200 RUB 1x4.5x3.5 1x6x5 1x6x5 Additional verified by Joint site visit as per DPR, 1x4.5x3.5 1x6x5.15
26 18519 18530 6.53 MNBR 2x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1x6x6 is sufficient however it 2x6x6 Retained 2x6x6 Considering Hydraulogy As per DIMTS, 2x6x6 is to be followed as proposed by 1x6x6
may be check as per them in DPR; while as per hydrology, 1x6x6 is OK. DIMTS
hydrological calculations is insisting for 2x6x6 without any base. Site has confirmed
the dimension of 1x6x6; for the time being 1x6x6 is
assumed; Site needs to confirm span of existing br. At NH
for same drain.

27 19690 19700 2.00 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK as per hydrology 1x2x2
28 20007 20020 3.67 62D RUB 1x6x4.5 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit size is confirmed during site visit. Zero degree Skew angle 1x6x5.15
shall be proposed. Site confirmation required.

29 20547 20560 2.00 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok as per dpr & hydrology report 1x2x2
30 20648 20640 2.67 RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
31 21374 21380 3.73 19D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 Ok 1x6x5 can be proposed. Not in dpr. 1x6x5.15
32 21506 21520 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok as per dpr 1x2x2
33 21966 21980 - MNBR 2x2x2 2x2x2 2x2x2 Ok as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is ok. 1x2x2
34 22161 22170 - MNBR 3x2x2 3x2x2 3x2x2 Ok as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is ok. 1x2x2
35 22258 22270 4.42 31D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 Ok as per dpr 2x6x6. DIMTS insists for 2x6x6 catering to any 2x6x6
future upgradation of road. No joint site survey
confirmation. For the time being we are going ahead with
2x6x6; project has to comment.
36 22461 22460 28.65 Major 2 x 30.50 1 x 30.5 As per site 2x30.5 is required 2 x 30.50 Verified by Site and Hydrology as per dpr, hydrology and joint site obsrevations, span 2x30.5
Bridge however it may be check as per proposal is ok.
hydrological calculation

37 23034 23040 3.89 RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1X6X5 is OK 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per railway circular, 5m clearance is ok 1x6x5.15
38 23252 23260 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok as per hydrology & dpr, size is ok 1x2x2
39 23741 23750 4.67 22D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1X6X5 is OK 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per railway circular, 5m clearance is ok 1x6x5.15
40 23807 23820 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok as per dpr & hydrology report, ok 1x2x2
41 24433 24440 7.16 RUB 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 6 Span arrangment to be revised 2x6x6 Ok since it is 4 lane NH, box will be not permissible. 1x30.5 1x30.5
as it is a 4 lane NH. Drainage of steel composite girder (RUB) will be required.
RUB is also to be examined.

42 24546 24560 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok as per dpr 1x2x2

43 24807 24820 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok as per dpr 1x2x2

2
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
44 25225 25235 6.89 RUB 1x4.5x3.5 1 x 6 x 5 1 X 6 X 5 is required 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per recommendation from joint site survey, proposed 1x6x5.15
span is ok.
45 25419 25430 11.66 24D Major 2 x 30.50 1 x 30.5 It may be check as per 2 x 30.50 Verified by Site and Hydrology not in DPR. As per KMZ file, 1x30.5 is found sufficient. 1x30.5
Bridge hydrological calculation
46 25650 25660 3.67 48D RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 X 6 X 5 is required 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
47 26093 26150 2.74 13D MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 Ok as per hydrology, sie is ok 1x3x3
48 26805 26820 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
49 27006 27020 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
50 27357 27365 3.97 44D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 Ok ok. DIMTS to ensure possibility zero degree skew angle. 1x6x6

51 28073 28080 6.08 45D Major 1 x 12.20 1 x 12.2 1 x 12.20 OK Hydrology report justified 1x12.2
Bridge
52 28884 28900 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
53 29145 29180 MNBR 1x4x4 1x4x4 1x4x4 Ok This is pond location. 1x4x4 box size may be provided to 1x4x4
solve dual purpose of cattle passage as well as drain.

54 29407 29420 4.83 RUB 1x6x5.5 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per DIMTS, this Is ODR and 1x6x6 as per DPR. 1x6x6

55 29525 29540 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
56 29964 29980 MNBR 2x2x2 2x2x2 2x2x2 Ok ok 2x2x2
57 30111 30120 11.32 25D MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 1x2x2 is sufficent however it 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
may be check as per
hydrological calculation
58 30305 30320 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
59 30405 30420 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 Ok ok 1x2x2
60 30628 30640 7.20 13D RUB 2x6x4.5 2 x 6 x 5 State Highway, Height may be 1x18.3 Span arrangement revised Considering the DIMTS agreed to follow 1x24 by keeping future expansion 1x24.4
reviewed. Ht+verticle clearance State Highway Crossing. Formation level shall in mind.
as per IRC 54 to be provided. be raised for required vertical clearance of
5m
61 30925 30940 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 Ok as per hydrology ok. 1x3x3
62 31310 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5 Ok village road. Size ok 1x6x5.15
63 31473 31480 12.22 18D Major 1 x 12.20 1 x 12.2 1 x 12.20 OK as per hydrology, DPR proposed size is ok 1x12.2
Bridge
64 31977 31990 4.07 12D RUB 1x6x3.5 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
65 32645 32660 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK ok 1x3x3
66 33260 33270 3.94 27d RUB 1x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x6 1x6x6 is proposed considering availability of BT road. 5.5m min. vertical clearance may be followed. 1x6x6
higher vertical clearance
67 33664 33680 MNBR 1x4x4 1x4x4 1x4x4 OK This is pond location. 1x4x4 box size may be provided to 1x4x4
solve dual purpose of cattle passage as well as drain.
Agreed for 1x4x4 - with modified location 33740 - at pond
location

68 33847 33860 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK as per hydrolgy, 1x2x2 is sufficient. 1x2x2
69 34804 34815 3.63 - RUB 1x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x6 OK vilage road. Site survey observation may be followed 1x6x5.15

70 35329 35340 3.86 RUB 1x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x6 OK vilage road. Site survey observation may be followed 1x6x5.15

71 35547 35560 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK ok as per hydrology 1x3x3

3
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
72 36047 36000 43.63 MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 Proposed 1 x 3 x 3 is sufficient Verified by Joint Site Visit ok as per hydrology and joint survey recom 1x3x3

73 36182 36200 37.32 MNBR 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 Proposed 1 x 3 x 3 is sufficient Verified by Joint Site Visit ok as per hydrology and joint survey recom 1x3x3

74 36291 36340 15.95 46D MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 Proposed 1 x 2 x 2 is sufficient Verified by Joint Site Visit ok as per hydrology and joint survey recom 1x2x2

75 36373 36380 4.33 23D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit 1x6x5.15
76 36428 36440 15.96 - Major 2 x 12.20 2 x 12.2 2 x 12.20 OK as per hydrology, 1x18 is sufficient. 1x18.3
Bridge
77 36679 36700 9.33 63D MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 5 x 3 1x5x3 is ok however it may be 1x5x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient but joint site survey 1x2x2
check as per hydrological recom for 1x5x3.
calculation
78 36912 36920 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
79 37056 37070 - MNBR 1x 5 x 4 1x5x4 1x 5 x 4 OK as per hydrology 1x5x4 is ok 1x5x4
80 37519 37530 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
81 37689 37700 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
82 37826 37840 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
83 38049 38060 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
84 38494 38520 3.51 40D RUB 1x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x6 OK BT road. 5.5m min. vertical clearance may be followed. 1x6x6

85 38739 38750 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2

86 38906 38910 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
87 39088 39100 27.11 MNBR 2x4x4 2 x 4 x 4 Opening size is sufficient 2x4x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit and hydrology as per hydrology, 1x4x4 is sufficient. 1x4x4
however it may be check as per
hydrological data.
88 39677 39690 5.12 59D RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
89 40374 40400 3.22 53D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 OK ODR, min. vertical clearance 5.5m need to maintain 1x6x6

90 41070 41080 MNBR 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 OK as per hydrology, Q=16cusec for which 1x3x3 is sufficient, 1x3x3
however, as per DPR 1x6x6 is proposed.

91 41730 41740 19.65 26D MNBR 2x4x4 2 x 4 x 4 Opening size is sufficient It may 2x4x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit and hydrology As per hydrology, q=9 cusec. 1x3x3 sie is sufficient, 1x3x3
be check as per hydrological however 2x4x4 is proposed as per DPR.
calculation
92 41928 41940 - - MNBR 2x4x4 2x4x4 2x4x4 OK As per hydrology, q=15 cusec. 1x4x4 size is sufficient, 1x4x4
however 2x4x4 is proposed as per DPR.
93 42631 42640 3.57 15D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1x6x5 is ok but the road 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
chainage is near 42726
94 43108 43120 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
95 43550 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5 OK However, this bridge is not covered in DPR as well as no 1x6x5.15
observation form site, this may be proposed by keeping in
view of village requirement as informed by DIMTS only.
We are going ahead with this but site confirmation is
required.

96 43889 43900 130.00 - Major 5 x 30.50 5 x 30.5 5 x 30.50 OK it is confirmed by kmz file. 5x30.5
Bridge
97 44089 44100 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK As per hydrology, ok 1x3x3
98 44351 44360 4.04 11D RUB 1x6x6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x6 OK in view of site observation, 1x6x5 may be proposed. 1x6x5.15

4
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
99 44840 44840 4.00 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit in view of site observation, 1x6x5 may be proposed. 1x6x5.15
100 45140 45150 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
101 45390 45400 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
102 45617 45630 3.29 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1x6x5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit in view of site observation, 1x6x5 may be proposed. 1x6x5.15
103 46057 46080 37.07 43D Major 2 x 12.20 2 x 30.5 2x30.5 is ok however It may be 2 x 30.50 Span increased as per site verification 2x30.5 is confirmed by kmz file. 2 x 30.50
Bridge check as per hydrological
calculation
104 46426 46440 30.33 MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 is sufficient 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
105 47437 47440 34.56 Major 1 x 12.20 1 x 30.5 Current water width is 34.56 but 1 x 30.50 Span increased as per site verification as per kmz file, 1x30.5 is found sufficient. 1x30.5
Bridge river natural width is about 180
meter aprox. There is a road
bridge up strem side aprox
length150m (Span arrangement
may be reviwed )

106 47789 47800 - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2

107 48271 48280 ROB 1x18.3 1X48 1X48 OK DIMTS confirmed that due to yard location, it has to cover 1x48
4 tracks and at end of platform. In view of this, 1x48 is
justified with carriageway of 7.5m.
from km 48271 to 49983 (1.712km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
108 49983 49980 15.43 48D Major 5x4x4 1 x 24.4 1 x 24.4 is ok 1x24.4 Span arrangement revised to avoide melticell OK, but need to check availability of any turnout, if any. 1x24.4
Bridge box
109 50250 50260 3.80 28D Major 2x6x6 1 x 24.4 Two separate RCC box 1x6x6 1x24.4 Span arrangement revised to accommodate DIMTS suggested to accommodate both road & drain 1x24.4
Bridge may be provided, one each for the Road and Nala together. within 1 major bridge to avoid road traffic intruption as
nala and road. well as water ponding area.
110 50300 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5 OK It may be deleted since this RUB will be covered within Deleted.
major bridge at location 50250.

111 50508 50520 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2

112 51108 51120 - - RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 NOT Required ,no road at site Deleted Not required, as recommended during joint in view of site observation, proposed str. Deleted. Deleted.
site visit
113 51244 51260 11.45 31D MNBR 2x3x3 2 x 3 x 3 2x3x3 is sufficent however It 2x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit and hydrology as per hydrology, proposed size is justified. 2x3x3
may be check as per
hydrological calculation
114 51640 51650 5.75 53D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit 1x6x5 is ok 1x6x5.15
115 51888 51900 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
from km 51888 to 52908 (1.02km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
116 52908 52920 3.20 16D RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
from km 52908 to 54028 (1.12km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
117 54028 54040 MNBR 1x 5 x 5 1x5x5 1x 5 x 5 OK as per discharge of 6 cusec, 1x2x2 is sufficient. 1x2x2
118 54084 54100 4.25 12D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15

5
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
119 54302 54340 9.52 21D MNBR 3x5x5 3x5x5 3x5x5 OK as per hydrology, Q=5.3 cusec which may be covered by 1x12.2
1x2x2 only. No site observation but stream width is 9.52m.
Need to take decision. 1x12 composite.

120 54488 54500 4.00 41D RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6x5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
121 55069 55080 - - MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1x5x5 OK Q=7.5 cusec. Kmz confirm a very thin line of drain. 1x3x3 1x3x3
seems justified.
122 55388 55460 4.00 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
123 56104 56120 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 Not required at site(no road at Deleted Not required, as recommended during joint Deleted.
site) site visit
124 56771 56780 7.00 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
125 57044 57060 33.64 MNBR 1x5x5 1 x 5 x 5 opening size is sufficent 1x5x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit and hydrology Q=7.4 cusec. Kmz confirm a very thin line of drain. 1x3x3 1x3x3
however It may be check as per seems justified.
hydrological calculation
126 57497 57520 3.81 33D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
127 58498 58510 5.25 51D RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x 5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
128 58766 58780 146.00 Major 4 x 30.50 4 x 30.5 4 x 30.50 OK ok 4x30.5
Bridge
from km 58766 to 60160 (1.394km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures reuired.
129 60160 60160 ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

130 60765 60780 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2

131 60886 60900 3.50 RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 As per site 1x6x5 is ok. It 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit and hydrology location needs to revise as per site observation. 1x6x5.15
crossing through Main Station
yard.Possibility of diversion of
road may be examined.

132 61437 61440 7.00 19D RUB 1x 4.5 x 4.5 1 x 5 x 4 1 x 5 x 4 is ok 1x5x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit need to revise size to 1x6x5 as adopted earlier for village 1x6x5.15
road. It will serve as RUB cum minor bridge.
133 61626 61640 19.18 54D MNBR 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 6 2 x 6 x 6 is ok 2x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per hydrology, Q=18.4cusec. 1x6x6 is sufficient but 2x6x6
stream width shown as 20m. However, go ahead with site
observation of 2x6x6. Simultaneously, project site may
comment on this.

134 62026 62040 4.50 RUB 1x6x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 6 x5 is ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
135 62412 62440 29.10 43D Major 1 x 12.20 1 x 12.2 1 x 12.20 OK since Q=11.5 cusec, 1x3x3 box is sufficient with filling 10m 1x3x3
Bridge
136 62595 62700 12.00 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x3x3
137 62743 62780 75.82 MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x3x3
138 62962 62980 16.76 MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1 x 5 x 5 is ok 1x5x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit since Q=10 cusec, 1x3x3 is sufficient. 1x3x3
139 63033 63060 41.30 MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1 x 5 x 5 is ok 1x5x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit since Q=12 cusec, 1x3x3 is sufficient. 1x3x3
140 63205 63220 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
141 63685 63700 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK since Q=3.86 cusec, 1x2x2 is sufficient. 1x2x2
142 63940 63980 17.90 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 is ok 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
6
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
143 64212 64220 3.70 21D RUB 1x6x6 1x6x6 1x6x6 OK need to revise size to 1x6x5 as adopted earlier for village 1x6x5.15
road.
144 64566 64580 - - MNBR 2x6 x6 2x6x6 2x6 x6 OK since Q=14.5 cusec, 1x3x3 is sufficient. 1x3x3
145 64929 64940 - - MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1x5x5 OK since Q=17.5 cusec, 1x4x4 is sufficient. 1x4x4
146 65209 65220 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK since Q=4.69 cusec, 1x2x2 is sufficient. 1x2x2
147 65456 65520 11.85 31D MNBR 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 Its Valley 1x4x4 will required It 1x4x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per hydrology, 1x3x3 is sufficient 1x3x3
may be check as per
hydrological calculation
148 66489 66500 14.10 49D MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 Its Valley 1x6x4 will required It 1x6x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x4
may be check as per
hydrological calculation
149 67245 67260 ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

150 67584 67680 4.04 7D MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1x5x5 OK since Q=18 cusec, 1x4x4 is sufficient. 1x4x4
151 67688 67700 8.85 17D Major 1 x 12.20 1 x 12.2 1 x 12.20 OK since Q=13.38 cusec, 1x3x3 box is sufficient with filling 1x3x3
Bridge 10m
152 67992 68000 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
153 68940 68940 20.24 29D MNBR 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 6 The Barreral Length of proposed 1 x 12.20 As recommended during joint site visit filling is 12m and discharge is 7.02 cusec. Box of 1x6x6 is 2x6x6
Box will be around 95 to 100m sufficient but site is asking for 12.2 plate girder. Box is
hence girder bridge of 1x12.2M preferred since this is in yard. Meanwhile, going ahead
with box of size 2x6x6. Simultaneously, Project site may
PG may be provided
comment on this.

154 69499 69480 MNBR 2 x 4 x4 2x4x4 2 x 4 x4 OK justified for Q= 74 cusec 2x4x4

155 70200 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5 OK village road. Ok 1x6x5.15
156 70615 70640 66.95 MNBR 2x2x2 2 x 2 x 2 As per L-Section Filling is Aprox 2x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit due to 200m distance, drain cant be dischared to MJ. For 1x3x3
4m. (2x2x2 box is sufficent) Q=16 cusec, 1x3x3 may be followed.
Paddy field. Possibility to divert
the discharge in toMN80 to MJ

157 70825 Major 1 x 24.4 This section is in cutting of Formation level shall be raised. as per kmz file, 1x6x6 may be followed. 1x6x6
Bridge approx 1m.Girder bridge is not
feasible.
158 71060 RUB 1x6x5 1x6x5 1x6x5 OK ok 1x6x5.15
159 71756 71760 3.91 21D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

160 72530 72540 5.12 35D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

7
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
161 73299 73320 4.39 9D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

162 73718 73720 13.18 MNBR 1x5x5 1 x 5 x 5 1x5x5 box is sufficent however 1x5x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit since Q=24.6 cusec, 1x4x4 is sufficient. 1x4x4
It may be check as per
hydrological calculation
163 74112 74120 - - MNBR 2x4x4 2x4x4 OK since Q=3.2 cusec, 1x2x2 is sufficient. 1x2x2
164 74390 74400 4.11 25D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

165 75301 75320 19.92 33D Major 2 x 30.50 2 x 30.5 2 x 30.50 OK ok 2x30.5
Bridge
75417 village road crossing. 1x6x5 may be proposed. 1x6x5.15
from km 75301 to 76628 (1.327km), no balancing culvert is ??????
provided. Project may confirm if any balancing type
structures required.
166 76628 76640 - - RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 At this location aprox 2m filling 1x6x5 Span arrangement revised by joint site visit. ok 1x6x5.15
so proper drainage arrangement Formation level shall be raised.
to made for RUB.

167 76689 76700 - - MNBR 1x 4.5 x 4.5 1 x 5 x 5 At this location aprox 2.5m 1x6x5 Span arrangement revised by joint site visit. as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient but for passage, 1x6x5 1x6x5.15
filling ( May be review ) Formation level shall be raised. is required
168 77151 77120 29.79 MNBR 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 is sufficient 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
169 77712 77720 42.59 MNBR 1 x 4 x4 1 x 4 x 4 1x4x4 is sufficent however it 1x4x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient for Q=4.46 1x2x2
may check by hydro data
170 77814 77820 - - RUB 1x4.5x4.5 1 x 6 x 5 1x6x5 ok 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
171 78106 78140 36.11 54D MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x3x3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit balancing culvert 1x2x2
172 78377 78420 27.04 51D MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 2 1x3x3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit balancing culvert 1x2x2
173 78708 78700 48.36 51D MNBR 2 x 3 x 3 2 x 3 x 3 At this location there is a village 1x6x5 Span arrangement revised as per the site as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient but for passage, 1x6x5 1x6x5.15
road RUB/ROB is required (May requirement of RUB/ROB near village. is required
be review)
174 79381 79400 54.38 Major 1x 4.5 x 4.5 1 x 24.4 opening size1x4.5x4.5 is 1 x 24.4 Span arrangement verified by Joint Site as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient but for passage, 1x6x5 1x6x5.15
Bridge sufficient however it may check verification is required
by hydro data
175 79947 79980 46.23 Major 4 x 6 x 6 3 x 24.4 opening size 4x6x6 is sufficient 1x24.4 Span arrangement revised to avoide melticell As per hydrology, proposal of 1x24.4 is justified. As per 1x24.4
Bridge however it may check by box kmz file, existing road bridge at downstream is of 23m
hydrodata length, which needs to be confirmed from site.

176 80422 80400 58.66 38D Major 2x6x6 2 x 30.5 opening size 2x6x6 is sufficient 2 x 30.5 Span arrangement verified by Joint Site from Ch. 80 to 81 (1km) track passing 1x24.4
Bridge however it may check by verification
through valley. Need to do detail
hydrodata
drainage plan by providing track side

8
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n drainage plan by providing track side
177 80757 80800 66.54 39D Major 1 x 2 x 2 2 x 30.5 opening size 1x2x2 is sufficient 2 x 30.5 Span arrangement verified by Joint Site drain on right side tp drainout rainwater 1x2x2
Bridge (near road to be verification
diverted)formation is on 0 fill
to nearest outlet (br. At ch. 79947 &
height(May be reviewed) 80422)
178 81803 81780 139.00 MNBR 2x2x2 2 x 2 x 2 formation is on zero fill 2 x2x2 Ok. ok 2x2x2
height(May be reviewed)
179 82376 82400 4.25 22D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

180 83013 83040 86.17 Major 1 x 4 x4 3 x 24.4 Openingsize1X4X4issufficent(Pa 3 x 24.4 Span arrangement verified by Joint Site as per hydrology, 1x2x2 is sufficient for Q=4.46. DIMTS 1x24.4
Bridge ddy Field) verification could not justified their proposal of 3x24.4. Taking cue
from KMZ file, 1x24.4 composite Girder span may be
adopted.
181 83341 83360 7.13 MNBR 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x3x3
182 83945 83960 4.77 20D ROB 1X48 1X48 1X48 OK due to yard location 1x48
183 84502 84520 - - MNBR 1 x 4 x4 1x4x4 1 x 4 x4 OK balancing culvert 1x2x2
184 84879 84900 25.20 MNBR 2 x 4 x4 2 x 4 x 4 2X4X4 is sufficent however it 2x4x4 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=14.5 cusec, 1x3x3 is sufficient. 1x3x3
may check by hydro data
185 85061 85080 - - MNBR 2 x 4 x4 2 x 4 x 4 2 x 4 x4 OK q=14.5 cusec, 1x3x3 is sufficient. 1x3x3
186 85091 85160 11.18 34D MNBR 2 x 6 x 6 2 x 6 x 6 OK 2x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit as per hydrology, Q=27, 2x4x4 is sufficient. 2x4x4
187 85407 85380 19.69 41D MNBR 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 ok 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
188 85960 86060 6.77 6D RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 RUB is not feasible due to Filling 1x6x5 Ok. Formation level shall be raised. 1x6x5 is ok 1x6x5.15
height of aprox2.4m (May be
review )
189 86519 86540 44.72 - Major 2 x 45.70 2 x 45.70 2 x 45.70 + 2 OK ok 2 x 45.70 +
Bridge +2x +2x x 76.00 2 x 76.00
76.00 76.00
190 86761 86780 - - MNBR 1x5x5 1x5x5 1x5x5 OK q=11 cusec1x3x3 is sufficient 1x3x3
191 86897 87020 49.74 MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x3x3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x3x3
192 87401 87420 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK q=19.5 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified 1x3x3
193 87580 87600 - - RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1 x 4.5 x 4 is sufficent 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15
194 87922 88000 13.09 42D MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x 3 x3 sufficent 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=15.5 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified 1x3x3
195 88164 88220 10.48 47D MNBR 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 6 1x6x6 is sufficent 1x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=35.36 cusec. 1x6x5 is justified 1x6x5
196 88420 88440 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK q=8.4 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified 1x3x3
197 88902 88900 28.00 MNBR 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 6 1 x 6 x 5 is sufficent 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=35.4 cusec. 1x6x5 is justified 1x6x5
198 89092 89100 7.96 29D MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x3x3 is sufficent 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x3x3
199 90143 90160 24.22 MNBR 2 x 6 x 6 2 x 6 x 3 2x6x6 is sufficent however it 2x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=33 cusec. 1x6x5 is justified 1x6x5
may check by hydro data
200 90738 90740 4.76 MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
201 91163 91180 - - MNBR 1x3x3 1x3x3 1x3x3 OK q=12.38 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified 1x3x3
202 91545 91560 7.67 15D RUB 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 6 State Highway, Height may be 1 x 18.3 Composite girder bridge proposed due to DIMTS agreed to follow 1x24 by keeping future expansion 1x24.4
reviewed.Road regrading will state highway. Formation Level shall be in mind.
required raised.
203 91622 91660 116.02 MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x3x3 is ok (paddy field) 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=24.2 cusec. 1x6x5 is justified 1x6x5
204 91872 91880 32.76 39D MNBR 1 x 3 x 3 1 x 3 x 3 1x3x3 is sufficent 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=10.16 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified 1x3x3
205 92099 92140 7.27 RUB 1x4.5x4 1 x 6 x 5 1x4.5x4 is sufficent 1x6x5 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x6x5.15

9
 Sl Revised Chainage STREAM/ SKEW Bridge Initial Span OBSERVATION FROM SITE Final Span DIMTS Remarks IRCON DD Cell observation Finalised by
No. Chainage ROAD ANGLE Type Span Proposed (DIMTS) Design cell.
WIDTH Arrangem for (First cut)
ent Verificatio
n
206 92535 92560 4.47 MNBR 2 x 4.5 x 2 x 5 x 4 1x5x4 is suficent To be discussed q=14 cusec. 1x3x3 is justified but site observation for 1x5x4
3.5 1x5x4
207 92847 92860 45.93 37D MNBR 2x6x6 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 6 is ok 2x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=20.6 cusec. 1x4x4 is justified 1x4x4
208 93621 93640 - - MNBR 1x2x2 1x2x2 1x2x2 OK ok 1x2x2
209 93908 93960 11.21 MNBR 1x2x2 1x3x3 1 x 3 x 3 is ok 1x3x3 Verified by Joint Site Visit canal exist 1x3x3
210 94351 94380 3.65 9D ROB 1x17x8 1x17x8 1x17x8 OK due to cutting section, DIMTS proposed box. Need to take 1x17x8
decision for box or girder bridge. Will be decided based on
cost estimation. Meanwhile, 1x17x8 will be considered for
alignment finalisation.

211 95008 95040 12.87 MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 1 x 2 x 2 is ok 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2
212 95568 95600 23.12 MNBR 2x6x6 2 x 6 x 4 2x6x6 is ok 2x6x6 Verified by Joint Site Visit q=61 cusec. 2x6x6 may be followed as per site 2x6x6
observation.
213 96224 96240 9.87 MNBR 1x2x2 1 x 2 x 2 1x2x2 ok 1x2x2 Verified by Joint Site Visit ok 1x2x2

10