Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of model data availability on scour risk of bridges

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Access to detailed data sets which can enable detailed hydraulic modelling of the river around a bridge structure is not always possible and may require extensive surveys. It is important for infrastructure managers to decide whether additional data availability that may increase the accuracy of scour risk assessments may be worthwhile. In this regard, this paper aims to examine the scour risk assessment of bridges under different model resolutions by using two commonly used scour risk assessment procedures for railway bridges in the UK and investigate the sensitivity of a number of hydraulic parameters used in the scour prediction equations. These procedures are applied to four case study railway bridges coupled with four data availability scenarios capturing different levels of topographical and hydrological data available for the bridge/river site. The results show that the estimations of hydraulic parameters based on the simple empirical equations recommended by EX2502 for data scarcity conditions have a tendency to cause a significant disparity compared to the estimates from 1D and 2D HEC-RAS models. Particularly 2D models with bathymetric representation of river can provide more reliable results and improve the accuracy of scour risk assessments, especially for bridges that are close to the thresholds distinguishing different scour risk categories, i.e. medium to high risk. Sensitivity analysis of hydraulic parameters suggests that the most influential parameter that causes significant variations in total scour depth and scour risk is average velocity, followed by mean flow depth, mean floodplain depth, and mean floodplain width.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abderrezzak KEK, Paquier A, Mignot E (2009) Modelling flash flood propagation in urban areas using a two-dimensional numerical model. Nat Hazards 50:433–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arneson LA, Zevenbergen LW, Lagasse PF, Clopper PE (2012) Evaluating scour at bridges, 4th edn. Hydraulic engineering circular No. 18 (HEC-18). Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC

  • Benn J (2013) Railway bridge failure during flooding in the UK and Ireland. Proc Inst Civ Eng Forensic Eng 166:163–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettess R (1993) Hydraulic aspects of bridges: assessment of the risk of scour. HR Wallingford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow VT (1959) Open-channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan WL (1956) Estimating hydraulic roughness coefficients. Agric Eng 37:473–475

    Google Scholar 

  • Dikanski H, Hagen-Zanker A, Imam B, Avery K (2017) Climate change impacts on railway structures: bridge scour. Proc Inst Civ Eng Eng Sustain 170:237–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Dikanski H, Imam B, Hagen-Zanker A (2018) Effects of uncertain asset stock data on the assessment of climate change risks: a case study of bridge scour in the UK. Struct Saf 71:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dikanski H (2018) Adapting scour risk management practices for national bridge stocks to a changing climate. PhD thesis, University of Surrey

  • Dubus IG, Brown CD, Beulke S (2003) Sensitivity analyses for four pesticide leaching models. Pest Manag Sci 59:962–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamill L (1999) Bridge hydraulics. E and FN Spon, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Highways Agency (2012) The assessment of scour and other hydraulic actions at highway structures. Vol. 3 of Design manual for roads and bridges. Guildford, UK

  • Imam B, Chryssanthopoulos MK (2010) A review of metallic bridge failure statistics. In: Proceedings of 5th international IABMAS conference, Philadelphia

  • Johnson PA, Clopper PE, Zevenbergen LW, Lagasse PF (2015) Quantifying uncertainty and reliability in bridge scour estimations. J Hydraul Eng 141(7):04015013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kattell J, Eriksson M (1998) Bridge scour evaluation: screening, analysis, and countermeasures. USDA Forest Service, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby A, Roca M, Kitchen A et al (2015) Manual of scour at bridges and other hydraulic structures. CIRIA Report C742, London, UK

  • Lamb R, Aspinall W, Odbert H, Wagener T (2017) Vulnerability of bridges to scour: insights from an international expert elicitation workshop. Nat Hazards Earth Syst 17:1393–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen RJ, Ting FC, Jones AL (2010) Flow velocity and pier scour prediction in a compound channel: big Sioux river bridge at Flandreau, south Dakota. J Hydraul Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen EM, Toch A (1956) Scour around bridge piers and abutments, vol 4. Iowa Highway Research Board, Ames

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroni A, Tubaldi E, Val DV et al (2018) Using Bayesian networks for the assessment of underwater scour for road and railway bridges. In: Proceedings structural faults and repair and European bridge conference, Birmingham, UK

  • May RWP, Willoughby IR (1990) Local scour around large obstructions. HR Wallingford, Wallingford

    Google Scholar 

  • Melville BW (1997) Pier and abutment scour: integrated approach. J Hydraul Eng 123:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melville BW, Sutherland AJ (1988) Design method for local scour at bridge piers. J Hydraul Eng 114:1210–1226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melville BW, Coleman SE (2000) Bridge scour. Water Resources, Colo

  • Néelz S, Pender G (2009) Desktop review of 2D hydraulic modelling packages, science report SC080035. Joint UK Defra/Environment Agency Flood and Coastal Erosion. Risk Management R&D Program

  • Qi M, Li J, Chen Q (2016) Comparison of existing equations for local scour at bridge piers: parameter influence and validation. Nat Hazards 82:2089–2105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qi M, Li J, Chen Q (2018) Applicability analysis of pier-scour equations in the field: error analysis by rationalizing measurement data. J Hydraul Eng 144(8):04018050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) (2004) Impact of scour and flood risk on railway structures. T112 report, London, UK

  • Richardson EV, Davis SR (2001) Evaluating scour at bridges. 4th edn. Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (HEC-18), US

  • Rossell RP, Ting FC (2013) Hydraulic and contraction scour analysis of a meandering channel: James river bridges near Mitchell, South Dakota. J Hydraul Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selvakumaran S, Plank S, Geib C, Rossi C, Middleton C (2018) Remote monitoring to predict bridge scour failure using interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) stacking techniques. Int J Appl Earth Obs 73:463–470

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Transportation (USDOT) (1988) Scour at bridges. Technical Advisory T5140.20 (updated by Technical Advisory T5140.23, Evaluating scour at bridges, October 28, 1991). U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC

  • Van Leeuwen Z, Lamb R (2014) Flood and scour related failure incidents at railway assets between 1846 and 2013. JBA Trust, Skipton

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner CR (2007) Simulation of water-surface elevations and velocity distributions at the U.S. highway 13 bridge over the Tar River at Greenville, North Carolina, using one- and two-dimensional steady-state hydraulic models. Scientific Investigations Rep. 2007-5263, USGS

  • Yoon TH, Kang SK (2004) Finite volume model for two-dimensional shallow water flows on unstructured grids. J Hydraul Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:7(678)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Network Rail for providing access to data for the case studies.

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Civil Engineering Program, Middle East Technical University, Northern Cyprus Campus, Kalkanli, Guzelyurt, Mersin 10, Turkey

    H. Zaifoglu

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    B. Imam

Authors
  1. H. Zaifoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. Imam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design, to the analysis of the results and to the writing of the manuscript. Hydraulic models were developed by Hasan Zaifoglu.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Zaifoglu.

Ethics declarations

Data availability

Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential in nature and may only be provided with restrictions.

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zaifoglu, H., Imam, B. Effect of model data availability on scour risk of bridges. Nat Hazards 114, 3445–3469 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05527-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05527-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation