Technical Guideline

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

April 2013

Copyright

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/
State of Queensland (Department of Transport and Main Roads) 2013
Feedback: Please send your feedback regarding this document to: mr.techdocs@tmr.qld.gov.au

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

Contents
1

PROCESS ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................... 1

BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS......................................................................................................... 2

DATA COLLECTION................................................................................................................................... 2

SURVEY ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

MAPPING AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 5

SITE VISIT..................................................................................................................................................... 6

HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................................... 7

HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................ 8

10

BRIDGE INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................................................................. 9

11

TIMES OF SUBMERGENCE AND TIMES OF CLOSURE ............................................................. 10

12

SCOUR ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................................ 11

13

REPORTING........................................................................................................................................... 12

14

DOCUMENTATION ............................................................................................................................... 12

15

FILING ..................................................................................................................................................... 12

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

PROCESS

Hydraulic analysis is a critical component for design of bridges that cross water courses. Hydraulic
analysis is not required for overpass bridges or similar structures as they do not convey water.
Because of the importance of hydraulics in the performance and safety of most bridges, hydraulic
analysis should be undertaken by either the Hydraulics and Marine Studies Unit (HMS) of Engineering
and Technology Branch or a suitably prequalified and experienced consultant. All hydraulic analysis
work undertaken for TMR should be reviewed by HMS and a copy of the final report should be
recorded with HMS in a central location.
The following is an overview of the general requirements of a hydraulic brief for bridge design.

OVERVIEW

This brief outlines the main issues involved in the hydraulic design for a bridge project. It also outlines
the types of checking that may be needed. The brief also provides generic guidelines for relatively
routine bridge designs, which includes bridges on single channels without significant overflow sections
or floodplains. These can be analysed using a one-dimensional hydraulic modelling approach. Some
specific applications may still require a more detailed specific and specialised methodology but the
general intent and specification outline are the same. An example of specialised hydraulic designs for
bridges includes floodplain bridges, with multiple bridges or with overflow culverts.
The main components of a bridge hydraulic design project involve the following steps:

Background investigations

Data collection

Survey

Site visit

Hydrology analysis, the calculation of flood discharges

Hydraulic analysis, the calculation of flood flow patterns, flood levels and flow velocities

Bridge investigations, including assessment of options

Times of submergence and times of closure

Scour assessment and scour protection measures

Reporting

Documentation, including bridge fixing form, and

Filing.

A request for a hydraulic design for a new or replacement bridge may come from one of a number of
sources. A Region or District is the most common source, but some of the larger bridges may involve
a specific project or alliance. Sometimes, the request may arise from Bridge Design Unit or another
specialist unit.
Data as needed for the hydraulic design should be provided by the requesting unit and in all cases, it
is important to confirm the requirements with other relevant units, such as Bridge Design.
If the project is undertaken in-house by HMS, a job number for use in SAP should be provided and set
up for HMS application. The project should also be catalogued in the HMS system and a file
prepared.

Page 1 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

If the project is undertaken by a consultant, a brief should be prepared and reviewed by HMS to
provide a clear and unambiguous outline of the scope of work. The scope of work should include the
provision of all data and result files for the computer models used in the project. The consultant
should provide a proposal outlining the scope of work and technical criteria, the inclusions and
limitations, as well as an itemised fee proposal. The fee should be fixed for a clearly defined scope or
time basis if the scope cannot be specified in detail.

BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS

Whenever a hydraulic report is required for a bridge, the first process is to review any previous
investigations that have been carried out on this bridge, or on other nearby locations.
The first source to review is the HMS files to find any previous studies that may have been carried out
in-house. If there is no information here, the second source is the Bridge Design Unit files. Even if
there is no HMS file, there may be some useful information in the bridge design file on hydraulic
results. In some cases, the TMR Plan Room will contain plans including useful hydraulic data, if there
is no other information.
If there is no information available in Structures Division, there may be some data available in the
Region if a hydraulic study has been undertaken either in-house in the region or by consultants
working for the region.
Obtaining this background data ensures that there is a good understanding of the current status of
hydraulic investigations for the Department to be the basis for the current project. As well, these old
reports will often contain valuable base data such as flood observations or survey data which may be
useful in the current project.
As well as specific flood studies for the bridge, there may be related flood investigations that have
been carried out for the bridge site or in a nearby reach of the river. These flood investigations will
often be carried out for Councils for floodplain management and, while they have been prepared for
other purposes, will often be useful for the current project. Information on flood studies completed for
the region may be listed in data bases held by Geoscience Australia or the Queensland
Reconstruction Authority, and these sources can be investigated.

DATA COLLECTION

Data on the hydraulics of the bridge site and the neighbouring reach of the river is valuable to assist in
setting the parameters for the hydrology and hydraulic modelling. Without any data, the modelling
must rely on regional parameters and this application leads to greater uncertainty in the results.
The data to be collected will include:

Streamflow data. If there is a streamgauge in the catchment (especially close to the bridge site) or
in a neighbouring catchment, this data should be applied. Streamflow data can be used directly in
a flood frequency analysis, to assist in calibrating a rainfall runoff model or to determine the
discharge for selected historical flood events to use in calibration of the hydraulic models. It is
also used for the calculation of times of submergence. Current and historic streamflow data is
available from the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM), with most routine data
needed for bridge hydraulic analysis available on their website. More detailed data, such as flood
hydrographs or rating curve details must be obtained from the Department officers directly, either
through a website query or directly to individual officers. There is no charge for provision of
streamflow data from DNRM. There are also some stream gauges operated by other agencies,
and these should be identified where available. Sunwater operate some gauges especially in
irrigation areas, or streams where they have an interest. The rating for these stations will often be

Page 2 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

less reliable than that for DNRM gauges since Sunwater is especially interested in irrigation
supplies. There is a charge for supply of data from Sunwater. The Bureau of Meteorology
operates flood warning stations in some catchments. The Bureau is generally only interested in
flood levels and therefore most of their gauges are not rated. These stations normally record
maximum flood levels and sometimes also flood hydrographs. Bureau data must be requested
from the Bureau and there is a charge. Streamflow data can be used to calibrate both hydrology
and hydraulic models, since they usually provide flood discharges, not just flood levels.

Observed flood levels. Observations of flood levels are useful to help in calibration of the
hydraulic model. Flood levels can be obtained from one of a number of sources, such as historical
records collected by TMR surveyors, from Councils or other stakeholders or directly from local
property owners. Care should be taken with the datum used especially for older records. While
observed flood levels are very useful, they should be carefully checked for consistency and the
reliability should be reviewed. The exact location of the measurements is also often important,
considering whether the level is taken upstream or downstream of a bridge or in a local tributary
rather than the main channel for example. Localised effects may have important impacts on
observed flood levels so the data must be carefully reviewed. Observed flood levels are critical for
calibration of hydraulic models, though when there are no recorded flood discharges, there will
always be some uncertainty in model parameters. As well as flood levels at an individual point
such as the bridge, flood levels along a reach of a water course allows an accurate assessment of
flood profiles and a better representation of model parameters. Many observed flood levels result
from debris levels, and there may be questions about the accuracy of these debris levels, so care
should be taken in the assessment of these levels.

General flood observations. Even if there are no detailed measurements of flood levels, general
observations of flooding patterns are often useful. For example, there may be information that a
bridge has never been inundated, and this can give some guidance on the flood immunity
expected when the analysis has been carried out. This information can include anecdotal
information from inspectors or other TMR staff. As well the 131940 system will include details on
road closures, but this data is available only for the last few years and may be limited.

Flow conditions. Observations on general flow conditions may be useful and these may be
obtained from local residents or other stakeholders. For example, an observation that flow
velocities are low may be an indication that flooding results from backwater rather than local
runoff. Observations on debris or sediment mobility can assist in a general understanding of flood
behaviour, which contributes to more reliable hydraulic modelling.

These observations and data may be obtained from a number of sources. Local residents or
stakeholders may have data, which can be obtained by TMR surveyors or as part of the consultation
programme. As well, this data can be obtained from the Council, who collect flood data for a range of
purposes such as floodplain management and planning.
Data that is suitable for use in hydraulic analyses may also be available in previous reports. These
may be TMR reports or studies carried out for other organisations. The most significant of these
would be Councils, who are responsible for floodplain management, where flood data is often
collected. However depending on the individual situation, a range of other organisations may collect
data. One of these is the Bureau of Meteorology who often prepare reports following major flood
events, and these reports usually contain a comprehensive compendium of data.
Whenever this type of data is collected, it is important to review it carefully. The data may be
inaccurate and it is often hard to determine the reliability. It can be checked for consistency both

Page 3 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

internally and with other sources. The source of the data can also provide an indication of how
reliable it is likely to be.
However in general any flood information is likely to be valuable and can assist the flood study, though
interpretation and weighting may be needed at times.

SURVEY

Survey is a critical component of any flood report for a bridge, and may be collected specifically for the
particular project or may be available from either TMR or some other organisation where it has been
collected for some other purpose. HMS has prepared a detailed brief for the survey requirements for
bridge hydraulic investigations and this should be followed. This brief has an outline of the different
requirements depending on the type of project.
The recommended survey requirements for a simple water course include cross sections for the reach
both downstream and upstream of the crossing. An example of the required cross sections for a
simple analysis can be seen below.

Downstream of the crossing, the general requirement is to have at least five cross sections spaced
approximately 100 m apart. These cross sections should be at right angles to the flow and should
extend to higher than the highest expected flood level, so that the model can represent all of the flow.
The maximum surveyed level is usually higher than the bank level of the stream, since over-bank or
floodplain flow is common. The cross sections should represent the downstream reach sufficiently to
allow the backwater model to calculate the flood level immediately downstream of the bridge
accurately. In some circumstances, some changes to this guideline may be needed if the water
course is small or large or there are other special features. These five cross sections however are
generally adequate for most requirements.

Page 4 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

Upstream of the crossing, at least five cross sections are also suggested, also spaced about 100 m
apart. These upstream cross sections ensure that the afflux or the impact of the crossing on flood
levels can be calculated accurately.
As well as the cross sections, the stream bed profile over the reach of the river upstream and
downstream of the bridge site (included with the cross sections above) should also be surveyed. This
provides assistance with the estimation of the flood profile and also helps to identify locations where
there are changes in bed slope, which is useful in the hydraulic modelling.
The survey at the road alignment itself is usually prepared for the road and bridge design and this
survey is usually suitable for the flood study. It needs to include the cross section at the bridge and
immediately upstream and downstream. Where there is an existing road alignment, there should be
survey of the road crown levels and drainage structures.
It is important that the cross sections should extend up to above the level of the highest expected
flood. If the cross sections do not extend sufficiently high, the calculated flood levels and velocities will
be too high because the cross sections are extended vertically in the hydraulic modelling.
Photographs of the locations of the surveyed cross-sections should be taken to aid in hydraulic
analysis of the site, especially if a site visit by the hydraulic specialist is unlikely.
As well as these cross sections that are used for the hydraulic analysis, additional survey data may
also often be useful. In some cases, survey of the floor levels of potentially affected buildings or other
infrastructure such as pumps or dams for example should be taken to assist in assessing afflux at
these buildings.
If survey is specially commissioned for a bridge hydraulic study, the survey brief can specify the actual
requirements. However if there is survey available for another purpose, there may be some
shortcomings. Where regional ALS data is available, having been obtained for other applications, the
required cross sections can be extracted.
As well as specific survey, other survey data can be obtained from aerial photographs, SRTM or other
mapping, which give a wider perspective for the project area.

MAPPING AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY

Mapping is needed for both the local area of the bridge and also for the catchment and is used for a
number of applications in the hydraulic design.
A catchment map, either hard copy or electronic is needed to delineate the catchment area, as an
input to the calculation of design flood inflows, the hydrology analysis. The map scale should be
appropriate for the catchment size being analysed. This map can be used to calculate catchment
area, stream length and slope and to subdivide the catchment into sub-catchments for application in
runoff-routing models. While traditional maps have been used, CatchmentSIM or another GIS based
approach are becoming more widely used and can be used for analysis of catchment data.
An aerial photograph of the catchment allows determination of catchment land use and thereby
relevant parameters for the hydrology model. Any obvious features of the catchment that may affect
runoff, such as urbanisation or dams can be easily identified.
Aerial photography of the immediate vicinity of the bridge site allows determination of local features
that may affect the hydraulic design. These include buildings or other infrastructure immediately
upstream of the bridge where they could be affected by an increase in flood level. There may also be
weirs or stream diversions that may not be immediately obvious but which may have an impact on the
design.

Page 5 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

Photogrammetry commissioned in-house by TMR is a common source of this data, but it can also be
obtained from other government agencies. Other sources include Geoscience Australia, but Google
Earth is an accessible source.

SITE VISIT

A site visit is almost always recommended during the preparation of a hydraulic design for a bridge.
While a site visit does require funding, in general, the benefits in having a better understanding of the
local issues, outweigh the costs.
During a site visit, a number of important features can be noted and this background data can assist in
the preparation of the hydraulic design report by ensuring that the analysis is consistent with local
features.
The site visit should be scheduled early in the project, though usually not at the very beginning. The
best time is after there has been some progress with the analysis and some understanding of the main
features of the project has been gained. If the site visit is carried out too early, the importance of
some issues may not be understood and these may be missed. If it is too late, some work may need
to be repeated if the site visit finds some unexpected details.
The general details that need to be investigated during the site visit include:

General appreciation of the local conditions around the bridge

Understanding of the conditions of the existing bridge and channel, both upstream and
downstream

Scour at the bridge site and in the neighbouring channel as well as channel migration history and
stability

Roughness conditions in the reach of the creek and overbank sections upstream and downstream
of the bridge site

Locations of any nearby infrastructure (such as other bridges, pipelines, buildings, dams or creek
diversions for example) that may influence the flood investigation. These features may not be
picked up in maps and survey

Any obvious environmental constraints in the vicinity of the bridge, and

Indications that the bridge has been overtopped or damaged by flooding.

It is usually recommended that the site visit be undertaken with the local project manager, who can
explain important details. It is often useful to involve other stakeholders including other specialists in
the project such as environmental, survey or geotechnical specialists for example or council
representatives. In some cases, it is useful to involve local residents in the site inspection. While they
can assist in guidance around the site, they can also provide local on-site assistance on flooding
patterns and levels.
During the site visit, it is important to take notes and photographs so that the local observations can be
interpreted back in the office.
While a site visit is usually very valuable, sometimes it is not practical or achievable. For example if
the bridge site is remote, the project is very small or the issues are particularly simple, the site visit
may not be justified. In this case, it is valuable to obtain as many photographs as possible from the
region project officer to understand the issues in the same way as if a site visit had been undertaken.

Page 6 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS

The first analysis process in the hydraulic design for a bridge is the hydrology, or the calculation of
design flood discharges and sometimes discharges for historical floods.
There are several floods that need to be calculated. Firstly, design floods for a range of probabilities
up to an annual exceedence probability of 1% (AEP 1%). This range should include the standard
AEPs of 50, 20, 10, 5, 2 and 1% for most projects. As well the flood with an annual exceedence
probability of 0.05% is needed for the structural design of the bridge. In some cases, other large
floods are also needed in special circumstances. Sometimes only a few design floods may be
needed. If there is sufficient data for model calibration, floods should also be calculated for the
specific historical flood events that are used for calibration.
The approach to the hydrology analysis depends on the particular circumstances. In all cases, efforts
should be made to use any available streamflow data for either the bridge site itself, elsewhere on the
river or on a nearby similar catchment. The general approaches are as follows, though usually a
combination of methods will be most appropriate:

Flood frequency analysis. At-site flood frequency analysis is used if there is a long term
streamgauge located near the bridge site. If the gauge is located close to the bridge site, say with
a difference in catchment area of less than 10%, the gauge can be used directly, with the
calculated discharges modified for the small differences in catchment area. If the gauge is located
further away, the flood frequency analysis can be used to help estimate parameters for a runoff
routing model. Flood frequency analysis is usually the most reliable method for calculating design
flood discharges, but it only provides peak discharges, not flood hydrographs. If flood
hydrographs are also needed, say for calculating times of closure, these must be calculated in
some other way. The two methods are by scaling recorded hydrographs or by using a runoff
routing model. Even if the nearest stream gauge is located some distance from the bridge site or
even in a neighbouring catchment, flood frequency analysis on this station may be of value to
obtain local regional flood estimates to compare with general regional values.

Australian Regional Flood Frequency (ARFF) Method. This newly released methodology provides
a regional flood peak estimates for small and medium sized catchments anywhere in Queensland
(and in fact for any catchment in Australia). It also applies for any size catchment up to 1,000
km2, including small catchments. The data requirements are catchment area and design rainfall
data with specific parameters defined for different regions of the state. As with at-site flood
frequency analysis, this method only provided flood peak discharges. If flood hydrographs are
required, as they often are, a runoff-routing model should be calibrated to the flood peaks from
the ARFF and then used to calculate flood hydrographs. This procedure also calculates
uncertainty limits which are useful for assessing risk in the design.

Runoff routing. This is a rainfall runoff model where flood hydrographs are calculated from rainfall
using one of a range of different software packages. The most common packages used for bridge
design include RORB, XP-RAFTS and URBS, but there are several others that can also be
appropriate. Rainfall inputs are calculated using Australian Rainfall and Runoff. Model
parameters can be calibrated using recorded streamflow data if available, or can be calculated
using the formulae for ungauged catchments given in Australian Rainfall and Runoff. As well the
model parameters can be calibrated using design flood peaks calculated using ARFF. Runoff
routing analysis gives both flood peak discharges and hydrographs.

Page 7 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

When design floods have been calculated, they should be checked for consistency. This check can
be with nearby similar catchments that have been previously analysed or with the regional graph of
AEP 1% floods prepared by the Department of Natural Resources & Water, now the Department of
Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts (DSITIA).
Once the design floods are decided, this data is available for the next process, the hydraulic analysis.

HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS

Hydraulic analysis is the calculation of flow patterns, flood levels and flow velocities for the bridge and
nearby river reach. This information is the data used directly in the analysis of the bridge and the
impacts of the bridge on local flooding in the water course. The hydraulic analysis relies on the survey
data described above, which is used to control the flood flow patterns in the model.
The most commonly used hydraulic analysis procedure used for routine bridge design is HEC-RAS,
developed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. This software is well suited to the hydraulic
analysis of bridges and culverts and is widely used around the world for this type of work. It is freely
available. The hydraulic analysis is carried out following the standard procedures for HEC-RAS as
described in the program manual.
More complex hydraulic designs, which are not covered in this note, may use more advanced
hydraulic modelling procedures, such as two-dimensional models. However for routine projects, HECRAS is the more common approach and this is the only method described here. More specialised
projects are more individual and standard procedures are less applicable.
HEC-RAS is a steady - unsteady one-dimensional hydraulic model, so it represents flow along
channels with constant conditions at each cross section on the channel. In some cases, flow may be
more complex with poorly defined flow spreading across floodplains. In this case, the flow is twodimensional and the HEC-RAS approach does not really apply. It may be possible to approximate the
complex flow by a one-dimensional channel (and many applications can use this approach
successfully), but in other situations, an alternative two-dimensional modelling approach will be
needed.
HEC-RAS needs survey data of stream cross sections, as discussed above. The HEC-RAS analysis
is carried out for a reach of the stream upstream and downstream of the bridge site. The reach should
extend sufficiently far downstream that the tailwater level for the bridge is represented correctly and
should extend upstream sufficiently to represent the afflux caused by the bridge.
The HEC-RAS model usually works upstream from a downstream boundary (for subcritical flow, which
is the most common in natural channels), and this downstream level needs to be carefully assessed.
The downstream boundary will usually be based on a downstream slope or the level of the receiving
water. The downstream boundary should be sufficiently far downstream that the level does not affect
the tailwater of the bridge, but in some cases, careful analysis and sensitivity testing may be needed.
The main parameter used for HEC-RAS analysis is Mannings n, a measure of channel roughness.
Guidelines for selection of Mannings n are included in text books and manuals, including the HECRAS Users Guide and the TMR Road Drainage Manual. Calibrated hydraulic models for other
projects in the region can also be a useful starting point for estimation of Mannings n. It is often
useful to consider a sensitivity analysis using Mannings n where there is uncertainty in selection of an
appropriate value.
Any observed flood data comes in useful with the hydraulic modelling. The flood levels may be
available for specific historical floods and these levels can be used directly in model calibration. If
there is only general information, this can also be used to help in ensuring that the model results are at
least reasonable. The observed flood levels are used to estimate Mannings n roughness values to

Page 8 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

make sure that the calculated flood levels match the observations. The observed flood levels can also
help in testing for the effects of backwater and for the downstream starting level for the HEC-RAS
model.
Three scenarios should be analysed:

Natural or unrestricted. This is the analysis for the reach assuming there is no bridge, and
provides the natural conditions so that the risk of scour and natural flood levels can be
determined. This is the base case for assessing bridge scenarios for the existing or proposed
bridge conditions.

Existing bridge. The conditions for the existing bridge need to be analysed to understand the
current flow conditions.

New bridge scenarios. Normally a number of scenarios need to be analysed to test options used
in developing the plans for the proposed replacement bridge.

In each case, flood levels and flow velocities along the reach must be calculated and the flow
velocities though the bridge need to be determined.
The hydraulic modelling should consider the flood levels along the reach of the water course
containing the bridge. The analysis should also consider the possibility of backwater from a
downstream stream, dam or the ocean. If these conditions seem likely, careful analysis of the
downstream conditions is needed to check for the possibility of backwater.
The hydraulic analysis should be carried out for a range of flood probabilities. Usually these
probabilities include the standard AEPs up to AEP 1% and the AEP 0.05% floods. As well the flood
that just overtops the bridge should also be considered, since this will be the most critical event
considering velocities through the bridge and the afflux. However in some cases, a range of large
floods may need to be analysed if there are significant impact issues, especially if floods significantly
larger than the design flood do not overtop the bridge.
The hydraulic analysis should normally be undertaken using HEC-RAS with the upstream and
downstream cross sections described here. The downstream cross sections are especially important
because these ensure that the tailwater level at the bridge is calculated correctly. However on some
occasions, the survey data may be inadequate and a less extensive investigation may be the only
possibility. In this case, a single cross section, along the road alignment may be the only available
data. If this is the case, the hydraulic analysis can be carried out with this single cross section and the
tailwater level must be calculated as well as possible. While this approach can provide reasonable
results for preliminary analysis, it must be recognised that there are uncertainties in the results.

10

BRIDGE INVESTIGATIONS

The hydraulic analysis is used to analyse the proposed bridge design and a range of scenarios need
to be tested.
Usually the region will provide an initial option which will be the basis for the assessment or they will
provide an indication of the expected hydraulic performance (flood immunity for example) for the
bridge. This performance is subject to constraints.
The issues that may need to be considered are:

Flood immunity. The TMR standard flood immunity criterion is AEP 2% and this is the usual
objective unless there is a documented reason to adopt a different value. Sometimes it is not
feasible to adopt an AEP 2% criterion because of an extensive floodplain or the wide expanse of
shallow flows. This is especially the case for less important roads, where there is likely to be less

Page 9 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

disruption to traffic. In other situations, it may be preferable to allow flow over the road to limit the
afflux when water overtops the road and in some cases, the limited traffic may not justify a high
flood immunity. Occasionally, the road geometry may lead to a very high flood immunity with the
bridge deck well above flood levels. In every case, the flood immunity needs to be calculated and
provided in the hydraulic documentation.

Flow velocity. The velocity of flow through the bridge is a critical design parameter, and defines
the risk of scour for the bridge. Flow velocity usually increases as the flood size increases, but is
often at a maximum for a bridge at the point where the bridge is overtopped. Setting an
acceptable flow velocity is usually an important constraint on the size of a bridge, because the flow
velocity will increase as the bridge is shortened or embankments are raised and the constriction to
the flow is increased. As the bridge is made shorter, the velocity increases, but the afflux also
increases, as noted further below. The allowable flow velocity depends on the local stream
conditions under the bridge, but an average velocity of more than 2.5 m/s is often a concern as the
peak localised velocity in the waterway will be higher. Assessing the natural stream conditions
without a bridge is often useful, since this will indicate the velocities that will occur and provide an
understanding of possible limits. The TMR Scour Manual gives more guidance on the topic of
scour estimation and mitigation related to flow velocity.

Afflux. The afflux is the increase in water level produced by the bridge, and is often a critical
constraint on the bridge design. This increase in level is produced by the constriction to the flow
width. As mentioned above, as the bridge reduces in length, the flow velocity through the bridge
and the afflux both increase. Afflux is usually a concern in urban areas or at locations where there
is a building or other infrastructure upstream of the bridge and in the region of influence. Afflux is
at a maximum for the flood that just overtops the bridge and associated approach embankments
and immediately upstream. Afflux is less for smaller floods that flow relatively unconstrained
under the bridge and for floods where the bridge is overtopped and water can spread over an
extent of floodway. Afflux reduces with distance upstream, with the extent of influence depending
on the channel slope and other conditions. Afflux must be calculated for the appropriate distance
upstream from the bridge and for a range of flood sizes. It may be impossible to reduce the afflux
at a building to zero, but the individual risk should be assessed carefully.

Large floods. In some cases, the bridge may not be overtopped by floods significantly larger than
the design flood. In this case, there is the possibility that there may be significant impacts or
stream diversions if a major flood occurs. If this situation occurs, larger floods should be
considered and analysis of these events carried out. The situation occurs where the road
geometry results in a high alignment, where there is an overpass over another road as well as
over the water course or where there are safety or noise barriers on the bridge.

AEP 0.05% flood. This flood probability needs to be analysed to provide flood levels and flow
velocity for input to the bridge design process.

During the investigations into bridge design options, it is common for a number of options to be tested.
The adopted option needs to be agreed with the project manager in the region, while meeting required
constraints of flow velocity and afflux.

11

TIMES OF SUBMERGENCE AND TIMES OF CLOSURE

Assessment of these times is important especially where the flood immunity of either the existing or
proposed bridge is low. The time of submergence is the time that the bridge is inundated by any water
even if it is shallow. The time of closure is based on the understanding that the road may be

Page 10 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

inundated, but still trafficable so depends on the depth and velocity of the flow. TMR defines a road to
be trafficable if the total head is less than 0.3 m. Total head (H, m) is the depth of water over the road
(h, m) plus the velocity head (V / 2g, m, where g is gravity and V is velocity). Because of the risk to
traffic, the Police will often close a road whenever it is submerged. As well bridges will not be
reopened after inundation until an inspection has confirmed that it is safe, which may extend the
period of closure.
Times of submergence can be expressed as a time for a major historical flood (such as the 1974 flood
in Brisbane), a large design flood (such as the AEP 2% flood) or as the average time per year, the
average annual time of submergence (AATOS). These measures, in conjunction with the flood
immunity, provide valuable information on the disruption to traffic that can be expected.
If the flood immunity of the bridge is AEP 2% or higher, the AATOS can be regarded as negligible,
though the bridge may be submerged occasionally by very large floods.
The calculated AATOS may be underestimated for bridges where the flood immunity is low so these
results should be analysed and reported carefully. A TMR paper published by HMS on an appropriate
adjustment to the calculated AATOS should be referred to and the calculated value adjusted
accordingly if the flood immunity is less than AEP 10%.
The AATOS is calculated from streamflow data or from flood hydrographs, as described in the Road
Drainage Manual.
These times should be calculated for the existing and proposed bridges and results provided, to assist
in the analysis of the benefits of the upgrade.

12

SCOUR ASSESSMENT

Scour is a major risk for a bridge, and it is possible for a bridge to be completely destroyed by scour
(though this is extremely rare in Queensland). Therefore an understanding of scour should be a part
of the hydraulic design for a bridge.
The TMR Scour Manual has a detailed consideration of all aspects of scour for bridges and provides
detailed guidance.
Generally the risk of scour is increased with high flow velocities through the bridge, but other factors
such as turbulence or complex flow patterns around the abutments or the bridge location on a bend in
the stream could also be a risk. Therefore the design should aim to maintain the flow velocities below
a threshold and to minimise the constriction caused by the bridge.
While it is not possible to give a clear rule, scour is not likely to be a problem if the flow velocity
through the bridge is increased by less than 10% from the case with no bridge. As well, a flow velocity
less than 2.5 m/s in a defined water course is not usually a problem, but the channel conditions need
to be considered for possible problems.
While scour can occur in the constricted flow area under the bridge, scour is more commonly found to
be a problem at the bridge abutments and on the bridge approaches. These are locations where
scour risk and scour protection should be examined more carefully.
Where there seems to be a possibility of a risk of scour, a scour assessment should be carried out.
This scour assessment could routinely follow the procedures in the Austroads Waterway Design
manual or HEC-RAS, which provides an approach to estimating the total expected depth of scour.
Otherwise a detailed and site specific scour assessment could be considered, but this is a major
project.

Page 11 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

If it is not possible to mitigate the scour risk by changing the bridge size, scour protection measures
may be required. This is a site specific design procedure and detailed analysis will be required. Scour
assessment should be assessed for the whole floodplain and approach embankments and not just for
the bridge itself, between the abutments. As part of the design for scour, a detailed General
Arrangement, incorporating both bridge, approach embankments, associated culverts and road
design, is needed.
The TMR guide to scour protection, produced by HMS should be referenced and appropriate scour
protection measure implemented.

13

REPORTING

Following completion of the hydraulic design, an important part of the project is the preparation of a
design report. This report is the main deliverable for the project from HMS or the consultant.
The report should be self contained and include all of the background information, base data,
assumptions, analysis procedures, results and conclusions. The report is prepared specifically for the
project manager in the region, but the report will often be used by others and may be sent to the
council or other stakeholders for their information and comments. Sometimes, the report will be used
as part of the public consultation programme and may be sent to members of the public. The
hydraulic report will also often be incorporated as part of the design report or a business case for a
project.
The text should be clear, concise and descriptive and the results should be presented as tables and
figures as well as maps. All information and assumptions needed to reproduce the results should be
included.
Where bridge design has been carried out by consultants, the deliverables should include all computer
files, including GIS layers.
Because this text may be incorporated into other reports and documents, it should be written in MS
Word to allow this editing to be carried out easily. A PDF issue copy should also be provided.

14

DOCUMENTATION

While the hydraulic design report and result files are important deliverables, there are several forms
that must be completed as part of the bridge hydraulic design.
The Bridge Hydraulic Design Summary (Form M2303) has a summary of the principal results from the
hydraulic analysis.
The Bridge Fixing Form (Form M2304) provides design details that are agreed with Bridge Design
Branch prior to the design of the bridge.
Both forms are prepared after the hydraulic report has been accepted by the region and a bridge
design has been agreed. The two forms are sent from the hydraulic designer to both Bridge Design
Branch and the region or other stakeholders as required. Depending on the particular project, they
may sometimes need to be sent also to consultants or other interested parties.
Once the hydraulic fixing has been accepted, details of the design should be incorporated into the
Bridge Information System (BIS).

15

FILING

While it is important to do the technical analysis correctly, it is also vital that the work can be
understood by others in the future. This means that the project should be well documented and filed,

Page 12 of 13

Department of Transport and Main Roads

April 2013

Hydraulic Guidelines for Bridge Design Projects

Guideline

with appropriate quality assurance systems. The HMS Unit Quality Assurance system should be
used.
The file should include all correspondence, including noting of phone conversations, emails and
reports. Records of phone conversations and meetings are important since decisions are often made
at these times. The file should also include all quality assurance forms and technical workings.
Sometimes even issues that appear minor at the time become significant in the future and it is
important that they should be documented.
The file is the main future source of all data concerning the project and it is vital that it should be well
prepared and clearly understood.

Page 13 of 13