Workshop 3: Modeling a Bridge with HEC-RAS

Exercise Overview

In this exercise, the bridge modeling capabilities of HEC-RAS will be demonstrated. At

the end of the exercise you will answer a series of questions that pertain to the output of
the project. These questions help you to analyze the results that you will receive.

Exercise Objectives

After completing this exercise, you will be able to:

• Use the Bridge/Culvert data editor to enter Deck/Roadway, Pier, and Abutment
data
• Analyze a bridge as part of a reach in HEC-RAS
• Properly place Ineffective Flow Stations in the cross-sections near a bridge

Scenario for Project

A transportation department has hired you to evaluate the hydraulic effects of a proposed
two-lane bridge across a deep river valley. The river drains a significant portion of a
three-state area and thus can exhibit high flows. In fact, the river has a history of
producing damaging floods. There is no FEMA floodway in force for the river, but the
States bordering the river have a requirement that encroachments can cause no more
than 0.10-ft of increased flood height for the 100-year event. The flood of record
(significantly greater than the 100-year flood) occurred a few years ago and that severe
flooding is fresh in everyone’s mind. Because of the river's flood history, a small town
located just 0.75 miles upstream of the proposed bridge site has recently been protected
by Corps of Engineers construction of a major floodwall built to exclude the Standard
Project Flood.
As part of the design team, your goal is to evaluate the proposed bridge geometry and
determine if the bridge’s impact on stream hydraulics can be shown to cause no more
than a 0.1 ft increase at the town for any of the three flood events (100-year flood, flood
of record, and Standard Project Flood). Any adjustments, hydraulic modifications, etc. to
meet this goal must be reasonable and found acceptable following a technical review of
the hydraulic analysis. The structural and geotechnical requirements of the bridge prevent
you from using a thinner pier or moving the abutment back from the river.

Existing Conditions

The following table provides discharge values and starting water surface elevations for
the 100-Year Flood, Flood of Record, and the Standard Project Flood.

Discharges and Starting Elevation for Bridge Analysis

Flooding condition Discharge (cfs) Starting Water Surface Elevation

(NGVD)
100-yr Flood 68,000 681.61
Flood of Record 115,000 688.18
Standard Project Flood 116,950 692.78

An existing conditions HEC-RAS project file will be used to start the hydraulic analysis.
The name of the file is EXE_BRIDGE.PRJ. This project contains the floodplain
geometry without the bridge and the flows to be evaluated. You should check to make
sure the correct discharges and boundary conditions (as listed in the above table) have
been supplied.

Remember that the bridge must not cause any more than a 0.10-ft increase in the
water surface elevation at the town for any of the three flood events. The town is
located at River Mile 65.2. You must first find the pre-developed water surface
elevations at this location for each flood event and then use these values as targets for the
post-development computations.

A table has been provided for you at the end of this exercise to assist in comparing water
surface elevations.
Proposed Bridge Description

The proposed bridge is to be located between River Stations 64.444 and 64.485. The
bridge is 25 ft wide and the low-chord elevation is expected to be 700.5 ft. The elevation
of the top of the roadway varies. The proposed geometry defining the roadway deck is
shown in the figure and table that follow.

Ground Station (ft) Top of Roadway Elev (ft) Low Chord Elev (ft)
0. 707.5 700.5
550. 707.5 700.5
650. 705.5 700.5
700. 703.5 700.5
700. 703.5 690.
730. 700. 690.

The bridge has tentatively been designed with one, 5-ft pier located within the main
channel area. In addition, an abutment having a side slope of 1V:2.5H is proposed for the
right overbank.

Remember that ineffective flow areas must be defined for the cross-sections immediately
downstream and upstream of the bridge. This is done in the Cross-Section Data Editor.
Evaluate the use of higher contraction and expansion coefficients for the bridge,
compared to those for valley sections. Higher coefficients (Cc = 0.3 and Ce = 0.5) have
historically been used at bridges.

RS=64.465 Upstream (Bridge)

710 Legend
700 Ground

690 Ineff
Elevation (ft)

Bank Sta
680

670

660

650

640
0 200 400 600 800 1000

RS=64.465 Downstream (Bridge)

710

700

690
Elevation (ft)

680

670

660

650

640
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Station (ft)
Proposed Geometry of Bridge

Notice that the bridge deck and low chord data takes a “nose dive” around Station 730.
For this project, the approach road turns sharply and travels up the floodplain as
illustrated in the plan view shown on the next page.

Due to the presence of a railroad track, configuring the approach road as shown below
was the only feasible alternative. Therefore the bridge roadway/deck data reflects the
orientation of the approach road. The approach road embankment prevents flow from
bypassing the bridge and flowing through the low area seen on the right of the bridge
cross section.

You can also see the approach road by viewing the cross-section plots for Sections
64.444 and 64.485.

The following table has been provided for you assist in comparing water surface
elevations. Run the without-bridge geometry first to establish pre-developed conditions
prior to modifying the file for the new bridge. Answer the questions on the following
page.
Pre and Post Developed Water Surface Elevations at River Mile 65.2
Flooding Condition Pre-developed Water Surface Post-developed Water Surface
Elevation Elevation
100-Year Flood

Flood of Record

Standard Project Flood

Exercise Review

Now that you have completed this exercise, let’s measure what you have learned.

Questions

1. What is low chord elevation for the bridge?

2. What is top of roadway elevation for this bridge?

3. What is the class of flow for this bridge during the Flood of Record?

4. How much water flows over the bridge during the Standard Project Flood?

5. How much backwater is produced during the SPF?

6. Based on the channel velocities, do you think that channel protection of some sort is in
order?

7. Based on the velocities at the bridge, do you think scour could be a problem?