Chapter 4:
Scour and Local Scour
Department of civil Engineering
Khulna University of engineering & Technology
4.1 Scour
• Scour is a natural phenomenon caused due to the erosive
action of flowing stream on alluvial beds which removes the
sediment around or near structures located in flowing water.
• It means the lowering of the riverbed level by water erosions
such that there is a tendency to expose the foundations of a
structure.
• It is the result of the erosive action of flowing water,
excavating and carrying away material from the bed and
banks of streams and from around the piers and abutments
of bridges.
• Scour has been the main cause for failures of marine
structures throughout the world.
Scour and local scour
(HR Wallingford, 1990)
• When an obstacle is placed in flowing water it can
produce General Scour and Local Scour
• General Scour occurs across the whole width of
the channel, and is caused by an increase in mean
velocity resulting from the blockage due to
obstacle
• By contrast, Local Scour is concentrated around a
obstacle, and is caused localized increase in flow
velocity due to streamline curvature, turbulence
and the establishment of complex vortex motions.
4.2 General scour (Julien, 2002)
Progressive degradation or aggradation can be associated with changes in the
river regime caused by natural processes or human activities on the stream or
watershed.
Factors that affect long-term bed changes are:
(1) dams and reservoirs both upstream and downstream of the bridge site;
(2) changes in watershed land use like urbanization, deforestation, etc.;
(3) channel stabilization and rectification;
(4) natural or artificial cutoff of a meander bend;
(5) changes in the downstream base level of the bridge reach, including
headcuts;
(6) Gravel/sand mining from the streambed;
(7) diversion of water into or out of the stream;
(8) lateral migration of a river bend; and
(9) thalweg shifting in a braided stream.
The engineer must assess the present state of the stream and watershed and
consider planned future changes in the river system.
4.3 Importance to study the Scour
• Scour around pier and pile supported structures and abutments can result in
structural collapse and loss of life and property.
• The construction of bridges in alluvial channels causes a contraction in the
waterway at the bridge site and hence gives rise to significant scour at that site.
As the scour continuously progresses at the site, it undermines the foundations
of the structure leading to possible failure.
• Many bridges failed around the world because of extreme scour around piers.
Failure of bridges due to scour at their foundations, which consist of abutments
and piers, is a common occurrence.
• Prediction of local scour holes that develop downstream of hydraulic structures
plays an important role in their design.
• Excessive local scour can progressively undermine the foundation of the
structure leading to failure. Because complete protection against scour is too
expensive, generally, the maximum scour depth and the upstream slope of the
scour hole have to be predicted to minimize the risk of failure.
• The localized scour phenomenon has been the subject of extensive
investigations by many researchers and numerous literatures exists on the topic.
4.4 Different types of scours based on sediment supply
at upstream and sediment discharge at downstream
(a) Clear Water Scour (Qs2 > Qs1 = 0 )
Different types of scours based on sediment supply at upstream and sediment
discharge at downstream
(b) Live Bed Scour (Qs2 > Qs1 > 0 )
Different types of scours based on sediment supply at upstream and sediment
discharge at downstream
(c) Equilibrium Scour (Qs2 = Qs1 > 0 )
This is the case when a dynamic equilibrium situation exists between section
(1) and section (2). Generally, it could be possible that there is erosion and
deposition between section (1) and Section (2), but they are dynamically in
balance.
4.5 Constriction Scour
• Contraction scour is caused by flow acceleration due to narrowing of the
channel cross section whether by natural reduction in the width of the main
channel for a bank line abutment, or by redistribution of floodplain flow in
the contracted section as a result of flow blockage by the bridge
embankment for a setback abutment.
• Although contraction scour will vary across the cross section in the field
due to nonrectangular geometry and a nonuniform velocity distribution, it
is often visualized and applied as a uniform decrease in bed elevation
across the bridge opening.
• Floodplain contraction scour is usually treated separately from main
channel contraction scour in compound channels. In this case, one of the
difficulties in applying a contraction scour formula is the determination of
the discharge distribution between the floodplain and the main channel in
the bridge section.
Constriction Scour
Constriction Scour can be estimated by
hs= Y2-Y1 (Hamill, 1999)
Sediment transport relation with velocity,
M = 3 to 5, = 0.67 to 0.8
Constriction Scour (Application Example)
4.6 Confluence Scour
Confluence Scour
Confluence Scour
4.7 Bridge Scour
River engineers are concerned with bridge crossings in the
following regards:
1. careful selection of the bridge site to minimize the total
bridge costs; and
2. protection against possible structural failure from scour
undermining the embankments and piers. The depth of
scour during a flood has to be determined in order to design
stable foundations for the bridge.
Selection of Bridge Site:
• The river crossing should preferably be located in straight river
reaches or in stable bends without lateral migration.
• Sites with narrow floodplain width, rock outcrops, or high bluffs
are good locations for bridge crossings.
• Straight river reaches are often selected in order to avoid problems
with lateral migration and deep scour holes in bends.
Bridge Scour
Protecting embankments and piers against scour requires consideration
of the following items:
1. General scour (Art 4.2)
2. Contraction scour (Art 4.5)
3. Pier scour (Art 4.8)
4. Abutment scour (Art 4.9)
The total scour depth is obtained from the sum of all components.
4.8 Flow and scour Pattern around a
Pier
Flow and scour Pattern around a Pier
Flow and scour Pattern around a Pier
• The flowing pattern of a normal flow comes to sudden change when in
encounters a pier on its path. Large scale eddy structure or the system of
vortices develop at the base of the pier.
• The eddy structure is normally composed these components.
– Horseshoe vortex
– Wake vortex system
• A flow running at a particular velocity, when approaches to the pier comes
to complete rest which results in increase of pressure at the water surface
near the pier. The velocity of the flow gradually decreases from top to
bottom and consequently the pressure also decreases from top to bottom.
This creates a downward pressure gradient that forces the flow to move
downward like a jet of water.
• This vertical jet when strikes the bed makes a hole in the immediate
vicinity of pier base. The strength of the down flow reaches maximum just
below the bed level. The down flow rolls up as it continuous to create a
hole and through the interaction with incoming flow converts into a
complex vortex system of horseshoe shape and hence called horseshoe
vortex.
Flow and scour Pattern around a Pier
• The horseshoe vortex is very effective at transporting the removed
particles away from the pier.
• The transport rate from the base region is greater than that from the
wake region. The separation of flow at the pier sides produces so called
wake vortex.
• Wake vortices are rotate about vertical axis and also erode sediment from
pier base. The wake vortex system somewhat acts like a vacuum cleaner
that sucks the material and carries away.
• The intensity of the wake vortices drastically reduces with distance
downstream, such that sediment deposition is generally immediately
downstream of the pier.
• The horseshoe and wake both the vortices work at the same time to scour
around the pier.
•
Scour Depth around a Pier
• The Colorado State University (CSU) Equation to determine
the scour around pier
Where
Δ z = scour depth,
h1 = flow depth just upstream of the pier,
K1 = correction for pier shape
K2 = correction for the flow angle of attack
a = pier width and
Fr1 = upstream Froude number
Scour Depth around a Pier
Problem on Pier Scour depth
Example: A 200-m-long bridge is to be constructed over a sand-bed channel with 300-
m-long spillthrough abutments 1V:2H. Six rectangular bridge piers measuring 1.5 m
thick and 12 m long are aligned with the flow. At a design 100-yr flow discharge of 850
m3/s, the upstream flow velocity is 3.75 m/s and the flow depth is 2.8 m upstream of
the piers. Estimate (a) the pier scour depth. and (b) the abutment scour depth
4.9 Abutment Scour
A bridge abutment is a substructure
that supports one terminus of the
superstructure of a bridge and, at the
same time, laterally supports the
embankment which serves as an
approach to the bridge. For a river
bridge, the abutment also protects
the embankment from scouring of the
stream.
The eddy structure is
normally composed of:
Horseshoe vortex &
Wake vortex system
• The flow around a abutment is similar to half of a pier
• The vortex developed is analogous to the horseshoe vortex developing at piers,
and it is usually called the principal vortex.
• The vortex is originated upstream of the abutment by the flow separation; it is
conveyed downstream resulting in a spiralling flow downstream of the obstacle
as Wake Vortex.
Abutment Scour
Fig. Abutment scour (after Richardson et al., 1990).
Abutment Scour
• Earth and rockfill abutments will generally have a spillthrough
shape when compared with sheet piles standing as vertical walls.
• The equilibrium scour depth for local live-bed scour in sand under
subcritical flow is
near a Spillthrough Abutment
near a Vertical Abutment
Where
Δ z = scour depth,
h1 = flow depth just upstream of the abutment,
Fr1 = upstream Froude number
La = the abutment and embankment length measured at the top of the water surface and
normal to the side of the channel from where the top of the design flood hits the bank to
the outer edge of the abutment
Take maximum value of La/h1 = 25
Problem on Abutment Scour
Example: A 200-m-long bridge is to be constructed over a sand-bed channel with 300-m-
long abutments. At a design 100-yr flow discharge of 850 m3/s, the upstream flow velocity is
3.75 m/s and the flow depth is 2.8 m upstream of the piers. Estimate scour depth (a) for
spillthrough abutments 1V:2H and (b) for vertical abutment.
Take maximum value of La/h1 = 25
Step 3: (a) For Spillthrough Abutment: Δ z = 10.0 m
(b) For Vertical Abutment: Δ z = 19.6 m
Flow around a Groynes/Spur Dykes
• The flow past the spur dyke may be divided into three zones:
– a main flow zone from the head of the spur dyke to the opposite
side of the channel,
– a wake zone behind the spur dyke and
– a mixing zone in-between them (Fig. 3).
Scour around a Groynes/Spur Dykes
• The eddy structure is normally composed of:
– Horseshoe vortex &
– Wake vortex system
Local scour Caused by Groyne
Section A-A
h0
hsm
b
α
A
• For α = 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 degree the multiplying factor = 0.8, 0.9, 0.95, 1.0, 1.05, 1.1
• For 450 Sloped head of groyne, scour depth is 15% lower.
• For Concave bank, the scour depth is 10-50% higher
Case Study:
Based on Regime Depth of Lacey
4.3.1 Design Considerations
The total length of Sirajgonj hardpoint is about 2550 m. The thickness of the
launching apron is 1.93m. Design flow velocity is 3.7m/s. The length of the apron
is 1.5 times the scour depth (below the apron setting level). The crest level is (+)
16.75mPWD, whereas approximate ground level is (+) 13.00mPWD. The side
slope of the hardpoint is 1V:3.5H. Some design parameters of straight portion and
upstream termination of Sirajgong hardpoint are shown in Table 4.1. The length of
an apron on upstream termination and thickness are 19.5m and 3.83m respectively.
High Flood Level (HFL) and Low Water Level (LWL) are considered (+)
15.75mPWD and (+) 6.80mPWD respectively. Apron setting level and the deepest
design scour levels are (-) 4.20mPWD and (-) 13.25mPWD respectively.
Table 4.1: Design parameter of the Sirajgong hardpoint
Block size (m)
Section Depth (m) Upper slope Lower Slope
Straight portion 29 55 cm cubic block (one layers) 55 cm cubic block (two
layers)
Upstream Termination 33 55 cm cubic block (two 85 cm cubic block (two
layers) layers)
Hs=hs+h0
h0
hs
Figure 4.3: Cross section of Sirajgonj hardpoint at straight portion
Ingis related the total mean depth, Hs=hs+h0 to the regime depth of Lacey, relying
heavily on Indian data:
Hs= 0.47(Q/f)1/3 ………………………(4.1)
hs= xHs-h0…………………………….(4.2)
where, f is the silt factor, f=1.75√dmm. To estimate the maximum scour depth, a
multiplying factor (Table 4.2) must be applied, provied by Indian code as follows.
.
Table 4.2: Multiplying factor for scour depth computation (x)
Nature of location Factor
Straight reach of channel 1.25
Moderate bend 1.50
Severe bend 1.75
Right angle turn* 2.00
Nose of piers 2.00
Along walls,abutment 2.25
Noses of guide banks 2.75
*For meandering river it may be 3.0 for massive structure
4.3.2 Design Parameters
Width of the particular channel in Jamuna river, b=1190 m (Fig. 2.2)
Height of the wall, h=15.75 m
Design velocity, V=3.7 m/s
Particle diameter of river bed, dmm =0.20 m (Julien, 2002)
4.3.3 Calculation of Maximum Scour Depth
Considering a parabolic section,
f= 1.75√dmm= 1.74√.20 = 0.783
Discharge, Q= AV= 2/3bhV= 1190*15.75*3.7*(2/3)= 46232 m3/s
Now, Hs= 0.47(Q/f)1/3 = 0.47(46232/0.783) 1/3 = 18.30 m
hs= xHs-h= 2.25*18.30-15.75= 25.43 m
(Multiplying factor along walls/abutment, x=2.25)
Since, deepest design scour level is 13.25 m. If scour depth is more than 13.25 m, then
failure of hardpoint may occur.
The design of the revetment wall is checked using Ingis equation of Lacey’s regime depth.
It is observed that the provided depth of revetment wall (15.75 m) is much lower than
required design depth (25.3 m).
Table 4.3: Calculated scour depth for different multiplying factor
Scour depth(m) x=1.25 (Straight x=2.25 (Along x=3 (Massive
reach of channel) walls/abutment) structure)
hs=xHs-h 7.13 25.43 39.15
Design check Ok Not Ok Not Ok
Ahmed (1953)
Ahmed (1953) Proposed a Formula to predict Scour depth at the nose of spur dyke
in terms of regime depth of Lacey as
Assignment
At a certain cross-section of a river, following data were recorded:
Maximum discharge = 12,000 m3/sec
Highest Flood Level = 107.5 m
River Bed Level = 102.5 m
Maximum width = 2.30 km
Estimate the maximum scour dept for construction of the following structure
(1)Six rectangular bridge piers measuring 1.5 m thick and 4.5 m long are aligned with the flow
(Use CSU Eqn)
(2) 300 m long spillthrough abutment 1V:2H over a sand bed channel
(3) Normal groyne of length =500 m provided at concave bank
(4) Abutment in a river having bed particle size of 0.5 mm (use Laceys regime method)
