Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Bridge Hydraulics
Page ii
Bridge Hydraulics
Les Hamill
School of Civil and Structural Engineering
University of Plymouth
E & FN SPON
An Imprint of Routledge
London and New York
Page iv
Contents
Preface viii
Principal notation xi
Preface
This is intended as a useful handbook on the subject of bridge hydraulics. It includes
references to articles published in 1997, just prior to its completion, so compared with similar
books it is relatively up to date. It explores how to undertake the hydraulic analysis or design
of a bridge, either single or multispan, with either rectangular or arched waterways. It
describes how to calculate the afflux (backwater), how to improve the hydraulic performance
of a bridge, and how to evaluate and combat scour. The intention is to provide a good
introduction to the fundamentals for anyone not familiar with this specalised branch of
engineering, with enough detailed information to appeal to those who are.
This book is, in a way, the result of a mistake. Near my home town many years ago a rather
old, untidy, steel truss bridge was replaced by a very elegant masonry structure. The result
was that flooding upstream got worse. This raised the question: how is the size of the opening
in a river bridge determined? Initial enquiries revealed that estimating the magnitude of the
design flood was relatively straightforward; it was converting this into the dimensions of a
bridge opening that was difficult. An expert on the subject candidly and charmingly admitted
that there was much that he (and practically everyone else) did not know or understand, so if
anyone cared to fill in a few gaps… Hence my research interest and the book. Another reason
is that bridges are interesting: many people stand on a bridge watching the floodwater pass
underneath. Hopefully some of this interest is captured in the following pages.
Some engineers may question why a book on bridge hydraulics is needed when it is
possible to find computer software that will do all the analysis and design for you. Such
people frequently believe, because computers are capable of giving answers to 20 decimal
places, that everything that comes out of them is correct and accurate. This is not true.
Ignoring the fact that the input data may be inaccurate, there may be mistakes in the computer
program. A sobering thought is that someone once said that if a piece of software is worth
using then it must have an error in it somewhere!
Many years ago the author was invited to use the research facilities of a large, prestigious
company. Part of the work involved digitising some
Page ix
complex shapes to determine their area. To provide a check on the accuracy obtained a
square was also digitised each time. It was found that the calculated areas of the squares were
in error by a very considerable margin. When this was pointed out to the company they held a
hasty conference and came to the conclusion that a square was too simple for the complex
software to be able to handle! They subsequently modified the software.
No-one would deny that computers have a fundamental role to play in modern engineering,
but sometimes the basic science is insufficiently understood or too complex to be represented
accurately by the software. Sometimes, as in the case of scour, there is not enough reliable
field data to verify the base equations or computer models under all conditions. Nature does
not realise that it must always act in strict accordance with human rules! For all of these
reasons, there are times when physical modelling is strongly recommended, particularly when
important or unusual projects are involved. Similarly, common sense, experience and
engineering judgement are needed. The smart engineer will make a few check calculations
without using the computer, just to ensure that the answer is of the correct order of magnitude
and makes sense. Similarly, smart engineers will ensure that they understand the basic
principles involved, because it may not be possible to obtain the optimum design otherwise.
In this respect little has changed over the years, as the saga of Mr Nagler and Mr Goodrich
illustrates.
Following Nagler’s paper of 1918 on the ‘Obstruction of bridge piers to the flow of water’
there is a nice account of how this article was used by a Mr Goodrich to calculate the
backwater from a proposed development in the USA. The value turned out to be 3 inches (75
mm), which was unacceptable, so the city attorneys applied for a restraining order to prevent
further construction. However, following additional field measurements and a review of the
computations Mr Goodrich obtained a negative backwater. At the final hearing another, well-
experienced hydraulic engineer showed that about 1 inch (25 mm) of backwater could be
expected. Mr Goodrich wrote that
The explanation to the Court of the disappearance of the other 2 inches of backwater is not
anticipated with any great pleasure, but it will be easier than to tell how the water is piled up
higher below the bridge than above it.
He also considered that he was lucky to have discovered the limitations of the Nagler equation
before the final hearing so that a much more embarrassing situation had been avoided. Later
in the discussion Nagler pointed out that he had given several cautions regarding the general
applicability of his work and stated that
Engineers are too prone to select empirical formulas and coefficients from handbooks and
apply them to entirely irrelevant cases, never
Page x
inquiring as to the natural limitations on the applicability which intelligent use would place on
them. Intelligent extension of experimental formulas and coefficients to practical problems is
the highest type of engineering, but the blind application of formulas smacks of student days.
The modern parallel to the Goodrich and Nagler saga is over-reliance on computers, which
has resulted in some notable ‘failures’. A multistorey car-park that developed significant
cracks shortly after opening springs to mind. This type of situation has been termed computer-
aided disaster (CAD). More than once a design has had to be hastily modified at the last
minute simply because an updated version of the software arrived and this yielded a
significantly different answer from the same input data. Engineers have been encountered
using hydraulic software to analyse and design bridges without having any idea of what it was
doing or what it was based on.
Because there have been relatively few in-depth investigations of bridge hydraulics, the
equations and research referred to in this book will also have been incorporated to a greater or
lesser extent into the commercially available software. Therefore this book and the software
may be considered complementary, and a possible use for the book may be to help explain the
fundamentals and to provide a means of checking the output from the software. However,
bearing in mind Nagler’s comments, it is still up to the engineer to use it wisely.
Metric units have been used throughout. Where necessary, charts, tables and equations have
been converted from English units.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank all those who have contributed in any way to the preparation of
this book. This includes everyone who helped supply information or photographs. Every
effort has been made to obtain copyright permissions and to include acknowledgements where
necessary. Any omissions notified will be rectified at the earliest opportunity.
Thanks are also due to the many people who have contributed to the author’s own research
over the years, including the staff of the former South West Water such as Bob Hutchings and
Alan Rafelt, the County Bridge Engineers of Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, staff at the
Environment Agency such as Tim Wood, and former colleagues such as Graham McInally .
Page xi
Principal notation
A numerical subscript attached to a symbol usually indicates the location of the cross-section,
or part of a cross-section, or the reach of a river according to context.
The bridge waterway opening may be referred to as the opening or the waterway.
The river is always referred to as the river or the channel.