Proceedings of the 19th IAHR-APD Congress 2014, Hanoi, Vietnam

ISBN xxx-xxxx-xx-x

EVALUATING HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES ACTING ON A BRIDGE

UNDER FLOODING IN STEEP MEDIUM AND SMALL RIVERS

SHIRO MAENO (1), KEISUKE YOSHIDA (2) & RYUJI TANAKA (3)
(1)
Prof. Dept. of Civil Engineering, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan,
e-mail: maeno@okayama-u.ac.jp
(2)
Assoc. Prof. Dept. of Civil Engineering, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan,
e-mail: maeno@okayama-u.ac.jp
(3)
Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan,
e-mail: ev422230@s.okayama-u.ac.jp

ABSTRACT
Very heavy rains on July 28 2013 in Yamaguchi and Shimane prefectures caused severe damage to bridges. The
extremely high flood discharge, coupled with the accumulation of large amounts of driftwood (logs, branches, and
rootstock) caused the failure. This study examined the possibility of assessing the forces acting on a bridge using three-
dimensional flow analysis in comparison with experimentally obtained results. Then hydrodynamic forces acting on the
bridge under different water level conditions with or without driftwood accumulation were investigated. Numerical
results show that the force acting on the bridge can be estimated using a three-dimensional flow simulation. Results
clarified that the force acting on the bridge under an overflow condition of the bridge in a driftwood-accumulated state
is 10 times greater than the force exerted in an ordinary flood discharge state.

Keywords: high flood discharge, driftwood hazard, fluid force on the bridge, 3D flow analysis

1. INTRODUCTION
Recently, heavy rains occur frequently in Japan. Very
heavy rains on July 28 2013 in Yamaguchi and Shimane
prefectures caused unprecedented damage to river
structures. The main features of the disaster were that the
damage occurred mainly in steep medium and small
rivers of the upper river basin and a large amount of
driftwood (logs, branches, and rootstock) caused the
severe damage. Especially, three railway bridges were
washed away by the extremely strong hydrodynamic
forces acting during the flood. Photo 1 portrays a
destroyed bridge. Bridges were destroyed at the lower Photo 1 Bridge destruction caused by high flood
part of bridge piers because of the high bending moment. (Abu River in Yamaguchi prefecture, Japan).
The accumulation of driftwood at bridge piers and
parapets reduced the available flow area, causing the
upstream water level to rise. Probably for that reason, the
hydrodynamic force exceeded the bridge strength,
leading to structural failure.
Sakano (2003) demonstrated by experimentation that a
water level raise at a bridge caused by accumulated
driftwood can be estimated well by accumulated
amounts of driftwood and by bridge dimensions.
Nakagawa et al. (1992, 1993, 1994) developed a
simulation technique using Lagrangian method to track
the driftwood movement and Eulerian method for the
flood flow field. The validity of the proposed method
was confirmed from experimental results. Furthermore,
accumulated driftwood at homes considerably increased
the hydrodynamic forces acting on them and increased
the risk of home inundation.
Shimizu et al. (2006) and Ikari et al. (2006) showed that
processes of driftwood accumulation can be reproduced
using Discrete Element method or Moving Particle Semi-
implicit method. Nakamura et al. (2010) clarified the
1
1.

Photo 2 Driftwood accumulated state

Photo 3 Experimentally obtained overflow state without
(Myonotani River in Ehime prefecture, Japan).
parapet.10)

(a)

Figure 1 Schematic view of the model

(bridge model is depicted with red line, its thickness is 10 mm).

2
 2.
Table 1 Numerically obtained forces

F2 (N) F3 (N)
Analysis F1 (N)
Momentum to Momentum to P (N) F (N)
Time Momentum F2/F1
Overflow Overflow Pressure Momentum
(s) to Flow in
over Bridge from Sides
40 3.20 3.53 16.05 0.22 15.99 14.51
42 3.75 3.60 16.05 0.22 15.65 14.10
44 3.72 3.77 16.05 0.23 15.04 14.31
46 4.51 3.52 16.05 0.22 14.16 13.68
48 4.10 3.12 16.06 0.19 15.55 14.59
50 3.99 3.03 16.05 0.19 14.91 14.46

Figure 4 Numerically obtained overflow state.

Figure 2 Momentum ratio of F2 to F1.

Figure 5 Momentum and fluid pressure.

Figure 3 Water surface profile for experiment and analysis.

3
 3.

Table 2 Upstream boundary conditions

Q (m3 /s) h (m) u (m/s)
Case
Discharge Water Depth Velocity
1 98.3 2.05 3.2
2 133.2 2.40 3.7
3 230.3 4.15 3.7
4 230.3 4.15 3.7
Figure 7. Schematic drawing of distance between two sections.

(a) Case 1 (a) Without driftwood (Case 3)

(b) Case 2
(b) With driftwood (Case 4)
Figure 9 Flow state with or without driftwood accumulation
(Bird view).

(c) Case 3

(d) Case 4

Figure 8 Water surface profiles and pressure distribution.

4
 4.

(a) Case 1
(a) Case 1

(b) Case 2
(b) Case 2

(c) Case 3
(c) Case 3

(d) Case 4 (d) Case 4

Figure 10 Velocity distribution at the central section (60 s). Figure 11 Pressure and velocity distribution around bridge (60 s).

Table 3. Fluid force on the bridge of four cases, distance between two sections, and analysis times
Momentum Acting on Bridge (kN)
Distance 16m 20m 24m
Case Average
Time 50s 55s 60s 50s 55s 60s 50s 55s 60s
Case1 40.1 40.6 36.2 37.4 38.4 31.6 31.8 33.9 33.3 35.9
Case2 45.9 48.2 43.2 52.7 56.0 50.1 44.0 49.7 34.7 47.2
Case3 217.0 230.0 223.0 221.9 227.2 223.9 237.8 232.2 223.8 226.3
Case4 455.0 451.8 463.1 469.8 457.1 472.6 485.6 460.7 468.7 464.9
5
5.

(a) Longitudinal size of control volume is 16 m

(b) Longitudinal size of control volume is 20 m

(c) Longitudinal size of control volume is 24 m

Figure 12 Momentum acting on bridge.

6
6.