×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

(OP)
I am currently reviewing a Hydraulic Analysis for a stream that passes beneath a bridge. According to the NYSDOT Bridge Manual, "Any stream structure that provides a minimum freeboard of 2 ft. for the 50 year flood shall be considered as satisfying normal hydraulic clearance requirements." In the analysis, it is shown that at the upstream face of the bridge, this 2 ft. of freeboard is met. However, the company doing the analysis has taken the freeboard 100 ft. upstream of the bridge, where the 2 ft. of freeboard is not met. Is there something that I am missing that states the freeboard shall be measured a distance upstream of the structure?  

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

you aren't missing anything, there is no requirement for freeboard 100-feet upstream of the bridge. There should be HEC-RAS section at each face of the bridge and that would be a typical location to check the bridge freeboard.

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

interesting sketch, however that sketch illustrates only one of many possibilities for the hydraulic conditions at the bridge in question. I don't know what point there is to checking a wsel at some arbitrary distance upstream of the bridge. Why not set the distance to 50 feet or 200 feet or a few meters? Is there any logic to this?

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

I'm wondering...
If the WSEL is at the level of the soffit elevation a few meters upstream of the bridge, would you still use the WSEL calculated at the face of the bridge (under the soffit) to determine the freeboard?

 

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

I'm trying to find why someone would take this level 100-feet upstream of the bridge...

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

probably wouldn't matter because you would not have any freeboard. Either way I would check the RAS section at the face of the bridge and compare.

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

again, this is just a sketch of a theoretical condition and not to scale. Is section 3 a few meters or a few hundred meters upstream? What is happening to the width of the channel? How deep and how wide is the channel? How wide is the bridge? Is there a levee which constricts the 50-year channel width? Is there any change in the bed slope? Is there any change in the channel cross section? Is there any change in roughness? Where and how are these changes happening? Are we looking at a 50-year or 500-year water surface profile? what is the difference in elevation between section 3 and the face of the bridge? Is it .1 foot, 1.0 foot or 10 feet? Without reviewing the entire situation, this question cannot be answered.

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

Model your bridge in HEC-RAS.
Use the HEC-RAS Hydraulic Reference Manual for guidance.
Plot and submit the profile with your bridge plans.

good luck

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

cvg i know it's a theorical condition...

Myself, I always take the section at the face of the bridge to determine if the freeboard requirement is met.
Freeboard = Soffit Elevation - WSEL


But i know that there might be some projects where this is not true. And this might be why the company doing the analysis has taken the WSEL 100 ft upstream of the bridge (or it's a mistake).

I guess that GAH9 will have to model the bridge and/or ask for explaination to the company doing the analysis.

RE: Freeboard Beneath a Bridge

I have seen videos of a lot of floods at various bridges over the years and was amazed at the debris washed down these rivers in 50 and 100 year events.  Two feet seems real tight to pass a lot of the material I've seen, to include intact houses, even though it is code, to prevent or limit impact on the structure, and log jam development against the structure.

Just a thought.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources