1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link]

com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Received: 25 June 2018 Revised: 17 November 2019 Accepted: 24 January 2020
DOI: 10.1111/jfr3.12599

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Bridge pier shape influence on wood accumulation:

Outcomes from flume experiments and numerical
modelling

Pina N. De Cicco1 | Enio Paris1 | Luca Solari1 | Virginia Ruiz-Villanueva2

1
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of Florence,
Abstract
Florence, Italy Streamwood accumulation at bridges exerts additional forces to bridge struc-
2
Department of Earth Sciences, University tures and may aggravate flooding, local scouring, and eventually may lead to
of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
bridge collapse. However, the important ecological role of streamwood in flu-
Correspondence vial systems calls for a compromise between preservation of river ecosystems
Luca Solari, Professor, Department of and prevention of streamwood-related hazards (e.g., bridge clogging). This
Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
study evaluates the effect of bridge pier shape on wood accumulation or block-
Email: [Link]@[Link] age, probability in lowland type of rivers. We conducted laboratory experi-
ments in a flume testing various pier shapes and wood transport mechanisms
under two different flow conditions, complemented with numerical modelling.
Results revealed that the flow field immediately upstream from the pier has a
significant influence on the blockage probability. The pier shape is controlling
the flow field, thus, it has a significant influence on wood accumulation. In
particular, a squared pier shape, higher Froude number and semi-congested
wood transport resulted in the highest blockage probability under the tested
conditions. Our results may help to better design infrastructures to mitigate
streamwood-related hazards in rivers.

KEYWORDS
blockage probability, bridge clogging, streamwood, wood accumulation

1 | INTRODUCTION vertebrates (Benke & Wallace, 2003; Harmon, Franklin, &

Swanson, 1986). Natural wood accumulations (i.e., jams)
Streamwood is usually referred to logs longer than 1 m create storage areas for organic material; this, together
with a diameter of 0.1 m transported by flow (Wohl et al., with the decomposition of wood itself, provides a rich
2010). Instream large wood enters rivers by different nutrient source for aquatic species, and a functional com-
recruitment processes along the fluvial corridor or from ponent of fluvial ecosystems (see, e.g., Gurnell, 2013; Le
the hillslopes (e.g., bank erosion, landslides, and other Lay, Piégay, & Moulin, 2013; Ruiz-Villanueva, Piégay,
types of mass movements; Benda & Sias, 2003). The pres- Gurnell, Marston, & Stoffel, 2016; Solari, Van Oorschot,
ence of streamwood in rivers provides habitat diversity Hendriks, Rinaldi, & Vargas-Luna, 2015). Importantly,
and nutriment for invertebrates, fishes, and other due to the natural afforestation in many European
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original work is properly cited.
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Flood Risk Management published by Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

J Flood Risk Management. 2020;13:e12599. [Link]/journal/jfr3 1 of 16

[Link]
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

catchments because of the abandonment of agricultural wood delivery tends to be more like a succession of
lands occurred in the last decades, the presence of wood impulses than a continuous release; and that (c) the in-
in rivers has generally increased (e.g., Comiti, 2012). channel wood is more prone to stop at the pier located
Moreover, wood is reintroduced in altered river systems within the channel than close to the banks. Schmocker
as a restoration measure (Kail, Hering, Muhar, Ger- and Hager (2011) analysed the wood blocking probability
hard, & Preis, 2007). This increase in streamwood storage of single logs and rootwads of different dimensions,
may have positive effects on the fluvial ecosystems, but under different freeboard and flow conditions and for dif-
under certain circumstances (e.g., urbanised areas) the ferent bridge deck geometries. These authors derived
transport of large quantities of wood during floods may blocking probability equations based on the analysed var-
imply hazards for humans and infrastructures. This is iables and identified freeboard and wood dimensions as
particularly important at critical sections such as bridges, the most relevant. Latter works by Gschnitzer et al.
where wood accumulation may produce significant (2013) and Gschnitzer, Gems, Mazzorana, and Aufleger
damages. (2017) evaluated the bridge obstruction caused by wood
Wood accumulation at bridge piers has been identi- with and without a central semicircular pier and pro-
fied as one of the most frequent causes of bridge failures posed a logistic regression model based on hydraulic
in the Unites States (Diehl, 1997), and many damages to parameter and wood characteristics. However, the gen-
infrastructures were observed during several recent flood eral application of those equations is limited to the ranges
events in Europe (e.g., the 2011 flood in the Magra river of the conditions under which they were derived.
basin in north-western Italy and the central part of the While these studies focused on wood accumulation at
country in 2005 or the Emme catchment in Switzerland bridges, they neglected additional aspects concerning the
in 2014; Badoux et al., 2015; Comiti, Lucía, & hydraulics of the problem (De Cicco, Paris, Ruiz-
Rickenmann, 2016; Steeb, Rickenmann, Badoux, Rickli, & Villanueva, Solari, & Stoffel, 2018). In particular, the flow
Waldner, 2017). field around the structure, which is determined by the
Wood accumulation at bridges may reduce the effec- pier shape, acts on the log motion thus affecting the
tive flow area thereby decreasing the river conveyance, blockage probability. Therefore, a better knowledge of
producing a backwater effect, which may intensify wood accumulation at bridge piers is required to better
flooding (Okamoto, Takebayashi, Sanjou, Suzuki, & develop flood mitigation strategies, such as improving
Toda, 2019). It can also lead to bridge failure due to both bridge design to allow wood passage.
additional hydrodynamic forces generated in proximity This work aims to fill this gap by investigating the
of the wood accumulation (Manners, Doyle, & Small, effects of bridge pier shape on wood accumulation
2007; Parola, Apelt, & Jempson, 2000) and increase of (De Cicco, Paris, & Solari, 2016 for some preliminary
local scouring (Kattell & Eriksson, 1998). results). To do this, the main dimensionless parameters
Previous flume experiments carried out on the inter- governing the pier blockage probability are described and
action between wood and bridges emphasise the most the influence of these parameters is investigated through
favourable bridge deck for wood transit or the effects of a hybrid approach combining laboratory experiments
clogging caused by in-channel wood on the water level and 2D numerical modelling.
and a mobile bed profile (Melville & Dongol, 1992;
Pagliara & Carnacina, 2011; Schalko, Schmocker,
Weitbrecht, & Boes, 2016; Schmocker & Hager, 2011). 2 | METHODOLOG Y
Previous investigations on wood accumulation at a single
pier aimed to study the effect of wood blockage on flow 2.1 | Experimental design and
velocity and water depth, or the correlation between the measuring instruments
shape of the wood accumulation and the resulted scour
or the blockage probability in the presence of a pier The experiments were done at the hydraulic laboratory of
(Gschnitzer, Gems, Aufleger, Mazzorana, & Comiti, the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
2013; Lagasse, Clopper, Zevenbergen, Spitz, & Girard, of the University of Firenze (Italy), in a glass-walled rect-
2010; Lyn, Cooper, Yi, Sinha, & Rao, 2003). The experi- angular flume 5 m long, 0.30 m, wide and 0.16 m deep.
mental analysis on wood accumulation at a square pier The flume bed had a fixed slope of 0.001 which was cov-
with rounded nose and the field monitoring at bridges ered by a layer of uniform gravel (D50 = 6.81 mm) glued
with video recording by Lyn et al. (2003) and Lyn, Coo- on a fixed plate. The downstream water level was con-
per, Condon, and Gan (2007) proved that (a) smaller trolled by a sluice gate. The recirculating water flow into
velocity and flow depth favour the accumulation of wood the flume was regulated by a valve and measured by
at bridges (in case of rounded pier shape); (b) in-channel means of an electromagnetic flowmeter (model Asamag,
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 3 of 16

flow range 0–14 L/s). The flow velocities were measured at occurring in a typical lowland river. Five pier geometries,
six cross-sections upstream of the piers at a distance of 8 cm three classes of logs, two wood transport mechanisms
from the walls and at different depths utilising a and two hydraulic conditions were performed under
STREAMFLO miniature current flowmeter system designed steady flow and fixed bed conditions. A total of 150 tests
for measuring low velocities. The flow velocities in the range were realised. The following subsections describe all the
could be measured with an accuracy of ±2% of true velocity scaling variables (for additional scaling issues, see also
and maximum immersion length of 420 mm. Supporting Information, A).
The water levels were recorded by means of three
ultrasonic sensors Honeywell series 943- F4V-2D-
1C0-330E. All the sensors recorded the water level with a 2.2.1 | The bridge piers
frequency of 4 Hz and a maximum error of ±1 mm. Two
sensors were fixed at the beginning and at the end of the Five different pier shapes were built using a 3D printer
channel, respectively, and one sensor was positioned with thermo-plastic material. The scaling of the piers was
upstream of the pier. The sensors measured the distance defined by the size of the flume and the ratio between
between the probe and the water surface along the cen- pier width and pier length (without cutwater). Pier width
treline of the channel. The probes were connected to a (wp = 2.5 cm) and length (Lp = 7 cm) were defined; the
PC with a data acquisition system and then the electronic ratio wp/Lp = 0.36 was kept constant which corresponds
signal was converted into a distance. The data recorded to common concrete bridges in European cities; for
was transferred and process using the software LabView. example, for the Margaret Bridge in Budapest (wp/
Figure 1 shows the side and top views of the flume Lp = 0.3) and the Ponte Vecchio in Florence (wp/
and the position of the pier used in the experiments. Lp = 0.34). Values of wp/Lp are reported in Table 1. Five
Two cameras were used during the tests to record the cutwater shapes inspired in masonry bridges from histori-
experiments. A Canon PowerShot camera, model cal European cities (e.g., the Ponte Vecchio in Florence,
SX600HS, was positioned at the beginning of the flume, Wilson Bridge in Tours, and the Concorde Bridge in
for tracking the logs movement from the input point to Paris; see also Section F in the Supporting Information)
the section in which the pier was positioned. A second were reproduced (Figure 2).
camera, a Canon PowerShot model SX230HS, was fixed in The piers were glued to the flume bed in the middle
correspondence of the pier in order to record the log accu- of the cross-section at 3 m from the flume inlet and
mulation formation and the logs entrapment at the pier. aligned with the flow.

2.2 | Scaling parameters 2.2.2 | Wood modelling

The present experiments were not set scaled from a spe- To reproduce the wooden logs, beech wooden cylinders
cific prototype, but were designed to explore conditions with no roots and no branches, were used. Importantly,

FIGURE 1 Side and top view of the laboratory flume

 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

TABLE 1 Pier shapes reproduced in the laboratory

Code Geometry Figure Similar example (wp/Lp) (wp/Lp)E (wp/Lp)E/(wp/Lp)

R0 Square-nose Tiberio Bridge (Rimini, Italy) 0.40 0.36 0.9

R1 Round-nose Ponte Palatino (Rome, Italy) 0.38 0.36 0.95

R2 Triangular-nose (60
) Ponte Vecchio (Florence, Italy) 0.34 0.36 1.06

R3 Ogival-nose Wilson Bridge (Tours, France) 0.30 0.36 1.2

R4 Trapezoidal-nose Dattaro Bridge (Parma, Italy) 0.33 0.36 1.09

F I G U R E 2 Bridge pier geometries

reproduced in the laboratory (five cutwaters R0,
R1, R2, R3, R4 were employed); (wp/Lp) is the
ratio pier width to its length for the example
pier, (wp/Lp)E is the adopted ratio in the
experiments

this simple cylindrical geometry, represents a reasonable

TABLE 2 Log classes, log dimensions and log mixture
approximation of defoliated and non-rooted pieces of
wood, commonly observed during fluvial transport in Length Diameter Log
lowland rivers (Allen & Smith, 2012; Bocchiola, Rulli, & Class (mm) (mm) mixture (%)
Rosso, 2008; Ruiz-Villanueva et al., 2014; Xu & Small 60 2 80
Liu, 2016). Medium 90 4 12
Three different log lengths (Llog) and diameters (Dlog) Large 150 6 8
were selected: small logs (length equal to the 20% of
flume width, Llog = 6 cm and Dlog = 0.2 cm), medium
logs (length equal to the 30% of flume width, Llog = 9 cm
and Dlog = 0.4 cm) and large logs (length half of flume Wohl, 2014). According to field observations in these riv-
width, Llog = 15 cm and Dlog = 0.6 cm), as reported in ers, the ratio of small, medium and large wood was
Table 2. A preliminary set of experiments (see Supporting equivalent to [Link]% (Table 2). This ratio was used in
Information, B) was carried out to determine the ratio the experiments as a reliable log size distribution in large
between the log length and the flume width to avoid the lowland rivers, other log size distribution may have an
‘log-walls’ interactions (Llog/flume width ≤ 50%). effect on the final results, however, as our aim was to
The relative proportion of each class of logs was compare the wood accumulation at different pier geome-
defined to reproduce the typical properties and dimen- tries, this aspect was considered not relevant.
sions of wood in large lowland rivers, like the Arno River The wood density for seasoned and dry beech varies
in Italy, the Indiana River in the United States (Manners in the range 700–900 kg/m3. For this reason, before each
et al., 2007), or the Slave River in Canada (Kramer & run, logs were put in a container filled with water for
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 5 of 16

300 s. This duration was determined based on the maxi- bed were of the order of 4/5 × 104, that are referred to a
mum duration of each test (in this case 250 s for fully turbulent flow (for bed friction factor of about
uncongested transport) to reduce weight fluctuations dur- 6 × 10−2 and Moody type diagram for open channels with
ing the experiments (Welber, Bertoldi, & Tubino, 2013). impervious rigid boundary [Yen, 2002]).
Additional preliminary tests show that log weight fluctu-
ations during a test are relatively small, being in the
range between 2 and 7% for large and small logs, 2.2.4 | Two-dimensional modelling
respectively.
Two types of wood transport mechanisms (Braudrick, A two-dimensional numerical model for simulating free
Grant, Ishikawa, & Ikeda, 1997) were simulated: surface shallow water flow, Iber, has been applied to
uncongested (when logs move without contact between reproduce the hydrodynamics of the experimental tests
them; each piece of wood can move independently of the (Bladé et al., 2014). To solve the shallow water governing
others) and semi-congested (when the pieces of wood equations, the model applies finite volume method with
move together as a single mass or entering in contact high-resolution (second order) extension of Roe's scheme.
between them). In the first case, one log each 5 s was The model interface is based on the preprocess and post-
introduced at 2.9 m upstream of the flume, along the cen- process software GID. Unstructured calculation meshes
treline and oriented parallel to the flow (θ = 0 rad). A reproduced the geometric domain. The model allows
total of 50 logs were entered during each run. In the sec- assigning different sizes to mesh for different objects
ond case, the input frequency was 25 logs together in a depending on the detail level needed. Higher mesh reso-
cohort every 20 s (the number of tests and tests repetition lution close to the pier was used (0.005 m). The bed
is reported in Figure 4). The logs were released in the roughness, defined in terms of Manning roughness coeffi-
channel centre but randomly oriented with respect to the cient, was calibrated by comparing the predicted and
flow direction. The duration of a single ‘uncongested’ and observed values of flow depth (see Section C in the
‘semi-congested’ test was 250 and 100 s, respectively. Supporting Information) and assigned to each element of
the mesh and equal to 0.022 s/m1/3, based on the compar-
ison between experimental and numerical water depth
2.2.3 | Flow conditions and flow velocities measured in the flume at the gauging
stations indicated in Figure 1.
To obtain different hydraulic conditions the discharge The two-dimensional numerical simulations were
and the downstream sluice gate were regulated. Two dif- used to define a pier hydraulic-shape coefficient Cpier,
ferent discharges were used for the experiments here introduced for the first time, to characterise the
(Table 3). flow field upstream of the pier for the different pier
These flow conditions are represented by Froude shapes. The obstacle (i.e., pier) produces a loss of
numbers equal to 0.3 and 0.5, which represent conditions energy and modifies the flow upstream and down-
for floods in lowland rivers, often characterised by stream. The pier shape has an effect on the resulted
Froude number lower than one (Gippel, O'Neill, flow, as commonly observed during scour experiments
Finlayson, & Schnatz, 1996). (Richardson & Davis, 2001). Upstream from the pier a
Reynolds number was computed using two different ‘low flow velocity area’ (ALFV) can be observed
regions of the flume, that is, the walls and the flume bed. (Figure 3). ALFV is defined as the flow area convention-
To quantify the retaining effect of the walls on the main ally delimited by the streamline where flow velocity is
flow the well-known ‘Side-Wall Correction Method’ of 60% of the flow velocity u∞ not affected by the presence
Johnson (1942) with the modification by Vanoni and of the pier and it was calculated from the 2D numerical
Brooks (1957) was used. The Reynolds numbers of the simulations carried out with different pier shapes. ALFV

TABLE 3 Hydraulic conditions performed in the flume tests

Discharge Mean surface flow Water Froude Reynolds Sluice-gate

(m3/s) velocity (m/s) depth (m) number (−) number (−) opening (m)
0.004 0.33 0.04 0.5 Reb = 4.21 × 104 Weir totally opened
Rew = 2.92 × 104
0.006 0.25 0.07 0.3 Reb = 5.73 × 104 0.02
Rew = 2.04 × 104
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

FIGURE 3 Streamlines maps computed by the 2D numerical model in the case of Fr = 0.5

F I G U R E 4 Sketch illustrating the

experimental tests carried out

appears to be higher around the flat pier shapes, such differs from other coefficients provided in the literature
as the square, rounded, and trapezoidal piers, whereas as they depend only on the geometry of the pier (e.g., the
it becomes negligible around the more pointed pier pier shape factors or parameters proposed by Melville &
shapes. Introducing LEFF as the linear projection of Coleman, 2000, Richardson & Davis, 2001, Ettema, Con-
ALFV on the pier, the following dimensionless parame- stantinescu, & Melville, 2011, or by Ettema, Con-
ter is defined: stantinescu, & Melville, 2017).
We hypothesized that higher values of Cpier lead to
ALFV 1 higher blockage probabilities.
Cpier = ð1Þ
LEFF wp

Cpier provides a measure of the impact of the ‘low 2.2.5 | Model runs and blockage
flow velocity area’ protruding on the upstream flow field probability
(ALFV/LEFF) relative to the pier width wp, therefore, it is
not only related to the shape of the pier but also to the For each pier shape, the two Froude numbers (i.e., 0.3
flow field upstream from the structure. In this regard, it and 0.5) and the two wood transport mechanisms were
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 7 of 16

tested. Each test was repeated 5 times for the  

Qlog Llog
uncongested transport (1 log for batches and 50 batches P=f , , Fr,C pier ð3Þ
Q wp
per test) and 10 times for the semi-congested transport
mechanisms (25 logs per batches and 5 batches per test)
(Figure 4), that represents a large enough repetition num- To highlight the effect of different pier shapes on
ber for statistically relevant results (Schalko, 2017; wood accumulation, the experimental results are further
Schmocker & Hager, 2010, 2011). explained by introducing the effective blockage probabil-
Results were analysed in terms of the blockage proba- ity (Pe) and the impact probability (Pi) (see Table 4). Pe
bility. The blockage probability (P) refers here as the represents the ratio between the number of logs per clas-
probability of the wood to accumulate at the bridge pier. ses (or for all classes) that are blocked at the pier at the
Therefore, wood blockage probability is equal to 1 (P = 1) end of each run and the total number of logs introduced
when a log is blocked at the pier and P = 0 when the log in the flume per class (or for all classes). The main differ-
does not stop at the pier (Schmocker & Hager, 2011). This ence between P and Pe is that in the former case only the
study focused on the interaction between logs and one actual blockage occurrence is considered, in the latter
single central pier, thus the case of pier-to-pier wood case also the number of blocked logs is examined. Pi is
accumulation was no investigated. the ratio between the number of logs that impact
Following the Buckingham π theorem we can define (i.e., touch) the pier but do not necessarily stop, and the
the dependence of p as: total number of logs introduced in the flume, and it has
been introduced as a probability of the potential occur-
  rence of clogging (see Ruiz-Villanueva et al., 2017).
Qlog ρlog Llog wp
P=f , , , , Fr,Re,C pier , αpier , shape of logs, θ Therefore, two main cases are distinguished for block-
Q ρ wp Lp
age probability definition; (a) if blockage occurs or not
ð2Þ (P) and (b) the blockage in relation to the number of
entrapped logs (Pe and Pi). Table 4 summarises the vari-
where Fr and Re are the Froude and Reynolds's respec- ous definitions and the formulas.
w
tively, Lpp ,C pier , αpier define the bridge pier geometry, Llog
is the log length, wp and Lp are respectively the pier
width and length, αpier is the orientation of the pier with 3 | RESULTS
respect to the flow direction (see Supporting Information,
ρ
Q Llog
ρ , wp ,shape of logs, θ are the wood transport and
D), Qlog , log 3.1 | Blockage probability P versus wood
log characteristics Q is the flow discharge, Qlog is the vol- transport mechanism
umetric log input rate, ρlog and ρ are the log density and
water density, respectively, Finally, the authors define a We observed that P increases for semi-congested wood
new coefficient, introduced here for the first time, cpier as transport (Figure 5), with values up to 0.9 (i.e., in nine
the pier hydraulic-shape coefficient that considers the cases out of 10 the logs stopped at the pier), while during
flow velocity field generated upstream of the pier for dif- uncongested wood transport the highest value of p was
ferent pier geometric configurations. just .012. Figure 5 also shows that the flatter pier shapes,
In order to focus the analysis on the influence of pier such as the square (R0) and the trapezoidal (R4), were
shape Equation (2) was modified using the following con- the most critical for wood accumulation for both Froude
siderations: (a) The logs were reproduced by using numbers, showing the highest P values. The worst case
wooden cylindrical dowels with no roots and no branches (i.e., highest blockage probability) was observed for the
in floating conditions (ρlog < ρ) and randomly oriented flat pier shape and Fr = 0.5. The lowest P value (P = 0)
with respect to the flow direction, thus the angle θ and was obtained for the Ogival pier shape, which was less
ρlog
ρ and log shapes can be omitted from Equation (2); prone to ‘capture’ logs during the two wood transport
(b) A single pier was reproduced in the experimental mechanisms and two hydraulic conditions.
tests, hence the influence of αpier was neglected and Lp During uncongested transport, the higher blocking
has no effect on P in the current experiments, and thus probability was observed at lower flow velocity condition
w
the ratio Lpp . (i.e., Fr = 0.3) and with the trapezoidal pier shape (R4).
Considering the flow as fully turbulent, the Reynolds For the same hydraulic conditions, logs did not stop at
number was also omitted. After these simplifications, the the other four pier shapes. For Fr = 0.5 the logs stopped
wood blockage probability at a single central pier can be only at the flatter pier shapes (square R0, rounded R1,
expressed as: and trapezoidal R4).
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

T A B L E 4 Definition and description of the blockage probability functions determined in the flume experiments for both uncongested
and semi-congested wood transport

Code Definition Formula Values Description Reference

P Blockage — 0,1 Probability of drift to get blocked Schmocker & Hager, 2011
probability 0 = no blockage at the bridge. When drift passes
1 = yes the bridge section the blocking
blockage probability is 0 while when it is
blocked the probability is 1.
#blocked logs
Pe Effective blockage #input logs 01 The number of logs that stop at the This study
probability 0 = no logs stop pier at the end of the test. It
at the pier represents the ‘effective’
1 = all logs stop blockage probability.
at the pier
#logs touch
Pi Impact #input logs 01 The number of logs that impact or This study after Ruiz-Villanueva,
probability 0 = no logs touch the pier after each impulse Wy_zga, Mikus, Hajdukiewicz, &
impact the of logs. It represents the Stoffel, 2017
pier ‘potential’ blockage probability.
1 = all logs
impact the
pier

Fr = 0.5) and frequent (e.g., for Fr = 0.3 large logs

blocked in correspondence of four pier shapes on five).
For higher flow velocity, that is, Fr = 0.5, all log sizes
stopped at the flat pier shape (R0), while at the rounded
pier shape (R1), only the smaller logs blocked. Larger
logs were more easily trapped at the flat (R0) and triangu-
lar (R2) piers. No logs stopped at the Ogival pier (R3) for
both hydraulic conditions.
In case of lower flow velocity (Fr = 0.3) the highest
probability for small and large logs was observed for the
trapezoidal pier shape (R4), as shown in Figure 6. All log
sizes stopped only at the triangular pier (R2) while the
large and small logs stopped at all pier shapes except for
the Ogival (R3). For logs with the same length, for exam-
ple, the small logs, the blockage probability is higher
when the flow velocity is higher (Fr = 0.5). This is not
the case for medium and large logs for which, in most
cases, the blockage probability was higher at lower flow
velocity (Fr = 0.3) than at higher flow velocity (Fr = 0.5).
F I G U R E 5 Blockage probability P for congested and semi-
congested wood transport, different pier shapes
3.3 | Blockage probability P versus flow
field

3.2 | Blockage probability P versus The flow velocity and thus the Froude number affected the
wood size log motion and consequently the blockage probability. Fig-
ures 5 and 6 show that in most analysed cases, the blockage
The blockage probability (P) plotted versus the relative probability is higher at Fr = 0.5 (Q = 0.004 m3/s) than at
log size (Llog/wp) (Figure 6), shows that, even if large logs Fr = 0.3 (Q = 0.006 m3/s) for the experimental conditions.
(Llog/wp = 6) are less frequent (8% of the total logs versus Figure 7 shows that the flow surface velocity distribu-
the 80% of the small logs), the probability to block at the tion measured at different cross-sections along the flume
pier was relatively high (e.g., the flat pier shape and influenced the logs trajectory observed in the flume.
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 9 of 16

FIGURE 6 Blockage probability P versus Llog/wp for Fr = 0.5 and Fr = 0.3. LW, large wood; MW, medium wood; SW, small wood

F I G U R E 7 Scheme of the log movement observed in flume experiment (top view). The grey and red zones are the areas occupied by
the logs (black and red lines) while transported at Fr = 0.3 and Fr = 0.5, respectively. The dotted dashed lines represent the flow velocity
distribution measured in flume

The measured flow velocity cross-sectional distribu- 3.4 | Blockage probability P versus pier
tion (red and black dots in Figure 7) shows that for hydraulic-shape coefficient Cpier
Fr = 0.3 (black dots) the velocity distribution is rather
uniform through the section. Contrasting, for Fr = 0.5 The low flow velocity area ALFV and Cpier were estimated
(red dots) the velocity is higher in the middle of the flume from two-dimensional numerical simulations in the case
width. Logs followed this higher velocity line, moving of Fr = 0.5 that gave a higher correlation coefficient of
along the centreline, and therefore, they were more predicted-observed flow depth and depth-averaged flow
prone to interact with the pier which was located in their velocity (see Section C in the Supporting Information).
trajectory (see red segments in Figure 7). The pier hydraulic-shape coefficients for each pier shape
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

T A B L E 5 Values of pier hydraulic-

Code Geometry Figure ALFV (cm2) LEFF (cm) Cpier
shape coefficient for different pier
R0 Square-nose 1.235 1.524 0.324 shapes and Fr = 0.5

R1 Round-nose 0.065 0.35 0.075

R2 Triangular-nose (60
) 0.0001 0.01 0.005

R3 Ogival-nose 0.0002 0.04 0.002

R4 Trapezoidal-nose 0.073 0.31 0.095

F I G U R E 8 Blockage probability P versus pier hydraulic-shape coefficient Cpier for each class of log size and for all log size classes, and
Fr = 0.5. rlinear regression is the cumulative deviation of data from the regression line (SD about the regression)

are listed in Table 5. In two cases Cpier = 0, for the trian- Figure 8) between the pier shape and the blockage proba-
gular and Ogival pier shapes, both characterised by a bility shows that the geometry of the pier has an impor-
more pointed pier shape. The highest value was obtained tant effect on the flow field upstream of the pier and thus
for the rectangular pier, meaning that the flatter the pier on the log motion and its blockage.
cutwater the higher the low flow velocity area upstream
of the pier (ALFV) and thus Cpier (see Equation 1). The
correlation between blockage probability and pier 3.5 | Effective wood blockage probability
hydraulic-shape coefficient for different ratio (Llog/wp) (Pe) and impact wood probability (Pi)
and for all log size classes and Fr = 0.5 is presented in
Figure 8. According to our results, the lowest blockage probability
In all cases the blockage probability P increases with was observed for the Ogival pier (R3), both in terms of effec-
increasing Cpier. The relation (see dashed-line fits in tive blockage probability and impact probability (Figure 9).
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 11 of 16

F I G U R E 9 Effective blockage probability Pe (left) and impact probability Pi (right) for different pier shapes and Froude numbers in
congested transport mechanism (m = median; SD = standard deviation)

However, high values of impact probability (Pi) do mechanisms, and hydraulic conditions (i.e., different
not always correspond with high values of effective Froude numbers but always in subcritical conditions)
blockage probability (Pe). For Fr = 0.5 and Fr = 0.3 the and defining a blockage function. In the present study,
highest mean value of pi was obtained for the triangular physical modelling was carried out with the aim of simu-
pier shape (R2) while the highest mean value of Pe for lating wood blockage at bridge piers, and analyse the
Fr = 0.5 was obtained for the flat pier shape (R0). The effect of the pier shape on this blockage, rather than rep-
impact probability for all pier shapes (Pi) (Figure 9, on roducing a specific field case (as in Bertoldi, Welber,
right) ranges between 0 and 30% while the effective Mao, Zanella, & Comiti, 2014; Parola et al., 2000; Welber
blockage probability (Pe) (Figure 9, on left) is lower than et al., 2013). It is worth pointing out that the dimensions
10%. Therefore, the range of Pe/Pi is between 0 and 30%. of channels and logs in the present model were inspired
Not all the logs that touch the pier stop at it. In this way, by field observations in the Arno River, but not precisely
the pier shape may favour or not the log stopping: this is scaled from a specific prototype. Therefore, the resulted
the case of the Ogival pier for which the impact probabil- blockage probabilities calculated are representative of
ity ranges between 18 and 22%, while the effective block- straight, large rivers and must be analysed in a relative
age probability is zero. The impact probability is higher and comparative way (i.e., comparing the blockage prob-
at Fr = 0.5 than Fr = 0.3, likely due to the tendency of ability obtained for the different pier shapes).
logs to move mainly in the centreline in the first case, as
explained previously and schematized in Figure 7, and
related to the flow velocity distribution measured in 4.1 | Effects of bridge pier on the
flume along the cross-sections upstream of the pier. streamline pattern

We carried out experiments under two different flow con-

4 | DISCUSSION ditions, Fr = 0.3 and Fr = 0.5, constrained by the flume
facility used, but which are typical conditions for large
This work aimed at investigating the factors controlling lowland rivers that can occur at floods. We observed dif-
wood accumulation at a single pier, studying a combina- ferences in the blockage probability under these two flow
tion of different pier shapes (with a focus on pier shapes scenarios, however, different conditions may lead to dif-
typical of historical cities), different wood transport ferent blockage probabilities. The aim of our study was to
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
12 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

F I G U R E 1 0 (a) Experimental observation on orientation and travelled path logs approaching the flat pier (upper panel) and the
rounded pier (lower panel) at four different time intervals (flow direction from left to right). (b) Streamlines at a flat pier shape (upper panel)
and semi-circular pier shape (lower panel). Flow from right to left

see the effect of different pier geometries under two dif- the streamlines as represented in Figure 10b. At the flat
ferent flow conditions, and not to compute wood block- pier shape (upper panel) the log centre moves along the
age for a large range of Froude number, additional tests stagnation point and it gets blocked at the pier; at the
would be required for the latter (Box, Hunter, & rounded pier (lower panel), even if the log centre moves
Hunter, 1978). close to the stagnation point, the lower curvature causes
Potential flow theory can provide a preliminary inter- the log sliding. This confirms also the higher blockage
pretation to explain the experimental observation of the probability for Fr = 0.5 (see Figure 5 on left) at the flat
log movements in the flume. The 2D streamlines around pier shape (P = 0.9) than at the rounded pier (P = 0.2).
the pier are analytically derived by assuming the flow has The potential flow theory (see Figure 10) showed the
a negligible vertical component of vorticity on the water streamlines curvature generated by different pier shapes
surface. Under this assumption, the stream function and what may happen if the log follows the stagnation
upstream of the pier is obtained in two different repre- streamline.
sentative cases: the rounded pier and the square pier. The The blockage probability is higher for the flat pier
rounded pier is modelled as a Rankine Half-Body while shape where the streamline curvature upstream of the
the squared pier as a Schwarz–Christoffel transformation pier is higher. However, this depends on the orientation
applied to a half plane (Kundu & Cohen, 2008). The of the log with respect to the flow, the alignment of the
streamlines in Figure 10, b at Fr = 0.5, show that the log with respect to the pier (if the log follows the stagna-
angle between the main flow direction and the tangent to tion streamline or the streamlines close to it), the log
the curve of the streamline is about 85
for the flat pier length, and the local changes in depth and velocity fields.
shape and about 45
for the rounded pier. In the former The explanation for the different log motion depending
case, the log undergoes a greater rotation with respect to on the flow hydraulics may be attributed also to the sec-
the main flow direction and then it flows downstream; in ondary flow generation. The vortex of secondary currents
the latter case, the rotation angle is lower and the log eas- may be stronger towards the centreline in one case
ily follows the flow. (Fr = 0.5) than the other (Fr = 0.3) (Albayrak & Lemmin,
Most of the experimental observations confirmed the 2011). The experimental observation on the orientation
simplified theoretical analysis of the streamlines, as illus- and track logs approaching the pier confirms the results
trated in Figure 10a, that shows the time-lapse sequence of Adachi and Daido (1957). These authors did not ana-
of congested transport of logs at the flat pier shape (upper lyse the effect of the pier shape on the wood-pier interac-
panel) and at the rounded pier (lower panel). The yellow tion, but just the cases for wood to pass after touching
dashed line shows the travelled path and orientation of the pier (here defined as impact probability). Adachi and
one single log s close to the pier frontal side. At the time Daido (1957) defined the percentage of logs to be washed
step t3 the log touches the pier following the curvature of away after touching the pier depending on the way in
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 13 of 16

F I G U R E 1 1 Possible configurations for logs to be washed away, on the right (adapted from Adachi & Daido, 1957) compared with the
experimental observation presented in the current research, on the left. The coloured lines indicate the configurations proposed by Adachi
and Daido (1957) observed in flume experiments

which the log approaches the pier. The tests were per- non-parallel to the flow and closer to the pier would
formed in subcritical conditions (Fr = 0.08/0.4). The lead to different results, such as higher blockage prob-
Figure 11 (right) represent four main cases: (a) when the ability for decreasing approach flow velocity (Schalko,
log passes without touching the pier; (b) the log touches 2017). This is explained because under those condi-
the pier and slides down; (c) the log bumps into the pier tions, logs may not behave like tracers, but they are
and bounces backward and then it flows away; and affected by an acceleration due to the difference
(d) the log bumps into the pier and the pressure of the between the flow velocity and their actual velocity.
running water on the left and right of the log is balanced, Therefore, the experiment set up is very relevant and
so the log stops at the pier. The cases (a), (b), and should be designed carefully to fulfil the objectives of
(c) represent what the authors here defined as impact the study. In our case, the goal was to test relative dif-
probability (Pi) while the case (d) is the effective blockage ferences between the different pier shapes and not to
probability (Pe). compute absolute blockage probabilities.
Although Figure 11 illustrates the case of logs intro-
duced in the flume perpendicular to the flow, the authors
(Adachi & Daido, 1957) affirm to obtain quite similar 4.2 | Effects of logs shape on blockage
results for logs introduced parallel to the flow direction. probability
The highest percentage of logs blocked at the pier was
obtained with Fr = 0.4 and in the case (d). In the current Finally, blockage probability may be influenced by the
research, the cases (c) and (d) were observed more often shape of the logs. In our experiments, cylinders with no
at Fr = 0.5, when the logs moved mainly in the centreline roots and no branches were used.
and the blockage probability was greater, while the cases Although this type of logs has been widely used in
(a) and (b) were more frequent at Fr = 0.3, when the logs flume experiments (Bertoldi et al., 2014, 2015; Bocchiola,
moved both in the centreline and towards the walls. Rulli, & Rosso, 2006; Braudrick et al., 1997; Braudrick &
Figure 11 shows the comparison between the experimen- Grant, 2001; Welber et al., 2013), the presence of bra-
tal observations by Adachi and Daido (1957) and the pre- nches and roots may increase the blockage probability as
sent experimental observations for cases (b) and logs with branches (or roots) may more easily interact
(d) revealing similar results. with each other and with the pier (Lyn et al., 2003;
In our experiments, we entered the logs 2.9 m Schmocker et al., 2013). Thus, the blockage probability P
upstream from the pier, and this has an influence on here determined represents the minimum predicted
the results. Logs, independently from the initial orien- probability.
tation (in general parallel to the flow direction) As our aim was to analyse the effect of different pier
adjusted their trajectory approaching the pier aligned shapes on the blockage probability in a comparative way
with the flow, and in general, they behaved as tracers. rather than calculating its absolute value, we consider
Changing this set up, adding the logs to the flume this simplification as acceptable.
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
14 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

5 | C ON C L U S I ON S their comments which help to significantly improve the

early version of this manuscript.
In the present work, wood accumulation at a single
bridge pier with different shapes was investigated experi- NOTATION
mentally and through numerical modelling. The aim was Cpier pier hydraulic-shape coefficient
to test the influence of the pier geometry on the wood Dlog log diameter
blockage probability. To do that, we designed the experi- Fr Froude number
ments using two wood transport mechanisms, different h Water depth
log size classes, two flow conditions, and five pier shapes. Llog log length
This research showed that: Lp pier length
P blockage probability
• the wood blockage probability P at a single pier was Pe effective blockage probability
significantly influenced by the wood transport mecha- Pi impact probability
nisms, with higher P under semi-congested wood Q flow discharge
transport; Qlog volumetric log input rate
• P was higher under Fr = 0.5 rather than Fr = 0.3 for Re Reynolds number
the experimental conditions; this was due to different U∞ undisturbed free stream velocity
flow field configurations upstream of the pier; w channel width
• the flow field upstream of the pier was greatly wp pier width
influenced by the pier geometry, and thus the latter αpier orientation of the pier with respect to the flow
affected the blockage probability P. Wood blockage direction
probability at the flat pier shape resulted three times θ inclination of the log relative to the flow direction
greater than the triangular shaped pier (for semi- ρ water density
congested transport mechanisms and Fr = 0.5); in case ρlog density of wood
of an Ogival pier, zero blockage probability was found
for both Froude number investigated; DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
• the relationship between P and log length over pier The data that support the findings of this study are
width (Llog/wp) revealed that largest logs, even if low openly available in the repository [Link] and can be
in number, stopped at the pier with a relatively high downloaded at [Link]
frequency.
ORCID
The results from the current research may provide Luca Solari [Link]
a support to design bridge or countermeasures aimed
at minimising wood accumulation at pier shapes typi- RE FER EN CES
cal of historical cities. In this regard, field data on Adachi, S. & Daido, A. (1957). Experimental study on washed tim-
wood transport (especially during high-magnitude bers (No. 1, pp. 41–49). In Annual Report of Disaster Preven-
flood events) and accumulation at bridges, are needed. tion Research Institute, Kyoto University.
The lack or insufficient field data constitute one of the Albayrak, I., & Lemmin, U. (2011). Secondary currents and
corresponding surface velocity patterns in a turbulent open-
main problems for researchers. The monitoring activ-
channel flow over a rough bed. Journal of Hydraulic Engineer-
ity and the implementation of multiple processes and ing, 137(11), 1318–1334.
factors such as sediment transport, the complex nature Allen, J. B., & Smith, D. L. (2012). Characterizing the impact of geo-
of log shapes (incl. Roots and branches), the number metric simplification on large woody debris using CFD. Inter-
of piers, as well as different river morphologies. The national Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 1, 1–14. [Link]
combination of numerical modelling, together with 10.5923/[Link].20120102.01
experiments is a powerful approach for prevention Badoux, A., Böckli, M., Rickenmann, D., Rickli, C., Ruiz-Villanueva, V.,
strategies. Zurbrügg, S., & Stoffel, M. (2015). Large wood transported during
the exceptional flood event of July 24, 2014 in the Emme catchment
(Switzerland). In Proceedings of the third International Conference
ACK NO WLE DGE MEN TS Wood in World Rivers 2015 (pp. 109–111), Padova, Italy.
The authors would like to thank the BSc students for Benda, L. E., & Sias, J. C. (2003). A quantitative framework for eval-
their support in the experimental activity and the Mauro uating the mass balance of in-stream organic debris. Forest
Gioli and Muzio Mascherini for their laboratory assis- Ecology and Management, 172(1), 1–16. [Link]
tance. The authors thank four anonymous reviewers for 1016/S0378-1127(01)00576-X
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
DE CICCO ET AL. 15 of 16

Benke, A. C., & Wallace, B. J. (2003). Influence of wood on inverte- (NCHRP Web-Only Report No. 175). Washington, DC:
brate communities in streams and rivers. In S. V. Gregory, K. L. National Cooperative Highway Program.
Boyer, & A. M. Gurnell (Eds.), The ecology and management of Gippel, C. J., O'Neill, I. C., Finlayson, B. L., & Schnatz, I. (1996).
wood in world rivers (pp. 149–177). American Fisheries Society, Hydraulic guidelines for the re-introduction and management
Symposium 37, Bethesda, MD. of large woody debris in lowland rivers. Regulated Rivers:
Bertoldi, W., Welber, M., Gurnell, A., Mao, L., Comiti, F., Tal, M. Research Management, 12, 223–236. [Link]
(2015). Physical modelling ofthe combined effect of vegetation SICI)1099-1646(199603)12:2/3<223::AID-RRR391>[Link];2-#
and wood on river morphology. Geomorphology 246, 178–187. Gschnitzer, T., Gems, B., Aufleger, M., Mazzorana, B., &
[Link] Comiti, F. (2013). Physical scale model test on bridge clogging.
Bertoldi, W., Welber, M., Mao, L., Zanella, S., & Comiti, F. (2014). Proceedings of the 35th IAHR World Congress. Beijing, China:
A flume experiment on wood storage and remobilization in Tsinghua University Press, 2013, ISBN 978–7–89414-588-8,
braided river systems. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, elektronisch.
39, 804–813. [Link] Gschnitzer, T., Gems, B., Mazzorana, B., & Aufleger, M. (2017).
Bladé, E., Cea, L., Corestein, G., Escolano, E., Puertas, J., Vázquez- Towards a robust assessment of bridge clogging processes in
Cendón, E., Dolz, J., & Coll, A. (2014). Iber: herramienta de flood risk management. Geomorphology, 279, 128–140. https://
simulación numérica del flujo en ríos. Revista Internacional de [Link]/10.1016/[Link].2016.11.002
Métodos Numéricos Para Cálculo y Diseño en Ingeniería, 30 Gurnell, A. (2013). Wood in fluvial systems (Chapter 236–9.11).
(1), 1–10. Treatise on Geomorphology, 9, 163–188.
Bocchiola, D., Rulli, M. C., & Rosso, R. (2006). Flume experiments Harmon, M. E., Franklin, J. F., & Swanson, F. J. (1986). Ecology of
on wood entrainment in rivers. Advances in Water Resources, coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Advances in Eco-
29(8), 1182–1195. [Link]/10.1016/[Link].2005.09.006 logical Research, 15, 133–302. [Link]
Bocchiola, D., Rulli, M. C., & Rosso, R. (2008). A flume experiment 2504(08)60121-X
on the formation of wood jams in Rivers. Water Resources Iroumé, A., Ruiz-Villanueva, V., & Picco, L. (2017). Breakdown of
Research, 44(2), 1–17. [Link] instream wood in low order forested streams of the southern
Box G.E.P., Hunter W.J., Hunter J, 1978. Statistics for experimenters, Chilean mountain ranges. Forest Ecology and Management,
an introduction to design, data analysis and model building. 401, 17–32.
(ISBN 0-471-09315-7). New York: Wiley. Johnson, J. W. (1942). The importance of side-wall friction in bed-
Braudrick, C. A., Grant, G. E., Ishikawa, Y., & Ikeda, H. (1997). load investigations. Civil Engineering, 12(6), 329–331.
Dynamics of wood transport in streams, a flume experiment. Kail, J., Hering, D., Muhar, S., Gerhard, M., & Preis, S. (2007). The
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 22, 669–683. https:// use of large wood in stream restoration, experiences from
[Link]/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9837(199707)22:7<669::AID- 50 projects in Germany and Austria. Journal of Applied Ecology,
ESP740>[Link];2-L 44(6), 1145–1155. [Link]
Braudrick, C. A., & Grant, G. E. (2001). Transport and deposition of 01401.x
large woody debris in streams, a flume experiment. Geomor- Kattell, J., & Eriksson, M. (1998). Bridge scour evaluation: Screening,
phology, 41(4), 263–283. [Link] analysis, and countermeasures (Pub. Report No. 9877).
(01)00058-7 Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service.
Comiti, F. (2012). How natural are alpine mountain rivers? Evi- Kramer, N., & Wohl, E. (2014). Estimating fluvial wood discharge
dence from the Italian Alps. Earth Surface Processes and Land- using time-lapse photography with varying sampling intervals.
forms, 37, 693–707. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 39(6), 844–852. http://
Comiti, F., Lucía, A., & Rickenmann, D. (2016). Large wood recruit- [Link]/10.1002/esp.3540
ment and transport during large floods: A review. Geomorphol- Kundu, P. K., & Cohen, I. M. (2008). Fluid mechanics (4th ed.). San
ogy, 269, 23–39. [Link] Diego, USA: Academic.
De Cicco, P. N., Paris, E., Ruiz-Villanueva, V., Solari, L., & Lagasse, P. F., Clopper, P. E., Zevenbergen, L. W., Spitz, W. J., &
Stoffel, M. (2018). In-channel wood-related hazards at bridges: Girard, L. G. (2010). Effects of debris on bridge pier scour
A review. River Research and Applications, 34, 1–12. [Link] (NCHRP Report No. 653). Washington, DC: Transportation
org/10.1002/rra.3300 Research Record. Retrieved from [Link]
De Cicco, P. N., Paris, E., & Solari, L. (2016). Wood accumulation at onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_653.pdf.
bridges: Laboratory experiments on the effects of pier shape. In Le Lay, Y.-F., Piégay, H., & Moulin, B. (2013). Wood entrance,
Proceeding of the Eight International Conference on Fluvial deposition, transfer and effects on fluvial forms and processes:
Hydraulics. St. Louis, MO, 12–15 July, 2016. problem statements and challenging issues. In J. Shroder
Diehl, T. H. (1997). Potential drift accumulation at bridges (Report (Editor in Chief), D. R. Butler, & C. R. Hupp (Eds.), Treatise on
No. FHWA-RD-97028). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Geomorphology (Vol. 12, pp. 20–36). Ecogeomorphology. San
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Ettema, R., Constantinescu, G., & Melville, B. W. (2017). Flow-field Lyn, D. A., Cooper, T., Yi, Y. K., Sinha, R. N., & Rao, A. R. (2003).
complexity and design estimation of pier-scour depth: Sixty Debris accumulation at bridge crossings, laboratory and field
years since Laursen and Toch. Journal of Hydraulic Engineer- studies. TRB Subject Code: 25–1 (Publication
ing, 143(9), 03117006. No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2003/10, SPR-2478).
Ettema, R., Constantinescu, G., & Melville, B. W. (2011). Evaluation Lyn, D., Cooper, T., Condon, D., & Gan, L. (2007). Factors in
of bridge scour research: Pier scour processes and predictions debris accumulation at bridge piers, Washington. Federal
 1753318x, 2020, 2, Downloaded from [Link] Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
16 of 16 DE CICCO ET AL.

Highway Administration Research and Development, Turner- (Eds.), Proceeding of 8th River Flow Congress 2010, Braun-
Fairbank Highway Research Center: U.S. Department of schweig, Germany, pp 713–720.
Transportation. Schmocker, L., & Hager, W. H. (2011). Probability of drift blockage
Manners, R. B., Doyle, M. W., & Small, M. J. (2007). Structure at bridge decks. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 137(4),
and hydraulics of natural woody debris jams. Water 470–479. [Link]
Resources Research, 43(6), 17. [Link] Schmocker, L., and W. H. Hager. (2013). “Scale modelling of
2006WR004910 wooden debris accumulation at a debris rack.” J. Hydraul. Eng.
Melville, B., & Dongol, D. (1992). Bridge pier scour with debris accu- 139 (8): 827–836. [Link]
mulation. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 118, 1306–1310. 0000714
[Link] Solari, L., Van Oorschot, M., Hendriks, D., Rinaldi, M., & Vargas-
Melville, B. W., & Coleman, S. E. (2000). Bridge scour. Highlands Luna, A. (2015). Advances on modelling riparian vegetation-
Ranch, CO: Water Resource Publications, LLC. hydromorphology interactions. River Research and Applica-
Okamoto, T., Takebayashi, H., Sanjou, M., Suzuki, R., & Toda, K. tions, 32, 164–178. [Link]
(2019). Log jam formation at bridges and the effect on flood- Steeb, N., Rickenmann, D., Badoux, A., Rickli, C., & Waldner, P.
plain flow: A flume experiment. Journal of Flood Risk Manage- (2017). Large wood recruitment processes and transported vol-
ment, 13(S1), e12562. [Link] umes in Swiss mountain streams during the extreme flood of
Pagliara, S., & Carnacina, I. (2011). Influence of large woody debris august 2005. Geomorphology, 279, 112–127. [Link]
on sediment scour at bridge piers. International Journal of Sedi- 1016/[Link].2016.10.011
ment Research, 26(2), 121–136. [Link] Vanoni, V. A., & Brooks, N. H. (1957). Laboratory studies of the
6279(11)60081-4 roughness and suspended load of alluvial streams (Report No. E-
Parola, A. C., Apelt, C. J., & Jempson, M. A. (2000). Debris forces on 68). Pasadena, CA: Sedimentation Laboratory, California Insti-
highway bridges (NCHRP Report No. 445). Washington, DC: tute of Technology.
Transportation Research Board. Welber, M., Bertoldi, W., & Tubino, M. (2013). Wood dispersal in
Richardson, E. V., & Davis, S. R. (2001). Evaluating scour at bridges braided streams: Results from physical modeling. Water Resources
(4th ed.). Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, Research, 49, 7388–7400. [Link]
U.S. Dept. of Transportation. Wohl, E., Cenderelli, D. A., Dwire, K. A., Ryan-Burkett, S. E.,
Ruiz-Villanueva, V., Bladé Castellet, E., Sánchez-Juny, M., Marti- Young, M. K., & Fausch, K. D. (2010). Large in-stream wood
Cardona, B., Díez-Herrero, A., & Bodoque, J. M. (2014). Two- studies: A call for common metrics. Earth Surface Processes and
dimensional numerical modeling of wood transport. Journal of Landforms, 35, 618–625. [Link]
Hydroinformatics, 16(5), 1077–1449. [Link] Xu, Y., & Liu, X. (2016). 3D computational modeling of stream
esp.3456 flow resistance due to large woody debris. In Con-
Ruiz-Villanueva, V., Piégay, H., Gurnell, A. A., Marston, R. A., & stantinescu, Garcia & Hanes (Eds.), Proceedings of River
Stoffel, M. (2016). Recent advances quantifying the large wood Flow 2016 (pp. 2346–2353). St. Louis, MO, ISBN
dynamics in river basins: New methods and remaining chal- 978-1-315-64447-9.
lenges. Reviews of Geophysics, 1–42, 611–652. [Link] Yen, B. (2002). Open channel flow resistance. Journal of Hydraulic
1002/2015RG000514 Engineering, 128, 20–39.
Ruiz-Villanueva, V., Wy_zga, B., Mikus, P., Hajdukiewicz, M., &
Stoffel, M. (2017). Large wood clogging during floods in a
gravel-bed river: The Długopole bridge in the Czarny Dunajec SU PP O R TI N G I N F O RMA TI O N
River Poland. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 42, Additional supporting information may be found online in
516–530. [Link] the Supporting Information section at the end of this article.
Schalko, I., Schmocker, L., Weitbrecht, V., & Boes, R. M. (2016).
Modeling the effect of organic fine material in a driftwood
accumulation on backwater rise. In Constantinescu, Garcia & How to cite this article: De Cicco PN, Paris E,
Hanes (Eds.), Proceedings River Flow 2016, St. Louis, MO, ISBN Solari L, Ruiz-Villanueva V. Bridge pier shape
978-1-315-64447-9: 2326-2332. influence on wood accumulation: Outcomes from
Schalko, I. (2017). Large wood accumulation probability at a single flume experiments and numerical modelling.
bridge pier. In Proceedings of 37th IAHR World Congress,
J Flood Risk Management. 2020;13:e12599. https://
August 13–18, 2017, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 7710, 1704–1713.
Schmocker, L., & W. H. Hager (2010). Drift accumulation at river
[Link]/10.1111/jfr3.12599
bridges. River flow 2010 - Dittrich, Koll, Aberle & Geisenhainer