Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

EXAMPLE 2

Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Purpose
This example demonstrates the use of HEC-RAS to analyze a river reach that
contains a single bridge crossing. For this example, the bridge is composed
of typical geometry and was located perpendicular to the direction of flow in
the main channel.

The stream for this example is a section of Beaver Creek located near
Kentwood, Louisiana. The bridge crossing is located along State Highway
1049, near the middle of the river reach. The field data for this example were
obtained from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Atlas
No. HA-601. This atlas is one part of a series developed to provide data to
support hydraulic modeling of flow at highway crossings in complex
hydrologic and geographic settings. The bridge, cross section geometry, and
high water flow data were used to evaluate the flood flow of 14000 cfs that
occurred on May 22, 1974, along with analysis of two additional flow values
of 10000 cfs and 5000 cfs. It should be noted that modelers typically do not
have access to high water marks and actual field flow measurements at
bridges during the peak events. However, for this example, the flood stage
water depth values were compared to the output from the model.

For this analysis, the water surface profiles were determined by first using the
pressure/weir flow method and then the energy method. Next, an evaluation
of the bridge contraction and expansion reach lengths was performed and
resulted in the necessity to reposition the location of certain cross sections.
After these adjustments were made, the model was then calibrated with the
observed water surface elevation data. Finally, a comparison of the
pressure/weir flow method to the energy method was made.

Pressure/Weir Flow Analysis

From the main program window, select File and then Open Project. Select
the project labeled "Single Bridge - Example 2.” This will open the project
and activate the following files:

Plan : "Pressure/Weir Method”

Geometry : "Beaver Cr. + Bridge - P/W”
Flow : "Beaver Cr. - 3 Flows”

2-1
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

To perform the pressure/weir flow analysis, the following data were entered:

• River System Schematic

• Cross Section Geometric Data
• Bridge Geometry Data
• Ineffective Flow Areas
• Bridge Modeling Approach
• Steady Flow Data

After the input of this data, the pressure/weir flow method was used to
determine the resulting water surface elevations for the selected flow values.

River System Schematic

From the main program window, select Edit and then Geometric Data. This
will activate the Geometric Data Editor and the screen will display the river
system schematic for the Beaver Creek reach, as shown in Figure 2.1. The
river name was entered as "Beaver Creek” and the reach name was
"Kentwood.”

Figure 2.1 River System Schematic for Beaver Creek

2-2
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

The reach was initially defined with 14 cross sections beginning at river mile
5.00 as the downstream river station and river mile 5.99 as the upstream river
station. The cross sections with an asterisk (*) were added by interpolation
for the purposes of this example. When the bridge was added, it was placed
at river mile 5.40 to place it at the appropriate location. On the river
schematic, some of the cross section labels may not appear due to overlapping
of the labels. If this occurs, the labels can be seen by zooming in on the
location of the closely spaced cross sections.

Cross Section Geometric Data

The cross section geometric data consists of the: X-Y coordinates, reach
lengths, Manning’s n values, location of levees, and contraction and
expansion coefficients. Each of these river station geometric data
components are described in the following sections.

X-Y Coordinates. To view the cross section geometry data, from the
Geometric Data Editor select the Cross Section icon. This will activate the
Cross Section Data Editor as shown in Figure 2.2 for river mile 5.99. As
shown in Figure 2.2, the X-Y coordinates were entered in the table on the left
side of the editor. The additional components of the cross section geometry
are described in the following sections.

Figure 2.2 Cross Section Data Editor For River Station 5.99

2-3
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Reach Lengths. The distances between the cross sections are entered as the
downstream reach lengths in the Cross Section Data Editor. To view the
summary of the reach lengths, the table as shown in Figure 2.3 can be
activated by selecting Tables and then Reach Lengths from the Geometric
Data Editor. The reach lengths were obtained by measuring the distances on
the USGS atlas. To determine the main channel distances, it was initially
assumed that during the peak event, the major active portion of the flow will
follow the course of the main channel. If, after the analysis, it is determined
that the major portion of the active flow is not following the main channel
course, then the main channel flow distances will need to be adjusted. In
other words, if the major portion of the active flow is "cutting across” the
meanders of the main channel, then these reach lengths will need to be
reevaluated.

Figure 2.3 Reach Lengths Summary Table

The reach lengths determine the placement of the cross sections. The
placement of the cross sections relative to the location of the bridge is crucial
for accurate prediction of expansion and contraction losses. The bridge
routine utilizes four cross sections to determine the energy losses through the
bridge. (Additionally the program will interpret two cross sections inside of
the bridge by superimposing the bridge data onto both the immediate
downstream and upstream cross sections from the bridge.) The following is a
brief summary for the initial estimation of the placement of the four cross
sections. The modeler should review the discussion in Chapter 6 of the
User’s Manual and Chapter 5 of the Hydraulic Reference Manual for
further detail.

2-4
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

First Cross Section. Ideally, the first cross section should be located
sufficiently downstream from the bridge so that the flow is not affected by the
structure (ie, the flow has fully expanded). This distance should generally be
determined by field investigation during high flows and will vary depending
on the degree of constriction, the shape of the constriction, the magnitude of
the flow, and the velocity of the flow. In order to provide better guidance to
determine the location of the fully expanded cross section, a study was
performed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center [HEC-1995]. This study
focused on determining the expansion reach length, the contraction reach
length, and the expansion and contraction energy loss coefficients.

For this example, cross section number 5.29 was initially considered as the
cross section of fully expanded flow. This cross section was determined by
field investigations as the approximate location of fully expanded flow during
the high flow event. After the pressure/weir flow analysis was performed, the
location of this cross section was evaluated using the procedures as outlined
in the recent HEC study [HEC-1995]. The procedures required flow
parameters at the initially chosen location to evaluate the location of the cross
section. These procedures will be described after the pressure/weir flow
analysis is performed near the end of this example.

Second Cross Section. The second cross section used by the program to
determine the energy losses through the bridge is located a short distance
downstream of the structure. This section should be very close to the bridge,
and reflect the effective flow area on the downstream side of the bridge. For
this example, a roadway embankment sloped gradually from the roadway
decking on both sides of the roadway. Cross section 5.39 was located at the
toe of the roadway embankment and was used to represent the effective flow
area on the downstream side of the bridge opening. The program will
superimpose the bridge geometry onto this cross section to develop a cross
section inside the bridge at the downstream end.

Third Cross Section. The third cross section is located a short distance
upstream from the bridge and should reflect the length required for the abrupt
acceleration and contraction of the flow that occurs in the immediate area of
the opening. As for the previous cross section, this cross section should also
exhibit the effective flow areas on the upstream side of the bridge. For this
example, cross section 5.41 was located at the toe of the roadway
embankment on the upstream side of the bridge. Similar to the previous cross
section, the program will superimpose the bridge geometry onto this cross
section to develop a cross section inside the bridge at the upstream end.

Fourth Cross Section. The fourth cross section is located upstream from the
bridge where the flow lines are parallel and the cross section exhibits fully
effective flow. For this example, cross section 5.44 was initially used as this
section where the flow lines were parallel. After the pressure/weir flow
analysis, the location of this cross section was evaluated using the procedures
as outlined in the HEC study [HEC-1995]. This evaluation will be presented
in the discussion near the end of this example.

2-5
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Manning’s n Values. The Manning’s n values were obtained from the field
data displayed on the USGS atlas. For some of the cross sections, the
Manning’s n values changed along the width of the overbank areas and the
horizontal variation in n values option was selected, such as for cross section
5.99. This option was performed from the Cross Section Data Editor by
selecting Options and Horizontal Variation in n Values. This caused a new
column to appear under the Cross Section X-Y Coordinates heading (as
shown in Figure 2.2). For cross section 5.99, the n values changed at the X-
coordinates of 518 (in the left overbank), 866 (the main channel left bank
station), and 948 (the main channel right bank station). This can be seen by
scrolling down in the coordinates window of the cross section editor. The
overbank areas have densely wooded areas, which created the necessity for
the variation in n values. The final data are shown in the cross section plot in
Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 Cross Section 5.99: Horizontal n Variation and Levee Options

Levees. As can be seen in the plot of cross section 5.99 in Figure 2.4, there
exists a large area to the left of the main channel that is lower in elevation
than the invert of the main channel. During the analysis, the program will
consider the water to be able to go anywhere in the cross section. The
modeler must determine whether or not the lower area to the left of the main
channel can initially convey flow. If the area cannot convey flow until the
main channel fills up and then overtops, then the levee option should be used.
For this example, a left levee was established at the left main channel bank
2-6
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

station for river station 5.99. This prevents water from being placed to the
left of the levee until the elevation of the levee is reached. The elevation
selected for this levee was the elevation of the left side of the main channel.

To insert the levee, Options and then Levees were selected from the Cross
Section Data Editor. This resulted in the display shown in Figure 2.5. The
values for this example were station 866 and elevation 214.8 for a left levee.
As can be seen in Figure 2.4, the levee is displayed as a small square located
at the LOB station. Additionally, a note appears identifying the selection of a
levee for the specific cross section at the bottom of the Cross Section Data
Editor. This note can be seen in the box at the bottom of Figure 2.2. Levee
options were selected for other cross sections in addition to cross section
5.99. In each case, the modeler needs to view each cross-section and
determine whether the levee option needs to be utilized.

Figure 2.5 Levee Option for Cross Section 5.99

Contraction/Expansion Coefficients. The contraction and expansion

coefficients are used by the program to determine the transition energy losses
between two adjacent cross sections. From the data provided by the recent
HEC study [HEC-1995], gradual transition contraction and expansion
coefficients are 0.1 and 0.3, and typical bridge contraction and expansion
coefficients are 0.3 and 0.5, respectively. For situations near bridges where
abrupt changes are occurring, the coefficients may take larger values of 0.5
and 0.8 for contractions and expansions, respectively. A listing of the
selected values for this river reach can be viewed by selecting Tables and
then Coefficients from the Geometric Data Editor. This table is shown in
Figure 2.6 and displays the values selected for the river cross sections.
Typical gradual transition values were selected for stations away from the
bridge. However, near the bridge section, the coefficients were increased to
0.3 and 0.5 to represent greater energy losses. For additional discussion
concerning contraction and expansion coefficients at bridges, refer to
Chapter 5 of the Hydraulic Reference Manual.

2-7
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.6 Coefficients For Beaver Creek

This completed the input for the cross section geometric data. Next, the
bridge geometry data was entered as outlined in the proceeding section.

Bridge Geometry Data

To enter the bridge geometry data, the Bridge/Culvert icon was selected
from the Geometric Data Editor. This activated the Bridge/Culvert Data
Editor. The river and reach were selected as "Beaver Creek” and
"Kentwood” (the only reach for this example). Then, Options, and Add a
Bridge or Culvert were selected and river station 5.4 was entered as the
location for the bridge. The Bridge/Culvert Data Editor then displayed the
upstream (river station 5.41) and downstream (river station 5.39) cross
sections. A description was then entered as "Bridge #1.” The following
section provides a brief summary of the input for the bridge geometry
including the bridge deck/roadway and then the bridge piers.

Bridge Deck and Roadway Geometry. From the Bridge/Culvert Data

Editor, the Deck/Roadway icon was selected and this activated the
Deck/Roadway Data Editor, as shown in Figure 2.7.

2-8
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.7 Bridge/Deck and Roadway Data Editor

The first input at the top of the editor is the distance from the upstream side of
the bridge deck to the cross section immediately upstream from the bridge
(cross section 5.41). This distance was determined to be 30 feet from the
USGS atlas. In the next field, the bridge deck width of 40 feet was entered.
Finally, a weir flow coefficient of 2.6 was selected for the analysis.
(Additional discussion of the weir flow coefficient will be presented in the
calibration section.)

The central section of the Deck/Roadway Editor is comprised of columns

for input of the station, high cord elevation, and low cord elevation for both
the upstream and downstream sides of the bridge deck. The data are entered
from left to right in cross section stationing and the area between the high and
low cord is the bridge structure. The stationing of the upstream side of the
deck was based on the stationing of the cross section located immediately
upstream. Likewise, the stationing of the downstream side of the deck was
based on the stationing of the cross section placed immediately downstream.

If both the upstream and downstream data are identical, the user needs only to
input the upstream data and then select Copy Up to Down to enter the
downstream data.

As a final note, the low cord elevations that are concurrent with the ground
elevation were entered as a value lower than the ground elevation. The

2-9
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

program will automatically clip off and remove the deck/roadway area below
the ground. For example, at station 0, a low cord elevation of 200 feet was
entered. However, the actual ground elevation at this point is approximately
216 feet. Therefore, the program will automatically remove the area of the
roadway below the ground. Additionally, the last station was entered as a
value of 2000 feet. This stationing ensured that the roadway and decking
extended into the limits of the cross section geometry. As described
previously, the program will clip off the area beyond the limits of the cross
section geometry.

The US and DS Embankment SS (upstream and downstream embankment

side slope) values were entered as 2 (horizontal to 1 vertical). These values
are used for graphical representation on the profile plot and for the WSPRO
low flow method. The user is referred to Example 13 - Bogue Chitto Single
Bridge (WSPRO) for a discussion on the use of this parameter with the
WSPRO method. The WSPRO method is not employed for this example.

At the bottom of the Deck/Roadway Data Editor, there are three additional
fields for data entry. The first is the Max Allowable Submergence. This
input is a ratio of downstream water depth to upstream energy, as measured
above the minimum weir elevation. When the ratio is exceeded, the program
will no longer consider the bridge deck to act as a weir and will switch the
computation mode to the energy (standard step) method. For this example,
the default value of 0.95 (95 %) was selected, however this value may be
changed by the user.

The second field at the bottom of the editor is the Min Weir Flow Elevation.
This is the elevation that determines when weir flow will start to occur over
the bridge. If this field is left blank (as for this example), the program will
default to use the lowest high cord value on the upstream side of the bridge.
Finally, the last field at the bottom of the editor is the selection of the Weir
Crest Shape. This selection will determine the reduction of the weir flow
coefficient due to submergence. For this example, a broad crested weir shape
was selected. Upon entering all of the above data, the OK button was
selected to exit the Deck/Roadway Data Editor.

Bridge Pier Geometry. From the Bridge/Culvert Data Editor, select the
Pier icon. This will result in the display shown in Figure 2.8. The modeler
should not include the piers as part of the ground or bridge deck/roadway
because pier-loss equations use the separate bridge pier data during the
computations.

2-10
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.8 Bridge Pier Data Editor

The program will establish the first pier as pier number 1. As shown in
Figure 2.8, the upstream and downstream stations were entered for the
centerline of the first pier. The upstream and downstream stations were based
on the geometry of the cross sections located immediately upstream (cross
section 5.41) and immediately downstream (cross section 5.39) of the bridge.
The user needs to be cautious placing the pier centerline stations because the
X-coordinates for the upstream and downstream cross section stationing may
be different. This is to ensure that the piers "line up" to form the correct
geometry. For this example, the pier centerline stations are 470, 490, 510,
530, 550, 570, 590, 610, and 630 for the nine piers. Each pier was set to start
at an elevation of 200 feet (this elevation is below the ground level and the
excess will be removed by the program) and end at an elevation of 216 feet
(this elevation is inside the bridge decking and the excess was removed by the
program). Additionally, each pier had a continuous width of 1.25 feet. After
entering the data, the OK button was selected and the schematic of the bridge
with the piers was displayed on the Bridge/Culvert Data Editor as shown on
Figure 2.9. (Note: The figure in the text displays the ineffective flow areas
that will be added in the next section.)

The cross sections shown in Figure 2.9 are developed by superimposing the
bridge data on the cross sections immediately upstream (5.41) and
immediately downstream (5.39) of the bridge. The top cross section in Figure
2.9 reflects the geometry immediately inside the bridge on the upstream side
and the bottom cross section reflects the geometry immediately inside the
bridge on the downstream side.

2-11
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.9 Bridge/Culvert Data Editor

While viewing the bridge, the modeler can select to view just the upstream,
just the downstream, or both of the cross section views. This is performed by
selecting View and then the required option. Additionally, from the View
menu, the user should select Highlight Weir, Opening Lid and Ground as
well as Highlight Piers. These options enable the modeler to view what the
program will consider as the weir length, bridge opening, and pier locations.
Any errors in the data may appear as inconsistent images with these options.
Also, the zoom-in option will allow the user to examine data details.

As a final note for the bridge geometry, a bitmap image of the bridge was
added to the geometry file (denoted by a red square on the river system
schematic, Figure 2.1). The user can view this image by selecting the View
Picture icon on the Geometric Data Editor.

2-12
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Ineffective Flow Areas

As a final step for the bridge geometry, any ineffective flow areas that existed
due to the bridge (or any other obstruction) were entered. Ineffective flow is
used to define an area of the cross section in which the water will accumulate
but is not being actively conveyed. At a bridge, ineffective flow areas
normally occur just upstream and downstream of the road embankment, away
from the bridge opening.

For this example, ineffective flow areas were included on both the upstream
cross section (5.41) and the downstream cross section (5.39). To determine
an initial estimate for the stationing of the ineffective flow areas, a 1:1 ratio of
the distance from the bridge to the cross section was used. For this example,
section 5.41 is located 30 feet upstream of the bridge. Therefore, the left and
right ineffective flow areas were set to start at 30 feet to the left and right of
the bridge opening. Similarly, cross section 5.39 is located 30 feet
downstream from the bridge and the ineffective flow areas at this cross
section were set at 30 feet to the left and right of the bridge opening.

To determine the initial elevation of the ineffective flow areas for the
upstream cross section, a value slightly lower than the lowest high cord
elevation was used. This ineffective flow elevation was chosen so that when
the water surface becomes greater than this ineffective elevation, the flow
would most likely be weir flow and would be considered as effective flow.
At the downstream cross section, the elevation of the ineffective flow area
was set to be slightly lower than the low cord elevation. This elevation was
chosen so that when weir flow occurs over the bridge, the water level
downstream may be lower than the high cord, but yet it will contribute to the
active flow area. (Additional discussion of the selection of these elevations is
described in the calibration section of this example.)

To enter the ineffective flow areas, from the Geometric Data Editor select
the Cross Section icon. Toggle to cross section 5.41 and select Options and
then Ineffective Flow Areas. This will result in the display shown in Figure
2.10. The default option (normal) is to enter the areas as a left station and
elevation and/or a right station and elevation. For this example, both the left
and right ineffective flow areas were used.

Figure 2.10 Normal Ineffective Flow Areas For Cross Section 5.41
2-13
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

The left and right ineffective flow stations were entered as 420 and 677 feet,
respectively. These values are 30 feet to the left and right of the bridge
opening, as discussed previously. The elevation was then entered as 216.7
feet, a value slightly lower than the high cord elevation. These entries imply
that all the water to the left of the left station and to the right of the right
station will be considered as ineffective flow until the water level exceeds the
elevation of 216.7 feet.

Similarly, ineffective flow areas were set at river station 5.39 with a left
station at 420 and a right station at 677, both at an elevation of 215.0 feet.
The OK button was selected and the ineffective flow areas appeared as green
triangles, as shown previously on Figure 2.9. Additionally, the ineffective
flow areas will appear on the plots of the cross sections. Finally, a note will
appear in the box at the bottom of the Cross Section Data Editor that states
an ineffective flow exists for each cross section for which this option was
selected.

Bridge Modeling Approach

The bridge routines allow the modeler to analyze the bridge flows by using
different methods with the same geometry. The different methods are: low
flow, high flow, and combination flow. Low flow occurs when the water
only flows through the bridge opening and is considered as open channel flow
(i.e., the water surface does not exceed the highest point of the low cord on
the upstream side of the bridge). High flow occurs when the water surface
encounters the highest point of the low cord on the upstream side of the
bridge. Finally, combination flow occurs when both low flow or pressure
flow occur simultaneously with flow over the bridge. The modeler needs to
select appropriate methods for both the low flow and for the high flow
methods. For the combination flow, the program will use the methods
selected for both of the flows.

From the Geometric Data Editor, select the Bridge/Culvert icon and then
the Bridge Modeling Approach button. This will activate the Bridge
Modeling Approach Editor as shown in Figure 2.11. For this example,
there is only 1 bridge opening located at this river station and therefore the
bridge number was 1. The following sections describe the additional
parameters of the bridge modeling editor. The modeler is referred to Chapter
6 of the User’s Manual and Chapter 5 of the Hydraulic Reference Manual
for additional discussion on the bridge modeling approach editor.

Low Flow Methods. Low flow exists when the flow through the bridge is
open channel flow. As can be seen in Figure 2.11, the program has the
capability of analyzing low flow with four methods:

2-14
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

- Energy Equation (Standard Step)

- Momentum Balance
- Yarnell Equation (Class A only)
- WSPRO Method (Class A only)

Figure 2.11 Bridge Modeling Approach Editor

The Energy Equation (Standard Step) method considers the bridge as just
being part of the natural channel and requires Manning’s n values for the
friction losses through the bridge and coefficients of contraction and
expansion. The Momentum Balance method performs a momentum balance
through the bridge area and requires the selection of a drag coefficient, Cd.
This coefficient is used to estimate the force due to the water moving around
the piers, the separation of flow, and the resulting downstream wake. The
Yarnell Equation is an empirical equation based on lab experiments. Finally,
the WSPRO method is an energy based method developed by the USGS for
the Federal Highway Administration.

At this time, the modeler needs to select which methods the program should
compute and which method the program should use. The modeler can select
to have the program compute particular methods or all of the methods. Then,
the modeler needs to select which method the program will use as a final
solution. Alternatively, the modeler can select the computation of several or
all of the methods, and then have the program use the method with the
greatest energy loss for the final solution. This will allow the modeler to
view the results of all the methods and compare the results of the different
techniques.

2-15
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

For this example, the Energy, Momentum, and Yarnell methods were selected
to be computed. For the momentum method, a drag coefficient Cd = 2.00
was entered for the square nose piers and for the Yarnell method, a value of K
= 1.25 was entered. Finally, the method that resulted in the greatest energy
loss was selected to be used for the solution. (The user is referred to Example
13 for an application of the WSPRO method.)

High Flow Methods. High flows occur when the water surface elevation
upstream of the bridge is greater than the highest point on the low cord of the
upstream side of the bridge. Referring to Figure 2.11, the two alternatives for
the program to compute the water surface elevations during the high flows
are: Energy Only (Standard Step) or Pressure and/or Weir Flow. The Energy
Only (Standard Step) method regards the flow as open channel flow and
considers the bridge as an obstruction to the flow. Typically, most bridges
during high flows may act primarily as just an obstruction to the flow and the
energy method may be most applicable.

As a second method for the analysis of high flows, the program can consider
the flow to be causing Pressure Flow and/or Weir Flow. For pressure flow,
there are two possible scenarios. The first is when only the upstream side of
the bridge deck is in contact with the water. For this scenario, the submerged
inlet coefficient, Cd, was set to be 0.34. (This value was arrived at during the
calibration, which is described later in this example.) The second scenario for
pressure flow is when the bridge constriction is flowing completely full. For
this situation, the submerged inlet and outlet coefficient was set to 0.80.

The program will begin to calculate either type of pressure flow when the
computed low flow energy grade line is greater than the highest point of the
upstream low cord. Alternatively, the user can set the elevation at which
pressure flow will begin to be checked, instead of the highest low cord value.
This value can be entered as the last input to the Bridge Modeling Approach
Editor (Figure 2.11). For this example, this field was left blank which
implies that the program used the highest value of the low cord (the default).
As an additional option, the user can select to have the program begin to
calculate the pressure flow by using the value of the water surface instead of
the value of the energy grade line. This is accomplished from within the
Bridge/Culvert Data Editor by selecting Options and then Pressure flow
criteria. This will result in the display shown in Figure 2.12. For this
example, the option to use the upstream energy grade line was chosen.

Finally, for the high flow analysis, Weir Flow occurs when the upstream
energy grade line elevation (as a default setting) exceeds the lowest point of
the upstream high cord. The weir flow data was entered previously in the
Deck/Roadway Data Editor. At this point, all of the bridge data have been
entered. The user should exit the geometry data editors and save the
geometry data. For this example, the geometry data was saved as the file
"Beaver Cr. + Bridge - P/W."

2-16
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.12 Pressure Flow Check Criteria

Steady Flow Data

To enter the steady flow data, from the main program window Edit and then
Steady Flow Data were selected. This activated the Steady Flow Data
Editor as shown in Figure 2.13. For this analysis on the reach of Kentwood,
three profiles were selected to be computed. The flow data were entered for
river station 5.99 (the upstream station) and the flow values were 5000,
10000, and 14000 cfs. These flows will be considered continuous throughout
the reach so no flow change locations were used. Additionally, the three
profile names were changed from the default values of "PF#1," etc., to "25
yr," "100 yr," and May ‘74 flood," respectively. These names will be used to
represent the flow profiles when viewing the output.

Figure 2.13 Steady Flow Data Editor

To enter the boundary conditions, the Boundary Conditions button was

selected and this resulted in the display shown in Figure 2.14. For this
example, a subcritical analysis was performed. Therefore, a downstream

2-17
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

boundary condition was required for each flow value. The mouse arrow was
placed over the downstream field and then the box was selected (highlighted).
Then, 1 of the 4 boundary conditions was selected and this caused the type of
boundary condition that was chosen to appear in the downstream end of the
reach.

Figure 2.14 Steady Flow Boundary Conditions

For this example, Known W. S. was selected. This caused the input editor as
shown in Figure 2.15 to appear. For each of the flows, the known
downstream water surface elevations of 209.5, 210.5, and 211.8 feet were
entered for the flows 1, 2, and 3, respectively. These values were obtained
from observed data on the USGS Atlas.

For the purposes of the analysis, if the downstream boundary conditions are
not known, then the modeler should use an estimated boundary condition.
However, this may introduce errors in the region of this estimated value.
Therefore, the modeler needs to have an adequate number of cross sections
downstream from the main area of interest so that the boundary conditions do
not effect the area of interest. Multiple runs should be performed to observe
the effect of changing the boundary conditions on the output of the main area
of interest. For a detailed explanation of the types of boundary conditions,
refer to Chapter 7 of the User’s Manual and Chapter 3 of the Hydraulic
Reference Manual. After entering the boundary condition data, the OK
button was selected to exit the editor. This completed the necessary input for
the flow data and the steady flow data was then saved as "Beaver Cr. - 3
Flows."

2-18
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.15 Known Water Surface Boundary Conditions

Pressure/Weir Flow Simulation

To perform the steady flow analysis, from the main program window Run
and then Steady Flow Analysis were selected. This activated the Steady
Flow Analysis Window as shown in Figure 2.16. First, it was ensured that
the geometry file and steady flow file that were previously developed
appeared in the selection boxes on the right side of the window. Then, for
this simulation, a subcritical flow analysis was selected. Additionally, from
the Steady Flow Analysis window, Options and then Critical Depth
Output Option were selected. An "x" was placed beside the option for
Critical Always Calculated. This may require additional computation time
during program execution, but then the user can view the critical depth
elevation at all river stations during the review of the output.

Figure 2.16 Steady Flow Analysis

Select Options and then ensure that there is a check mark "T" in front of
Check data before execution. This will cause the program to check all of
the input data to ensure that all pertinent information was entered. Next, the
2-19
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

options were saved as a plan entitled "Press/Weir Method," with a Short ID

entered as "Press/Weir." Finally, COMPUTE was selected at the bottom of
the window.

Review of Pressure/Weir Flow Output

After the program has completed the analysis, the last line should read
"PROGRAM TERMINATED NORMALLY." This window is closed by
double clicking the bar in the upper left corner of the display. From the main
program window, View and then Water Surface Profiles were selected.
This displayed the profile plot as shown in Figure 2.17, showing the water
surface elevations and critical depth lines for all three profiles. (Note: the
variables that are displayed can be changed by selecting Options and then
Variables.)

From Figure 2.17, it can be seen that all three of the flow profiles are
occurring in the subcritical flow regime. This ensures that for the low flow
analysis, Class A low flow (subcritical flow) was occurring through the
bridge. Low flow occurred for the first (5000 cfs) and for the second (10000
cfs) flow profiles. For the high flow, the method of analysis was chosen to be
pressure/weir flow. Pressure and weir flow occurred during the third flow
profile (14000 cfs). One way to determine the type of flow that occurred is
by viewing the bridge only output table. This table is presented in Figure
2.18 and was activated from the main program window by selecting View,
Profile Table, Std. Tables, and then Bridge Only.

Single Bridge - Example 2 Press/Weir Method

Geom: Beaver Cr. + Bridge - P/W Flow: Beaver Cr. - 3 Flows
220 Kentwood
Legend

WS May '74 flood

215 WS 100 yr
Crit May '74 flood

WS 25 yr
Elevation (ft)

210
Crit 100 yr
Crit 25 yr

205 Ground

200

195
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Main Channel Distance (ft)

Figure 2.17 Profile Plot for Pressure/Weir Analysis

For this example there is only one bridge located at river station 5.40, as
listed in the table. Pressure flow calculations were set to begin when the
energy grade line elevation of the upstream section (5.41) was greater than
the highest elevation of the upstream low cord (215.7 ft). The first column in
2-20
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.18 shows the energy grade line elevation of the upstream section
(EG US) and the second column shows the elevation when pressure flow was
set to begin. A comparison of these two columns shows that pressure flow
occurred for the third profile. Additionally, it can be seen that weir flow
occurred for the third profile, since there is a weir flow value for the third
profile. The following sections detail the output for the first two profiles and
then for the third flow profile.

Figure 2.18 Bridge Only Summary Table for Pressure/Weir Flow

First and Second Flow Profiles. The first (5000 cfs) and second (10000 cfs)
flow profiles were both computed using the low flow methods of: Energy,
Momentum, and Yarnell. From the main program window, select View,
Profile Table, Standard Tables, and then Bridge Comparison. This will
provide a comparison table for the different energy loss methods and is
shown in Figure 2.19.

In Figure 2.19, the three rows display the results for each of the three flow
profiles, in ascending order. The river station is set at 5.4 (the only bridge
location for this reach). The fourth column shows the water surface elevation
immediately upstream of the bridge. The sixth, seventh and eighth columns
show the results of the low flow methods that were chosen to be computed:
Energy, Momentum, and Yarnell Methods, respectively. The program
compared the results and used the value with the greatest energy loss. For the
first and second profiles, the energy method calculated the greatest energy
losses and the program used the results of 213.31 and 215.67 feet,
respectively.

2-21
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.19 Bridge Comparison Table for Pressure/Weir Flow Analysis

Third Flow Profile. The third flow profile was computed for a flow of
14000 cfs. As can be seen in Figure 2.18, approximately 3050 cfs of the total
flow was weir flow. The remaining flow, approximately 10950 cfs, was
pressure flow through the bridge opening. As can be seen in Figure 2.19, the
energy grade line necessary for pressure-only flow was 221.66 feet. Since
this value is greater than the upstream high cord, weir flow also developed.
Therefore, the program used the pressure/weir energy value as the solution to
the high flow method, namely 217.68 feet.

Energy Method Analysis

As a second approach to analyze the three flows, the energy method will be
used instead of the pressure/weir flow method for the high flows. From the
Steady Flow Analysis Window, select File, Open Plan, and then select
"Energy Method." This will activate the plan that employed the energy
method for the analysis. The following discussion outlines the procedure
used to develop this plan.

Energy Method Data and Simulation

To enter the data for the energy method, from the main program window
Edit, Geometric Data, the Bridge/Culvert icon, and then the Bridge
Modeling Approach icon were selected. This activated the Bridge
Modeling Approach Editor as was shown in Figure 2.11. The Energy Only
(Standard Step) option was then selected as the high flow method (instead of
the Pressure/Weir method). Then, the editor was closed and the geometry
was saved as "Beaver Cr. + Bridge - Energy." Next, Run and then Steady
Flow Analysis were selected from the main program window. This activated
the Steady Flow Analysis Window. The geometry file was selected as
"Beaver Cr. + Bridge - Energy" and the steady flow file was "Beaver Cr. - 3
Flows" (the same steady flow file as used previously). Then, a Short ID was
entered as "Energy" and the options were saved as the plan "Energy Method."
Finally, COMPUTE was selected to perform the steady flow analysis.

2-22
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Review of Energy Method Output

From the main program window, select View, Profile Table, Standard
Tables, and then Bridge Comparison. This bridge comparison table is
shown in Figure 2.20. For the first and second profiles, the table shows the
same results as for the pressure flow analysis. This is as would be expected
since the first and second profiles were calculated using the same low flow
procedures. For the third profile, the energy method was used to calculate the
energy losses through the bridge for this high flow and resulted in an energy
gradeline elevation of 217.38 feet.

Figure 2.20 Bridge Comparison Table for Energy Method Analysis

Evaluation of Cross Section Locations

As stated previously, the locations of the cross sections and the values
selected for the expansion and contraction coefficients in the vicinity of the
bridge are crucial for accurate prediction of the energy losses through the
bridge structure. For this example, the locations of the cross sections and the
energy loss coefficients were evaluated for the high flow event. The
following analysis is based on data that were developed for low flow events
occurring through bridges and the modeler should use caution when applying
the procedure for other than low flow situations. Each of the reach length and
coefficient evaluation procedures are discussed in the following sections.

Expansion Reach Length

The expansion reach length, Le, is defined as the distance from the cross
section placed immediately downstream of the bridge to the cross section
where the flow is assumed to have fully expanded. For this example, this
distance is from cross section 5.39 to cross-section 5.29. Initially, the
expansion reach length is estimated according to observed field data or other
appropriate method. For this example, observed data were available so the
2-23
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

initial estimate of the expansion reach length was obtained from the field
observations. After the analysis, the modeler can evaluate the initial estimate
of the expansion reach length. For the analysis, it is recommended to use the
regression results from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) study
[HEC-1995]. The results of the study suggest the use of Equation 2-1 to
evaluate the expansion reach length. This equation is valid when the
modeling situation is similar to the data used in the regression analysis. (In
the document, alternative expressions are presented for other situations.) The
equation is:
F 
( )
Le = ER L obs = − 298 + 257  5.39  + 0.918 L obs + 0.00479 Q (2-1)
 F5.29 

where: Le = expansion reach length, ft

ER = expansion ratio
F5.39 = main channel Froude number at the cross section
immediately downstream of the bridge (cross section
5.39 for this example)
F5.29 = main channel Froude number at the cross section of
fully expanded flow (initially cross section 5.29 for
this example)
Lobs = average length of obstruction caused by the two
bridge approaches, ft
Q = total discharge, ft3/s

(Note: The subscripts used in Equation 2-1 and all subsequent equations
reflect the river station numbering for this example.)

From the field data, the average length of the obstruction is approximately
740 feet and the total discharge, Q, is 14000 cfs for the high flow event.
From the initial analysis, the values of the Froude number at cross-section
5.39 was 0.37 and at cross section 5.29 was 0.30. (Both of these values were
the same for pressure/weir and energy methods and are displayed on
Standard Table 1.) Substituting the values into Equation 2-1 yielded that the
expansion reach length, Le, was approximately 778 feet. This equation has a
standard error of 96 feet, which yields an expansion reach length range from
682 to 874 feet to define the 68% confidence band. The distance used for the
expansion reach length (the distance from cross section 5.39 to cross-section
5.29) was set to be 500 feet in the main channel, which is less than the
recommended range from the equation. The modeler now has the option to
adjust this length so that it is within the calculated range. Then, after a new
analysis, the new Froude numbers should be used to calculate a new
expansion reach length. If the geometry is not changing rapidly in this
region, then only 1 or 2 iterations should be necessary to obtain a constant
expansion reach length value.

For this example, the location of the fully expanded cross section was
changed to reflect the new expansion reach length (778 feet) by interpolating
a new cross section to be located 778 feet downstream from cross section
5.39. To accomplish this, the following steps were taken. First, the

2-24
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

pressure/weir flow plan ("Pressure/Weir Method") was activated. Then, in

the Geometric Data Editor, a cross section was interpolated between cross
sections 5.29 and 5.21*. This interpolated cross section (5.24*) was set to be
at a distance of 278 feet downstream from cross section 5.29. Since cross
section 5.29 was already located 500 feet downstream from cross section
5.39, the location of cross section 5.24* was then 500 + 278 = 778 feet
downstream from cross section 5.39. The cross sections 5.29, 5.27*, and
5.21* were then deleted.

Finally, this new geometric data was saved as a file called "Bvr.Cr.+Bridge -
P/W: New Le, Lc." On the Steady Flow Analysis Window, a Short ID was
entered as "P/w+NewLeLc" and then the new geometry file and the original
steady flow data file were saved as a plan entitled "Press/Weir Method: New
Le, Lc." The Geometric Data Editor was then reactivated and the Bridge
Modeling Approach Data Editor was selected. The high flow method was
chosen to be the energy method and then the geometry data was saved as
"Bvr.Cr.+Bridge - Energy: New Le, Lc." The Steady Flow Analysis
Window was activated, a Short ID was entered as "En.+New LeLc," and the
new energy geometry file and the steady flow data file were then saved as a
new plan entitled "Energy Method : New Le, Lc." This procedure created
two new plans, with each plan containing the necessary interpolated geometry
and appropriate high flow calculation methods.

Each of the two new plans were then executed and the resulting flow
parameter values were reentered into Equation 2-1. (Note: The Froude
number for river station 5.29 was replaced by the Froude number at river
station 5.24* in Equation 2-1.) The final mean value of the expansion reach
length was then determined to be 750 feet, with a range of ± 96 feet to define
the 68% confidence band. The adjusted reach length value of 778 feet is
within the confidence band and no additional iterations were computed.
Finally, the expansion ratio (ER) as described in Equation 2-1 should not
exceed 4:1 and should not be less than 0.5:1. For this example, the final
expansion ratio was ER = (778) / (740) = 1.05, which is within the acceptable
range. In the above procedure, the modeler is directed to Chapter 4 of the
Hydraulic Reference Manual for additional information on cross section
interpolation and to Chapter 5 of the User’s Manual for further discussion on
working with projects.

Upon reviewing the above procedures, the modeler can open either of these
new plans and the corresponding geometry and flow data files will be
activated. For this example, the results of the water surface profiles for the
new plans are approximately equal to the results obtained from the original
geometry for both of the pressure/weir flow and energy methods,
respectively. However, the modeler should apply the above procedures to
evaluate the location of the expansion reach length for each specific
application.

Finally, during the procedures as outlined above, if the location of the

expansion reach length produces a distance sufficiently far downstream from
the bridge, then the modeler may be required to include additional cross

2-25
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

sections within this reach length to accurately predict the energy losses. This
may be accomplished by inserting cross sections and providing the
appropriate ineffective flow areas at each cross section according to their
location with respect to the bridge opening.

Contraction Reach Length

The contraction reach length, Lc, is defined as the distance from the cross
section located immediately upstream of the bridge (5.41) to the cross section
that is located where the flow lines are parallel and the cross section exhibits
fully effective flow (5.44). To evaluate this reach length, the regression
results (shown as Equation 2-2 below) from the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) study [HEC-1995] was used. The equation is:

2 0.5
F  Q  n 
( )
Lc = CR L obs = 263 + 38.8  5.39  + 257  ob  − 58.7  ob  + 0.161 L obs (2-2)
 F5.29   Q   nc 

where: Lc = contraction reach length, ft

CR = contraction ratio
F5.39 = main channel Froude number at the cross section
immediately downstream of the bridge (cross section
5.39 for this example)
F5.29 = main channel Froude number at the cross section of
fully expanded flow (initially cross section 5.29 for
this example)
Qob = discharge conveyed in the two overbanks at cross
section 5.44, cfs
Q = total discharge, ft3/s
nob = Manning n value for the overbanks at section 5.44
nc = Manning n value for the main channel at section 5.44

From the field data and the results of the initial analysis, the Froude numbers
at sections 5.39 and 5.29 were 0.37 and 0.30, respectively, the total over bank
flow at cross section 5.44 was approximately 9780 cfs (an average of 9880
for the pressure/weir flow and 9685 for the energy method), the total flow
was 14000 cfs, the weighted n value for both of the overbanks was 0.069, the
n value for the main channel was 0.04, and the average length of the
obstruction was 740 feet. Substitution of these values into Equation 2-2
yielded the contracted reach length of 478 feet. This equation has a standard
error of 31 feet which results in a contraction reach length range from 447 to
509 feet to define the 68% confidence band. For this example, the distance
from cross section 5.44 to cross section 5.41 was set at 170 feet along the
main channel. Since this value was outside of the confidence range, the reach
length was adjusted to reflect the new contraction reach length.

The adjustment of the geometry for the new contraction reach length was
performed similarly to the adjustment procedure for the expansion reach
length. A cross section (5.49*) was interpolated between river stations
2-26
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

5.525* and 5.44 that was set to be 308 feet upstream of river station 5.44.
Then, the reach length from river station 5.49* to river station 5.41 was 308 +
170 = 478 feet, the required contraction reach length. This new river station
can be viewed by opening the plan "Press/Weir Method: New Le, Lc" for the
pressure/weir method or the plan "Energy Method: New Le, Lc" for the
energy method analysis.

Finally, after the subsequent analysis with the new contraction reach length,
the new flow parameters were entered into Equation 2-2 and yielded a
contraction reach length of 499 feet, with a range from 468 to 530 feet to
define the 68% confidence band. The adjusted contraction reach length of
478 feet is within this range and no additional iterations were necessary.
(Note: The Froude number for river station 5.29 was replaced by the Froude
number at river station 5.24* in equation 2-2.)

As a final criteria, the contraction ratio (CR) should not exceed 2.5:1 nor
should it be less than 0.3:1. For this example, the final contraction ratio was
CR = (499) / (740) = 0.67, which is within the acceptable range. Table 2-1
shows a relationship of the values computed for the expansion reach lengths
and the contraction reach lengths during the iterations as described above.
Additionally, the table shows the values as determined by the USGS and the
traditional USACE methods.

Table 2.1 Expansion and Contraction Reach Length Determinations

Expansion or Contraction Reach Length Determination Method

USGS Traditional Initial Placement HEC-1995 HEC-1995
USACE from field data 1st iteration 2nd iteration
Le 200 2964 500 770 747
Lc 200 740 170 478 499

As can be seen from the data in Table 2.1, the USGS method will typically
provide a minimum criteria and the traditional USACE method will provide a
maximum length. The recent study [HEC-1995] was performed to provide
better guidance for the evaluation of the reach lengths and these values fall
within the range as determined by the previous two methods.

Expansion Coefficient
The expansion coefficient is used to determine the amount of energy loss due
to the flow expanding between two particular cross sections. The research
document [HEC-1995] suggests the following relationship for the value of the
expansion coefficient:

D  F 
C e = − 0.09 + 0.570  ob  + 0.075  5.39  (2-3)
 Dc   F5.29 

2-27
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

where: Ce = expansion coefficient

Dob = hydraulic depth (flow area / top width) for the
overbank at cross section 5.29
Dc = hydraulic depth in the main channel at cross section
5.29

From the data for the analysis, the hydraulic depth for the overbank at cross
section 5.29 was 4.26 feet (an average of 5.31 and 3.20 feet for the LOB and
ROB, respectively, with the values being consistent for both the pressure/weir
flow and energy method) and the hydraulic depth of the main channel was
7.20 feet. Substitution of the values for the variables yielded an expansion
coefficient of 0.34. This is the median value and the range of ± 0.2 defines
the 95% confidence band for Equation 2-3. Therefore, the modeler should
use the value of 0.34 as an initial value and vary the coefficient by ±0.2. For
this example, a value of 0.5 was initially used for the expansion coefficient in
the vicinity of the bridge. During the iterations for the contraction and
expansion reach lengths, this coefficient was reevaluated for each iteration.
For the final value, the hydraulic depth in the overbank at cross section 5.24*
was 4.11 feet (an average of 5.06 and 3.16 feet for the LOB and ROB,
respectively, with the values being consistent for both the pressure/weir flow
and energy method) and the hydraulic depth of the main channel was 8.40
feet. This yielded an expansion coefficient of 0.27, ±0.2. For the example, a
final value of 0.5 was calibrated in order to match the observed data.

Contraction Coefficient
The contraction coefficient is used to determine the amount of energy loss
due to the flow contracting between two particular cross sections. The data of
the study [HEC-1995] did not lend itself to regression of the contraction
coefficient values and an approximate range is recommended by the research.
For this example, a range of 0.3 to 0.5 is recommended by the research. A
value of 0.3 was used for the contraction coefficient in the vicinity of the
bridge.

In summary, the above recommendations for the expansion reach length, the
contraction reach length, and the expansion and contraction coefficients
represent an improvement in the general methodology behind the prediction
of these values. The modeler is recommended to apply these new criteria as a
more substantial method for estimating the transition reach lengths. As a
final note, after the initial analysis, the expansion and the contraction reach
lengths as well as the expansion and contraction coefficients should be
evaluated simultaneously. Then, adjustments should be made to the reach
length and coefficient values before a subsequent analysis is performed.
Finally, the new data should be used to reevaluate all of the reach lengths and
coefficients. This procedure will ensure that the modeler is always using the
current flow data for the analysis.

2-28
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Model Calibration
For the high flow event, observed data were available as obtained from the
USGS Atlas. Therefore the water surface profiles calculated by the model
were calibrated to reflect the observed water surface profiles and weir flow.
This calibration occurred after the reach lengths and coefficients had been
evaluated.

From the observed data, it was recorded that a flow of approximately 3300
cfs occurred over the highway embankment. Therefore, a target value of weir
flow was available for the calibration of the model. From the main menu,
select View and then Cross Section Table, Type, and then Cross Section.
Select river station 5.41 and profile 3 and this will display the table shown in
Figure 2.21. In the right column, the flows in the LOB, main channel, and
ROB are shown as 1228.00, 9653.93, and 3118.07 cfs respectively. Since
this cross section is placed immediately upstream of the bridge, the majority
of the flow in the LOB and ROB will contribute to the weir flow over the
bridge. From the top of the table, select Type and then select Bridge. In the
left column, the weir flow is listed as being 3043.90 cfs. This is the total weir
flow occurring over the bridge. This value should be approximately equal to
the total flow in the LOB and ROB of river station 5.41 of 1228.00 + 3118.07
= 4356.07. The calculated weir flow is less than this total but all of the flow at
cross section 5.41 in the LOB and ROB will not contribute to the weir flow,
only a major portion of it. Furthermore, a target value of approximately 3300
cfs of weir flow was observed. The total weir flow was computed as being
3044 cfs, a close approximation to the estimated weir flow.

To obtain this close approximation, the weir flow coefficient was set to a
value of 2.6 to account for the inefficiency of the bridge surface structure to
act as a true weir and since the depth of water over the bridge was small
compared to the height of the weir. Additionally, the Manning’s n values
were adjusted. Originally, the Manning’s n values were the average values
obtained from the USGS Atlas. Then, the Manning’s n values were raised
slightly in the overbank and main channel areas to decrease the amount of
conveyance in these areas. This caused the water surface profile and the
amount of weir flow to closer approximate the observed data throughout the
river reach. It should be noted that the n values were raised on a global scale.
Individual specific n values should not be adjusted without taking into
account the spatial average of the factor.

For the pressure flow coefficients, the downstream water surface inside the
bridge was calculated at a value slightly lower than the low cord. This
implies that the program was using the sluice gate (submerged inlet only)
pressure flow relationship. Therefore, the submerged inlet coefficient was
reduced to decrease the amount of flow through the bridge. This increased
the upstream energy and allowed more water to flow over the bridge to
concur with what happened during the observed event.

2-29
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Figure 2.21 Cross Section Table For Plan: P/W New LeLc

Finally, for the calibration, the ineffective flow areas at cross section 5.41 and
5.39 were set to balance the flow going over the weir. Initially, the flow in
the LOB and ROB at cross section 5.41 was drastically larger than the flows
in the LOB and ROB at the downstream section 5.39. This was due to the
fact that the ineffective flow area elevations at cross section 5.39 were
previously set to a value in between the low cord and the high cord. When
the flow came over the weir, the depth downstream was less than the
ineffective flow elevation, so the program initially considered the overbank
area as ineffective flow. This is not a realistic answer. When the flow goes
over the weir it contributes to the overbank flow at the downstream cross
section and then this downstream area should be considered as effective flow.
Therefore, the ineffective flow elevations were lowered to allow the weir
flow that entered cross section 5.39 to become effective.

These calibrations were performed because the actual flow depths for the
event were known. If these actual data were not known, then the adjustment
of the Manning’s n values, pressure flow coefficients, and weir flow rate
2-30
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

could not be conducted to the refinement in the previous discussion.

However, the balancing of the weir flow to the flow in the LOB and ROB at
river stations 5.39 and 5.41 could be performed. The calibration to the model
accounted for a more accurate determination of the water surface profile to
the observed data.

Comparison of Energy and Pressure/Weir Flow

Methods to Observed Data

To compare the results of the analyses to the observed data, the observed data
was first entered in the Steady Flow Data Editor by selecting Options and
then Observed WS. This activated the editor as shown in Figure 2.22 on
which the observed data were entered for the flood event. This editor was
closed and then the profile plot was activated and is shown in Figure 2.23.

Figure 2.23 displays the three water surfaces for each of the two plans, as
well as the observed values. The display options for this figure were selected
under the Options menu as: 1) Variables - select to display the water surface
and observed water surface; 2) Profiles - select 1,2, and 3; and 3) Plans -
select both the "Energy Method: New Le Lc " plan and the "Pressure/Weir
Flow: New Le Lc" plan. As shown in the figure, both methods produced the
same water surface profiles for the first two flows (both of the low flows).
This is as would be expected because both methods analyzed the two low
flows using the same criteria. For the high flow, the water surface profile for
the energy method and the pressure/weir flow method varied slightly
upstream of the bridge. The Zoom feature under the Options menu can be
used to obtain a closer view of the profiles.

Figure 2.22 Observed Water Surface Editor

2-31
Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Single Bridge - Example 2 1) P/W+NewLeLc 2/6/1998 2) En.+New LeLc 2/6/1998

Geom: Bvr.Cr.+Bridge - P/W: New Le, Lc Flow: Beaver Cr. - 3 Flows
220 Kentwood
Legend

WS May '74 flood - P/W+NewLeLc

WS May '74 flood - En.+New LeLc

WS 100 yr - En.+New LeLc
WS 100 yr - P/W+NewLeLc
215 WS 25 yr - P/W+NewLeLc
WS 25 yr - En.+New LeLc

Ground
Obs WS May '74 flood - P/W+NewLeLc
Obs WS May '74 flood - En.+New LeLc
210
Elevation (ft)

205

200

195
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Main Channel Distance (ft)

Figure 2.23 All 3 Flow Profiles for Press/Weir and Energy Methods

Table 2.2 shows a tabular comparison of the calculated water surface

elevations for both the pressure/weir flow method and the energy method to
the observed data. The observed values with a ** denote that the value may
be in question due to there being only a few observed values in the vicinity of
the location on the atlas or because those that were provided were not in the
active flow area.

In comparison of the calculated values to the observed values, both of the

modeling approaches were able to predict the actual water surface elevations
within a reasonable tolerance. The largest errors occurred where the observed
water surface values are in question. Additionally, the observed values in the
table are an average water surface elevation over the area of effective flow
where the cross sections are located. The one dimensional model can only
predict one resulting water surface; therefore, the fluctuations across the cross
section will not occur in the model as they did during the actual event.

In comparison of the pressure/weir method to the energy method, the greatest

difference occurs at the bridge structure. The water surface elevations for the
pressure/weir flow method inside the bridge are estimated using the upstream
and downstream flow depths.

2-32
 Example 2 Beaver Creek - Single Bridge

Table 2.2 Comparison of Water Surface Elevations for Q = 14000 cfs

Pressure/Weir Energy
Cross Section Calculated Absolute Calculated Absolute Observed
Error Error
5.99 220.00 0.00 219.95 -0.05 220.0
5.875* 218.99 -0.21 218.87 -0.33 219.2**
5.76 218.46 0.06 218.29 -0.11 218.4
5.685* 218.23 -0.07 218.04 -0.26 218.3
5.61 218.09 -0.01 217.88 -0.22 218.1
5.49* 217.91 0.01 217.66 -0.24 217.9
5.41 217.44 -0.36 217.12 -0.68 217.8**
5.40 - Br Up 217.44 215.86 NA
5.40 - Br Dn 217.44 215.26 NA
5.39 215.62 0.42 215.62 0.42 215.2**
5.24* 214.64 0.04 214.64 0.04 214.6
5.13 213.33 -0.27 213.33 -0.27 213.6
5.065 212.54 0.04 212.54 0.04 212.5
5.00 211.80 0.00 211.80 0.00 211.8

Summary
This example demonstrated the use of HEC-RAS to analyze a river reach that
contains a single bridge crossing. The geometric data consisting of the cross
sections and bridge geometry were entered for the reach along Beaver Creek,
as obtained from the USGS Atlas No. HA-601. Three flow values were used
for the analysis, with the largest flow coinciding with the flood event in May
1974. The first plan consisted of the geometry data (with the high flow
method selected as press/weir) and the flow data. A second plan was created
with the selection of the energy method for the high flow analysis. Review of
results for these plans reflected the necessity for adjustments to the expansion
and contraction reach lengths.

After the adjustments were made, two new plans were created, one for the
pressure/weir and one for the energy method for the high flow analysis. The
results of these two new plans were then compared to the observed water
surface elevations. From the comparison, the pressure/weir method resulted
with the closest values to the observed water surface elevations.

2-33