Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Bridge pier geometry effects on local scour potential: A comparative study

Aly Mousaad Aly a, *, Erin Dougherty a, b
a
Windstorm, Impact, Science, and Engineering (WISE) Research Lab, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA,
70803, USA
b
United States Coast Guard, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Scour, or the localized loss of soil around the foundation, is a dominant factor contributing to failure. Scour at
Scour bridge piers, columns of elevated buildings, and wind turbines with monopile foundations can cause damage
Bridge pier after flooding and natural hazards. However, due to the lack of sophisticated modeling, scour is not fully un­
Countermeasure
derstood. This study utilizes computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations to understand the performance of
Flow altering
Monopile wind turbine
different flow countermeasures in reducing the scour potential. We look at altering the flow around the pier and
Computational fluid dynamics thereby alleviating the horseshoe vortices and downflow issues. CFD models are developed and validated with
Coastal infrastructure available experimental data. The recommended models, with turbulence closures, are employed to predict the
Coastal protection and rehabilitation bed shear stress for different pier configurations: streamlined shape, tapered sheath, delta vane, and guide wall
with slanting vanes. Reductions in the maximum bed shear stress are 30% for both the angled plate and the delta
vane, 20% for the tapered sheath, and 15% for the guide wall with slanting vanes. By reducing the bed shear
stress, these countermeasures demonstrate their capability to mitigate scour. The proposed solutions have a
potential to minimize the accelerated deterioration and protect bridges, elevated buildings, wind turbines, and
coastal and offshore infrastructure against scour-induced failures.

1. Introduction
Scour is one of the most significant factors contributing to failure in
bridges (Niedoroda and Dalton, 1982). The analysis of 500 bridges in the
United States (between 1989 and 2000) shows that 53% of failures were
attributed to floods and scour (Wardhana and Hadipriono, 2003). Scour
may also affect the stability of offshore monopile wind turbines.
Monopile offshore wind turbines often suffer from scour. Several
research studies on the effects of scour on wind turbines in terms of
analysis, measurements, prognosis, dynamic modeling of the structure,
and mitigation countermeasures are available in the literature (Lin et al.,
2019; Prendergast et al., 2015; Trojnar, 2020; B. Yang et al., 2020; Yuan
et al., 2017).
As floodwater passes around an obstruction, the flow accelerates,
losing and transporting the soil. Structural supports, such as bridge piers
and wind turbines, depend on the foundation to transfer the loads to the
ground. When the sediment supporting a foundation is lost, the structure
may become unstable and collapse (Fig. 1-a). One countermeasure may
decrease scour by minimizing the downflow at the face of a pier,
whereas another method may weaken the horseshoe vortices (Fig. 1-b).
These flow physics are often difficult to measure experimentally. How­
ever, scour modeling and prognosis are indispensable for the safe and
economical design of bridges, wind turbines, elevated buildings, and
other inland and offshore infrastructures. In addition, scour modeling is
crucial for the design and analysis of potential mitigation devices.
Research on local scour has been enjoying a renewed interest over
the past 50 years. Empirical formulas, deriven from field and laboratory
measurements, may prognosticate the maximum scour depth (Chortis
et al., 2020; Najafzadeh et al., 2015). Because of the complex interaction
among several parameters in the sediment transport process, these for­
mulas often serve as a rough estimate of scour depth and may not be
used for accurate prognosis. With advances in computational fluid dy­
namics (CFD) modeling, scour can now be adequately simulated in three
dimensions. Most CFD models rely on solving the Reynolds Averaged
Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations, although Large Eddy Simulations are
emerging.
To assess the scour prevention potential of various flow-altering
countermeasures, CFD provides many benefits over laboratory experi­
ments. CFD requires less physical space and can provide instantaneous
flow characteristics anywhere within the computational domain.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aly@lsu.edu (A.M. Aly).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109326
Received 23 October 2020; Received in revised form 7 June 2021; Accepted 8 June 2021
Available online 18 June 2021
0029-8018/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
However, numerical errors are always present, and validating the CFD
model with experimental data will ensure meaningful and accurate re­
sults. CFD simulations can assist in the understanding of how the
countermeasures may reduce scour. CFD analysis of piers, with different
geometries, may indicate which geometry has the best performance in
reducing scour. Mitigation devices can alter the flow velocities, bed
shear stress, and hence the ability to transport sediment.
Due to the potentially disastrous consequences of local scour at
bridge piers and other elevated structures, researchers have been
attempting to reduce scour effects via different methods (Pandey et al.,
2020a; Yang et al., 2019; Yao et al., 2020). These methods are known as
flow-altering (active) or bed-armoring (passive) countermeasures
(Wang et al., 2017). Both methods act to alter the primary flow char­
acteristics, including the strong downflow, when the flow encounters the
face of the pier and the horseshoe vortex, entailing vortices that shed off
the sides of a pier (Melville and Coleman, 2000). The primary method
often used to reduce local scour is the armoring of the bed around a pier,
such as with riprap. Recently, however, researchers started to assess the
combination of flow-altering and bed-armoring techniques to synergis­
tically reduce scour effects (Gaudio et al., 2012). It is worthy to mention
that, the first author of the current paper realized the role of certain
aerodynamic features in reducing wind pressures on buildings (fluid
mechanics problem) (Aly et al., 2017; Aly and Bresowar, 2016). This
increased our interest to understand whether other features can work in
water to reduce the bed shear stress (fluid mechanics problem), and
hence decrease the scour potential. The literature review shows that a
streamlined pier shape may decrease the scour depth by as much as
50–57% under various flow velocities (Al-Shukur and Obeid, 2016).
Under clear water conditions, the delta-wing plate experimentally
reduced the maximum scour depth by 67% (Gupta, 2002). This design
has shown a maximum scour reduction of up to 32% in unsteady flow;
however, this reduction is highly dependent on the flow depth (Tafar­
ojnoruz et al., 2010). In general, such devices lack their performance
during floods (live-bed conditions), and they may adversely increase
scour. A guide wall with slanting vanes may decrease the maximum
depth by 90% (Daido and Yano, 1995). Both methods become ineffec­
tive once the sediment is cleared out, below the desired installation
depth. By armoring the bed below these flow countermeasure devices,
scour can be further reduced, compared to the case with bed armoring
alone.
Due to the lack of sophisticated modeling, scour is not fully under­
stood. This study aims to employ the CFD capabilities to understand the
performance of different flow countermeasures in reducing scour. The
scope of the study is clear-water scour, with a non-cohesive sand bed,
and specific ranges of D50. The complex set of flow equations is reduced
by employing the two-equation k-ε and k–ω turbulence closures. Both
turbulence closures, in validated CFD models, are used to prognosticate
the bed shear stress for different pier configurations: streamlined shape,
Fig. 1. Scour: (a) bridge collapse due to scour/erosion (Banks, 2010), and (b) scour vortices around a cylindrical pier (adapted from Roulund et al., 2005).
2
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
tapered sheath, delta vane, and guide wall with slanting vanes. Re­
ductions in the maximum bed shear stress are in the order of 30% with
the angled plate and the delta vane, 20% with the tapered sheath, and
15% with the guide wall with slanting plates. By reducing the bed shear
stress, these countermeasures demonstrate their potential to mitigate
scour. The presented solutions can reduce the accelerated deterioration
and protect bridges and other coastal and offshore infrastructure against
collapse due to scour. The paper layout is as follows. Section 2 provides
an overview of scour and its classification. Section 3 presents recent
efforts on scour processes by scaled laboratory models. Computational
modeling, with its potential to resolve the scale issues, is presented in
Section 4. Scour countermeasures are reviewed in Section 5. Section 6
presents CFD modeling to prognosticate local scour. The CFD validation
study is presented in Section 7. In Section 8, numerical investigations of
different flow countermeasures are presented. Reynolds number effects
on the performance of the delta vane countermeasure are addressed in
Section 9. Section 10 summarizes the main findings of the paper.
2. An overview of scour
Scour can be classified as general, contraction, and local (Wang et al.,
2017). General scour occurs when the water flow removes sediment
without structure impediment. Contraction scour arises under the nar­
rowing of the width of a river or a channel. Local scour occurs at an
obstacle obstructing the flow, such as a pile or a pier, and generally
causes ten times the depth due to general scour (Johnson et al., 2013;
Parker et al., 1998). Additionally, a river bed may experience aggrada­
tion and degradation, i.e., long-term bed elevation changes due to the
deposition or removal of sediment from natural or man-made causes
(Arneson et al., 2012). Aggradation and degradation differ from general
scour. The general scour may be cyclic or caused by short-term events
such as flooding. The contributions of all of these forms should be
accounted for when evaluating the total scour at piers and abutments.
During the local scour process, water flow encounters a structure and
accelerates, creating a horseshoe vortex, which loses sediment in the
flow direction (Wang et al., 2017). The horseshoe vortex in Fig. 1-(b)
provides a visual representation of the flow structure during the local
scour process. The directed flow pushes and transports sediment at the
base. The lee wake vortices generated downstream erode the sediment
behind the pier (Breusers and Raudkivi, 1991). As the depth of the
resulting scour hole increases, the strength of the horseshoe vortex de­
creases, which subsequently decreases the transport rate of sediment
(Arneson et al., 2012).
Scour is greatly affected by the type of sediment. Loose and granular
soils are more easily eroded by flowing water, while more cohesive or
cemented soils are more scour resistant (Arneson et al., 2012). However,
the scour hole can be deep in cohesive sediment as in sand beds if the
time is long enough to reach the maximum depth. While sand may
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
develop a maximum scour depth within hours, limestone may not
experience a maximum depth for years (Wang et al., 2017). Another
factor related to sediment transport, which affects local and contraction
scour, is being clear-water or live-bed scour. Clear-water scour occurs
when the water flow does not transport bed sediment or that the amount
of sediment transported is less than the capacity of the flow. This type of
scour occurs in coarse bed materials, armored streams, flatbeds with low
flow, heavily vegetated beds, and in the case of riprap around bridge
piers where rocks are much larger than the transported sediment
(Arneson et al., 2012). Live-bed scour transports bed sediment from
upstream to scour hole. Live-bed scour is cyclic, meaning that the
developed scour hole (for example, during a flooding stage) fills back
during flood falls. For instance, in a river with coarse bed materials, the
riverbed may be subjected to a clear-water scour, before and after floods,
and live-bed scour during flooding or when the discharge rates are the
highest. Clear-water scour causes approximately a 10% increase in
depth, compared to live-bed scour, and may occur over a longer time.
The critical velocity of the median particle size D50 refers to the speed
at which the motion of a particle initiates and is used to determine
whether clear-water or live-bed scour will occur. If the mean upstream
flow velocity, Ū, is less than or equal to the critical velocity of D50, then
the local scour can be classified as clear-water (Melville and Coleman,
2000). The critical velocity depends on the flow depth and the size of the
bed material. If the ratio of the shear velocity of the flow to the fall
velocity of D50 exceeds two, live-bed scour may occur. In clear-water
scour, sand beds with dunes tend to increase the equilibrium scour
depth by 30% (compared to live-bed scour), but, in large rivers, the
dunes tend to plane out. The clear-water condition further affects local
scour in that scouring continues until the shear stress caused by the
horseshoe vortex equals the critical shear stress of the sediment at the
bottom of the scour hole. Under the live-bed condition, however,
scouring continues until the inflow sediment equals its outflow (Arneson
et al., 2012).
Local scour can be further classified as occurring due to wave, cur­
rent, and a combination of the two. In wave-induced scour, the
Keulegan-Carpenter number is the main influential parameter (Sumer
and Fredsøe, 2001a). The Keulegan-Carpenter number, Kc, is defined as
the amplitude of the flow velocity oscillation times the period of oscil­
lation divided by a characteristic length scale such as the hydraulic
diameter of the pier (similar to the reduced velocity in wind tunnel
testing (Aly, 2014)). A bridge pier may be subjected to forces in multiple
directions due to wave and tidal actions. Although wave and tidal ac­
tions can influence local scour at the piles and piers of elevated struc­
tures, in this paper, we will focus on steady flow local scour,
representing inland waterway bridge systems experiencing flow pri­
marily in one direction.
3. Laboratory studies for scour modeling
Experiments carried out on local scour are categorized in three areas:
hydraulic, structural, and geotechnical (Wang et al., 2017). Hydraulic
studies usually focus on the flow mechanisms of local scour; however,
local scour depends on the structure; therefore, hydraulic studies should
account for the structural system. Geotechnical investigations usually
address the variables related to sediment. Flume tests are often needed
to measure the scour depth and rate under steady current flows (Wang
et al., 2017; Zhao et al., 2010). Field measurements are usually
employed to develop predictive models.
3.1. Laboratory-driven predictive models
Sediment, bed patterns, and scour depth are measured to derive re­
lationships between several variables (Ni et al., 2020; Yilin Yang et al.,
2020). These variables include the flow depth, effective pier width,
Froude number, shear stress, and critical shear stress (Jones, 1984). The
models can be grouped into three categories: (1) models for fine bed
3
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
materials; (2) models with a hypothesis that the depth of flow is more
important than the velocity for sediment transport; and (3) models with
the velocity expressed as a function of Reynolds or Froude number. The
limitations of these models include accuracy only over the region of the
empirical data, the primary use of uniform, non-cohesive soils, and the
lack of field measurements to correlate equations with laboratory
testing.
To develop better predictive models, numerous studies were con­
ducted (Breusers and Raudkivi, 1991; Melville and Coleman, 2000;
Sumer and Fredsøe, 2001b). The normalized scour depth, or the scour
depth divided by the pile diameter (ds/D), for uniform diameter sedi­
ment, is closely correlated to the flow intensity, normalized velocity,
water depth normalized by pile diameter, and pile diameter normalized
by median sediment grain diameter (D/D50). Two general equations to
determine local scour were developed (Arneson et al., 2012; Melville
and Coleman, 2000).
⎫
ds = KyB KI Kd Ks Kθ KG Kt
⎪
⎬
ys
( )0.65
a (1)
0.43 ⎪
= 2.0 K1 K2 K3 Fr1 ⎭
y1 y1
each K in Eqn. (1) is a parameter that influences the scour depth (ds
or ys), KyB accounts for the depth of a pier, KI accounts for the flow in­
tensity, Kd depends on the sediment size, Ks is for the pier shape, Kθ is for
the pier alignment, KG is for channel geometry and Kt accounts for time.
The scour depth ys, over the flow depth y1, is a function of several pa­
rameters – K1, a factor of pier shape, K2, a factor of the angle of attack of
the flow, and K3, a factor of bed condition, a is the pier width, and Fr1 is
the upstream Froude number. Two empirical expressions have been
found to better fit the time history data of local scour, in clear water
(Sheppard et al., 2004).
[ ] [ ]⎫
1 1 ⎬
ds (t) = a 1 − +c 1−
(1 + abt) (1 + cdt) (2)
⎭
ds (t) = a[1 − exp(− bt)] + c[1 − exp(− dt)]
in Eqn. (2), the constants a, b, c, and d produce the best least-squares
fit of the experimental data. These equations yield more accurate equi­
librium scour depth. The duration of the test should be at least the same
as that of the experiment conducted in (Sheppard et al., 2004), to pro­
duce accurate estimates of the equilibrium depth.
The time required to reach the equilibrium scour depth is a vital
parameter in predictive models. Scour depth was expressed as a function
of time, using cylindrical and square bridge pier models in a laboratory,
under clear-water conditions and uniform bed materials (Yanmaz and
Altinbilek, 1991). A semi-empirical time-dependent analysis of local
scour was conducted using sediment continuity equations. The vortex
field was calculated in front of the cylinder and at the trailing
wake-vortex system (Graf and Istiarto, 2002). By using Acoustic Doppler
Velocimetry (ADV), the horseshoe vortex was studied, within a devel­
oping scour hole, for cylindrical and square piers (Dey and Raikar,
2007). It was observed that, for the two piers, the flow structure and
turbulence intensities in the horseshoe vortex, in a developing scour
hole, are reasonably similar.
Experiments on bridge pier scour were carried out under steady and
unsteady clear-water conditions, with uniform and non-uniform sedi­
ments. A scheme was proposed for computing the scour-depth evolution
(Chang et al., 2004). The temporal evolution of jet-driven scour depth,
in a pothole laying on a cohesionless granular bed, was investigated by
using diverse approaches. Ordinary differential equations were devel­
oped in (Bombardelli et al., 2018), and the theory was validated using
datasets. The temporal variation of scour depth around a vertical wall
spur dike was assessed and the influencing parameters were identified
(Pandey et al., 2020b). A modified Sheppard-Melville method and a new
corrected time-scale equation were recommended to predict clear-water
scour depth and scour evolution for complex bridge piers (Yifan Yang
et al., 2020).
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
New data on the temporal evolution of downstream clear-water
scour depth at a submerged weir were presented (Wang et al., 2020).
A dimensionless equilibrium timescale was defined and its dependence
on these parameters was studied. The temporal evolution of scour depth
in cohesive sediments was extensively studied in the literature (Bom­
bardelli et al., 2018; Chaudhuri et al., 2018; Hamidifar and Omid, 2017;
Lodhi et al, 2017, 2018; Muzzammil et al., 2015). Local scour in
clay-sand mixed cohesive sediment beds was also covered in several
studies (Debnath and Chaudhuri, 2010, 2011, 2012; Khalid et al., 2018;
Najafzadeh and Barani, 2014). Local scour was measured around a
group of piles, for different spacings and skew angles. It was noted that
predictive models do not agree with measurements (Salim and Jones,
1996). A method was then developed to predict scour for pile arrange­
ments. Local scour was measured around three adjacent piles, with
different arrangements, to find the arrangement that creates the smallest
scour depth (Wang et al., 2017). A relationship between the aspect ratio
of submerged piles and the timescale was developed (Yao et al., 2018).
Additional experimental studies were conducted to understand the ef­
fect of pier shape on the scour depth (Al-Shukur and Obeid, 2016).
3.2. Scale issues
Researchers have yet to agree upon a scaling method that takes into
account all relevant parameters (Zhao et al., 2010). Equilibrium scour
depth was measured under large-scale turbulence (Ettema et al., 2006).
The normalized scour depth was increased when the pier diameter was
decreased. A scour depth adjustment factor was calculated to scale local
scour. However, difficulties still arise in scaling the flow characteristics,
as well as the sediment size.
Of critical importance to local scour research, is the dependence on
the sediment type and the mechanisms behind sediment transport. The
answer to fundamental questions, such as when the erosion initiates,
where particles are transported to, and how the particles interact with
each other, may vary depending on the type and structure of the soil, for
instance, particle size, adhesion, composition, and the degree of satu­
ration (Wang et al., 2017). The sediment size is the most influential
parameter since it is a primary factor in determining the scour shape and
the fall velocity (Melville and Coleman, 2000). The median particle size,
or D50, can adequately describe alluvial sediment in uniform materials.
The dimensionless sediment size, d* , is another vital parameter (Julien,
2010).
[ ]1/3
d* = D50
(G − 1)g
(3)
v 2
where G is the specific gravity of the sediment, υ is the kinematic vis­
cosity of the fluid, and g is the gravitational acceleration. The initiation
of the sediment motion relies on the critical value of the Shields
parameter, τ*c, which depends on the dimensionless sediment size, d*.
Eq. (4) expresses the Shields parameter τ*, as the ratio of the bed shear
force to the submerged particle weight.
τ0 u* 2 hSf
τ* = = ≅
(γs − γ)ds (G − 1)gds (G − 1)ds
In Eq. (4), τ0 = ρ u2* is the bed shear stress, u* is the shear velocity, γs is
the specific weight of sediment particles, γ is the specific weight of
water, h is the flow depth, and Sf is the friction slope (Julien, 2018). The
critical shear velocity, u*c, or the velocity of the incipient motion, is
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
defined as u*c = τc /ρ. For sand with a mean sediment size of 0.5 mm,
for example, the critical velocity is approximately 0.016 m/s and the
critical shear stress is about 0.27 Pa. Estimates in the literature show that
a shear stress of 0.1 Pa can cause incipient motion in silts, but not in
sand. Also, a shear stress of 1 Pa can cause incipient motion in sand, but
not in gravel (Julien, 2010).
Different forms of the above equation are available in literature. An
earlier formula for the critical shear velocity was proposed (Melville,
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
1997). A useful expression to calculate the critical mean channel ve­
locity, Vc, was established to understand the sediment motion (Melville
and Coleman, 2000).
( )
Vc y
= 5.75*ln 5.53 (5)
u*c D50
In Eq. (5), y is the flow depth. In a later study, the Shields-Rouse
equation was adapted for the calculation of the critical shear stress,
for a dimensionless sediment diameter (Guo, 2002). The critical shear
stress calculated from this equation matched the experimental data, for
diverse types of sediment, with different diameters.
Like the scaling difficulties observed in the structural aspects of local
scour, as well as aerodynamic modeling (Aly, 2016; Aly and Bitsuamlak,
2013), addressing the scaling issues in sediment modeling is chal­
lenging. The effects of the sediment size on the scour depth were
investigated under three uniform sediment sizes at three different model
scales (Lee and Sturm, 2009). A distortion was realized between labo­
ratory and field measurements, due to improper scaling of the horseshoe
vortex. Scaling scour in laboratory settings, to accurately represent field
observations, still poses a challenge for researchers (Wang et al., 2017).
However, computational fluid dynamics offer an attractive means for
predicting flow velocities and scour at full scale.
4. Scour prognosis via CFD modeling
One of the main factors limiting the accurate prediction of scour by
physical modeling is the scaling from laboratory settings to field settings
and vice-versa (scale issues). The Froude number and Reynolds number
both can affect scour, but usually are not accounted for simultaneously.
One of the two numbers often sacrifices the other. However, one of the
advantages of numerical simulations of local scour is to partially resolve
the scale issues. Other advantages include the ability to model complex
conditions that experiments cannot achieve, observe the mechanical
behavior of the process in detail, and reduce the physical space required
to simulate the process (Wang et al., 2017). Most numerical simulations
use computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to model the scour process (Liu
et al., 2019; Yazdanfar et al., 2021; Yu and Zhu, 2020), (Zhao et al.,
2021). The limitations of this method include the long computational
time, as per the need for a refined mesh, to accurately represent the
sediment grains. The difficulty in approximating the interaction pa­
rameters, such as particle porosity and drag coefficients, and the many
assumptions made to predict the scour depth, are discussed in the
literature (Wang et al., 2017).
Most CFD studies combine hydrodynamic and morphologic models
to simulate the flow field and sediment transport. Hydrodynamic models
are classified into three categories: steady Reynolds-Averaged Navier-
Stokes (RANS) equations, unsteady RANS (URANS), or Large Eddy
Simulation (LES). Navier-Stokes (N–S) equations describe the motion of
a fluid, which is usually associated with turbulence (Aghaee and
Hakimzadeh, 2010). Direct numerical simulation (DNS) of N–S equa­
tions can resolve the spatial and temporal range of turbulence. Although
DNS would be the most accurate method for scour modeling, it is limited
(4) to low Reynolds numbers due to its inhibitive computational cost.
Compared to DNS, a simplified model would combine the continuity
equation and the RANS equations (Zhou, 2017).
∂ρU ( )
∇⋅U=0⋅ + ∇ ⋅ ρUUT = − ∇p + ∇ ⋅ (2μm S + ρR) + ρf (6)
∂t
here, ρ is the fluid density, U is the fluid velocity vector, S is the mean
strain-rate tensor, μm is the fluid dynamic molecular viscosity, R is the
Reynolds stress tensor which may be calculated for various turbulence
models, p denotes pressure, and f is the external force. The left side of Eq.
(6) includes the local time derivative of velocity and convective accel­
eration. The right side of the equation includes the effects of viscosity,
pressure gradient, and external forces. Under the Boussinesq eddy
4
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

viscosity assumption, the eddy viscosity is modeled by momentum except for the eddy viscosity, μt, which no longer has Cμ as a constant in
transfer due to turbulent eddies. This is based on the analogy between Eq. (8). For the realizable k-ε model, the term Cμ is calculated as follows.
molecular-motion-based laminar momentum and scalar transport, and
1
eddy-motion-based turbulent momentum and scalar transport (Kundu Cμ = * (12)
A0 + As kUε
et al., 2012). The molecular viscosity describes how the momentum is
transferred by molecular motion. In the RANS equations, R represents
where A0 and As are constants and U* is the square root of the sum of the
the mean viscous stress and is defined as follows.
square of the mean rate of the state tensor and the mean rate of the
R = − u’ u’ T = 2 μρt S − 23 kδij ; rotation tensor. The model is called ‘realizable’ because it satisfies the
1( ) (7) physics in turbulent flows, as well as certain mathematical constraints
S= ∇U + (∇U)T on the Reynolds stresses. Some advantages include, more accurate pre­
2
dictions of the spread rate of both planar and round jets, as well as the
where μt is the eddy viscosity, k is turbulence kinetic energy, u′ is the capability of modeling flows involving rotation, flows with boundary
fluctuating component of the velocity and δij is the Kronecker delta. layers under strong adverse pressure gradients, flows with separation,
Reynolds stresses develop from the nonlinear advection term of the and flows with recirculation (Spalart, 2000).
conservation of momentum equation and represent the average stresses The k-ω model improves upon the k-ε model in that the damping
induced by the flow fluctuations (Kundu et al., 2012). Reynolds stresses functions are no longer employed and the Dirichlet boundary conditions
may be considered as the rate of mean momentum transfer due to flow allow for better numerical stability (Menter, 1993; Wilcox, 1993). The
fluctuations. Reynolds stresses tend to be much larger than viscous k-ω turbulence closure significantly improves the modeling of flows with
stresses, except close to a solid surface where the fluctuations vanish, adverse pressure gradient, although it is sensitive to the value chosen for
and the mean flow gradients are large. the free-stream variable. Eq. (13) solves for the turbulence kinetic en­
To solve the RANS equations, the two-equation eddy-viscosity ergy, k, and Eq. (14) solves for the dissipation of the turbulence energy,
models are utilized: one equation for the turbulence kinetic energy, and ω. The parameters k, ω, and ε are defined in Eq. (15).
the other equation is related to the turbulent length scale (Menter,
∂ρk
1992). The primary models in RANS simulations are the k-ε and k-ω + ∇ ⋅ (ρUk) = ∇ ⋅ [(μm + σ k μt )∇k] + R∇U − β* ρkω (13)
∂t
turbulence closures. The k-ε model was developed in 1973 and has been
improved over time (Jones and Launder, 1973). In the standard k-ε ∂ρω γ
equation, the eddy viscosity, μt, is expressed as follows. + ∇ ⋅ (ρUω) = ∇ ⋅ [(μm + σω μt )∇ω] + R∇U − ρβω2
∂t vT
ρσω2
k2 + 2(1 − F1 ) ∇k⋅(∇ω)T (14)
μt = C μ ρ (8) ω
ε
′ ′
where k is the turbulence kinetic energy, ε is the dissipation rate, and Cμ 1 ′ ′ ε ∂u ∂u
k = ui ui , ⋅ ω = * , ⋅ ε = v i i (15)
is a constant. The rate of production of turbulence, Pk, is given by: 2 kβ ∂xk ∂xk

Pk = μt (∇ × U)⋅(∇ × U)T (9) the new parameters μm , σ k , β* , σω β, σ , ω2 , and γ are constants defined
in the literature, except for vT which is the turbulence kinematic vis­
The two equations of the k-ε turbulence closure are: cosity and F1 which is a blending function.
[( ) ] The Mentor Baseline (BSL) model blended the k-ε and the k-ω models
∂ρk μ
+ ∇ ⋅ (ρUk) = ∇ ⋅ μm + t ∇k + Pk − ρε (10) and helped reduce the ambiguity of the free-stream term. Like the k-ε
∂t σk
model, the k-ω model under predicts the flow separation. The Shear-
∂ρε
[( )
μt
]
ε ε2 Stress Transport (SST) model improves upon the standard k-ω model
+ ∇ ⋅ (ρUε) = ∇ ⋅ μm + ∇ε + C1 Pk − C2 ρ (11) and assumes that the turbulence shear-stress is proportional to the tur­
∂t σε k k
bulence kinetic energy in the logarithmic and wake regions of the
in these equations, Cμ, C1, C2, σk, and σε are constants, primarily boundary layer, and the eddy viscosity is limited by taking the maximum
given as: Cμ = 0.09, C1 = 1.44, C2 = 1.92, σk = 1.0, and σε = 1.3 (Launder term in the denominator of the eddy viscosity equation (Menter, 1993).
and Spalding, 1974). The numerical simulations underpredicted the scour depth by 15% up­
Although being widely used, the k-ε model has several drawbacks stream of the pier and up to 30% downstream. Similarly, a 10–20%
including a lack of sensitivity to adverse pressure gradients. The model underprediction of the scour depth was found for steady flow around
over-predicts the shear stress, which is often a challenge in the modeling submerged cylinders (Zhao et al., 2010). The underprediction may arise
of flow separation (Menter, 1993). Another disadvantage is that the from the steady-state flow modeling which did not account for the un­
equations in the model may be stiff, and convergence may be difficult steady effects of the fluctuating velocity components of the horseshoe
due to the damping terms. Several researchers have shown the effec­ and the lee-wake vortices. However, with the consideration of
tiveness of the k-ε turbulence closure under certain conditions. flow-altering countermeasures, more reliable designs can be achieved.
The scour hole created by an inundated bridge deck was experi­
mentally measured under steady flow at a high Reynolds number 5. Flow altering countermeasures
(Tulimilli et al., 2010). The hydrodynamic model was coupled with a
sediment transport model that simulates the scour of the initially flat One of the earliest comprehensive studies on scour countermeasures
bed, in iterative increments. Sediment transport is initiated when the was published by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program
shear stress exceeds its critical value. The flow mechanism was studied (NCHRP) in 1998 (Parker et al., 1998). The study provided recom­
for three piles (with different arrangements) under steady flow, using mendations on the use of scour countermeasures, other than riprap.
RANS simulations with the k-ε turbulence closure, and sediment scour Although the preferred method was bed armoring with riprap or cable
model. The k-ε turbulence model was used to reduce the computational tied blocks over a geotextile, other countermeasures include sacrificial
cost. The simulated results fairly agreed with the experimental data piles, upstream sheet piles, collars and horizontal plates, vanes or plates,
(Zhang et al., 2017). modified pier shape or texture, slots in piers or pier groups, and suction
An improvement upon the standard k-ε model is the realizable k-ε applied to the pier. Since then other flow altering techniques have been
model. The realizable k-ε equations follow the standard k-ε equations, developed, including internal connecting tubes, surface guide panels,

5
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
threading, and sleeve and downstream bed sill (Tafarojnoruz et al.,
2010). Scour countermeasures may be categorized as pier geometry
modification or openings, pier attachments, bed attachments, among
other techniques.
5.1. Pier geometry and pier openings
Research regarding the effects of the geometry of the pier (or the
shape) itself shows that reductions in the scour depth can be realized.
Studies on the pier shape have been conducted with a general under­
standing that the scour depth can be reduced as the pier becomes more
streamlined (Melville and Coleman, 2000). The scour depth is reduced
(or increased) by the following factors for the following pier shapes: 1.1
for square, 1.0 for circular (round nose, or group of circular piers), and
0.9 for piers with a sharp nose (Arneson et al., 2012). In an experimental
study, a larger variety of pier shapes were considered (Al-Shukur and
Obeid, 2016). Compared to a circular pier, the streamlined pier reduced
the scour depth by 50–57% for three different clear-water flows. The
next best scour-reducing geometries were the hexagonal shape
(28–40%), the sharp nose (23–29%), and the elliptical shape (7–20%)
(Al-Shukur and Obeid, 2016).
Experimental testing and CFD modeling were conducted for circular,
diamond, and square piers and the findings agreed with previous liter­
ature that scour increases for the diamond shape, and even more for the
square shape, when compared to the circular pier (Khosronejad et al.,
2012). The optimization of the pier geometry relies on the flow angle,
which may not capture the realistic field conditions (Tafarojnoruz et al.,
2010).
Scour was investigated for complex pier shapes that arise when
scouring exposes pile caps and the piles themselves (Baghbadorani et al.,
2018). Fifty-two tests were conducted on four different complex pier
models, in clear-water conditions, to help improve the accuracy of the
published HEC-18 equations (Richardson and Davis, 2001). The exper­
iments agreed with the equations which predict reduced scour depth as
the pile cap is exposed to sediment that interrupts and minimizes the
downflow effects. A collar located at the base of a pier, or below the level
of the bed, works under the same mechanism. The performance of col­
lars and exposed pile caps rely on a minimum diameter to reduce scour,
otherwise, the scour depth may increase (Parker et al., 1998). Although
a pile cap is not meant to be a countermeasure, it is beneficial for the
safety of a bridge as the last expedient, in case other countermeasures,
inspection, or maintenance plans fail.
The performance of a pier with a vertical slot was experimentally
investigated, to understand its ability to reduce scour by diverting the
flow away from the bed, or by reducing the downflow effects (Chiew,
1992). A reduction of 20% was realized in the maximum scour depth, for
a slot length of twice the diameter of the pier and a width of at least
one-quarter of the diameter. A reduction of 45% in the maximum scour
depth was achieved, after experimentally testing different sizes of
openings in different shapes of piers (EL-Ghorab, 2013). A significant
scour depth reduction of 89% was realized by utilizing a sacrificial
perforated pile upstream of a perforated main pile (each pile has a hole
that is 43% of the pile diameter, orientated at 45◦ ) (Elnikhely, 2017).
Other studies had shown that sacrificial piles alone may reduce the
maximum scour depth by 44%, in the field, and up to 60% under lab­
oratory conditions (Parker et al., 1998). Nevertheless, pier openings
cause practical problems including potential blockage by debris and a
reduction in the pier’s strength.
5.2. Pier attachments
Experiments with plates and vanes to reduce scour depth began as
early as the 1960s (Gaudio et al., 2012). Before that time, vertical plates
installed in the channel, were primarily used to prevent lateral channel
migration, although a reduction in scour had been noticed. The effec­
tiveness of vertical plates and vanes was compared, showing that
6
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
vertical plates can separate the flow around a pier, and hence reduce the
intensity of the horseshoe vortex (Parker et al., 1998). Vertical plates
with an aspect ratio of 3:1 may reduce scour by 70–80%, and they are
effective in low and high flow rates (Tafarojnoruz et al., 2010).
One of the more successful vane designs includes the delta vane,
which disrupts the flow at the base of the pier and produces vortices that
rotate against the horseshoe vortex (Gupta, 2002). This design has
shown scour reduction of up to 32% in unsteady flow, and 67% in
clear-water laboratory settings. However, this design is highly depen­
dent on the flow depth (Tafarojnoruz et al., 2010). The use of a vertical
guide wall and vertically inclined plates at 45◦ showed up to 90%
reduction in clear-water scour, with similar limitations as the delta vane.
Another pier attachment was developed, which consists of a guide
wall with vanes (Daido and Yano, 1995). The guide wall is intended to
decrease the intensity of the horseshoe vortex by disturbing the
approaching flow. Slanting vanes are used to further decrease the in­
tensity of the horseshoe vortex. The results showed that at a 90%
reduction in the scour depth was realized, compared to the unprotected
circular pier. This design was tested under a few flow velocities. In a
later study, this configuration reduced scour by only 50%, compared to
the unprotected circular pier (Parker et al., 1998). The effect of sub­
merged vanes on the flow pattern around a pier was numerically studied
by testing combinations of 2, 4, and 6 vanes angled at 20◦ and 30◦ (Azizi
et al., 2016). Three plates angled at 30◦ significantly reduced the ve­
locity near the bed. This decrease in velocity is associated with a
decrease in the ability of the flow to transport sediment.
Most experiment discussed thus far focused on scour in steady flow.
The effectiveness of splitter plates and threaded piles under waves and
current was investigated (Dey et al., 2006). The main scour mechanism
under waves is vortex shedding. Attaching a splitter and threading the
pile or wrapping cables in a helical pattern around the pile, can disrupt
vortex shedding (this approach is known in wind engineering applica­
tions as well, for example, the older antenna of the car had a spiral shape
to disrupt vortex shedding and hence reduce the vortex shedding ef­
fects). With a cable to pile diameter ratio of 0.75, a maximum reduction
of scour under waves of 51% was realized. Under steady current, a
maximum scour depth reduction of 46% was realized for a cable to pile
diameter ratio of 0.1. However, the splitter plate reduced scour by 62%.
A combination of flow-altering countermeasures may prove to be
even more effective. The following combinations were experimentally
investigated in clear water: submerged vanes and a bed sill, slot and
sacrificial piles, collar and sacrificial piles, slot and collar, and bed sill
and collar (Gaudio et al., 2012). Most combinations did not reduce scour
more than the individual countermeasures. However, the slot and collar
combination reduced scour by 82%, but its efficiency was reduced when
the collar rim was exposed (for example, during degradation or when the
slot is blocked by debris). When a sill was positioned upstream of a pier
with a collar, scour was reduced by 63–76%, but degradation is a po­
tential concern.
In summary, there are many countermeasures, including active
countermeasures that attempt to alter the flow pattern around the pier,
with a potential to reduce scour. Each method, such as altering pier
geometry, sacrificial piles, pier attachments, or openings, has potential
benefits, but may have some concerns. There is no single solution for the
local scour problem, so different countermeasures and solutions may be
considered in the design process, especially for unique projects. In the
following section, we will create and test computational models that will
be used to study different scour countermeasures.
6. Case study of CFD application to predict local scour
Here we model and predict the bed shear stress and velocity around a
pier. We evaluate different turbulence closures and validate the model
with available experimental data. Later, the model with the proper
turbulence closures will be employed to investigate the performance of
proposed scour countermeasures.
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
6.1. Computational domain
A computational domain was created using the same dimensions as
those in (Roulund et al., 2005). A schematic representation of the
computational domain is shown in Fig. 2. The dimensions of the domain
are given in terms of the diameter of the pier, D. A symmetry boundary
condition was considered at the side boundaries. This condition assumes
a zero flux of all quantities across a symmetry plane. The shear stress is
also set to zero, so a surface with symmetry boundary conditions may be
a slip surface. The flow along the sidewalls of the flume in the experi­
ment was a no-slip surface, but because of the distance of the side walls
to the cylinder, the effect of the side walls was not anticipated to impact
the results significantly. The blockage ratio is 1D/20D or 5%. The
experiment was performed with a width of 5.6D which has a blockage
ratio of approximately 18%. The blockage effect did not pose any sig­
nificant problems because the flow velocity was increased by less than
3%, close to the sidewalls (Roulund et al., 2005).
Symmetry condition was applied at the top surface of the domain.
This will place a “lid” on the fluid surface since the free surface is not
modeled. Since a lower Froude number will decrease the amount of
elevation of the free surface of an object in a flow, such as a wake at the
bow of a boat, lower Froude numbers may be modeled with a lid con­
dition. Two experiments with Froude numbers of 0.2 and 0.5 were
performed for a depth of flow of 26 cm and a 31 cm pier diameter
(Roulund et al., 2005). A height difference of 22%, compared with the
water depth, was found for a Froude number equal to 0.5. The height
difference was only 3.8% for a Froude number of 0.2. The velocity
profiles in both cases were also compared and the Froude number of 0.2
matched closely with the free surface velocity distributions. The rigid lid
approximation is therefore applicable when the Froude number is of the
order of 0.2.
The boundary layer thickness to pier diameter (δ/d) was kept con­
stant. The value of δ/d is about 1. The CFD analysis was carried out for a
δ/d value that is similar to the reference experimental data (Roulund
et al., 2005). It is worth mentioning that the separation of the bed
boundary layer (forming the horseshoe vortex) will be delayed if the
boundary layer thickness to pier diameter ratio, δ/d, is small (δ/d < 0.5).
This may lead to a more uniform velocity distribution in the upstream
boundary layer flow, which can lead to a smaller-size horseshoe vortex.
For small values of δ/d, the boundary layer may not separate (no
horseshoe vortex).
The boundary condition for the inlet was a velocity inlet. A velocity
profile based on the average velocity was applied to the inlet, as well as a
constant absolute velocity equal to the main flow velocity. The turbu­
lence was set to 5% with a length scale of 0.54 (Roulund et al., 2005).
The bottom surface and pier surface are wall conditions with no slip.
Wall functions dependent on the turbulence closure were employed as
will be discussed in the next subsection. The outlet was set as a pressure
outlet. Zero gradient and Neumann conditions were applied.
6.2. Mesh generation
A structured O-grid mesh was created (Fig. 3). The mesh cell height
Fig. 2. Computational domain in dimensions of the pier diameter D.
7
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
in the vertical direction is smaller towards the bed so that the height of
the first cell from the bed surface is 1.0 × 10− 4 m. The cell height also
becomes smaller towards the pier surface. The height of the first cell on
the pier wall is 6.3 × 10− 5 m. This size was determined from the y+ value
to resolve the viscous sublayer (White, 2002). The k-ω SST model was
the initial turbulence closure, which requires a y+ value of less than 1
(ANSYS Inc, 2021).
y Uτ
y+ = ρ ;
μ
√̅̅̅̅̅
τw (16)
Uτ = ;
ρ
1
2
τw = Cf ρU∞ ;
2
Cf = 0.058Re−l 0.2
Cf is the skin friction, and all other quantities including the Reynolds
number, viscosity, density, and flow velocity are known (Table 1). For
the standard and realizable k-ε models, enhanced wall treatments were
employed. These treatments bring improvements over the standard wall
functions that are not recommended for use under boundary layer sep­
aration (Khaled et al., 2021). The enhanced wall treatment is a y+
insensitive approach and will act as a wall function if the first grid point
is in the log layer. To predict the physics in the near-wall region, this
method formulates the law-of-the-wall as a single wall law for the entire
wall region, by combining the linear (laminar) and logarithmic (turbu­
lent) laws-of-the-wall (ANSYS Inc, 2021). The wall shear stress, like the
normal velocity gradient at the wall, is dependent on the formulation of
the near-wall region using the enhanced wall treatment.
The generated mesh is shown in Fig. 3. Notice how the mesh ele­
ments decrease towards the cylinder and bottom surface. The number of
elements was then optimized following a grid independence study, and
the results were compared with available experimental data. The mesh
characteristics for each trial are listed in Table 2. The ‘element count’
refers to the number of elements in each direction, over height (z-di­
rection), width (y-direction), and length (x-direction). The O-grid
around the cylinder, for extra grid refinement, was not altered from test
to test since the y+ value depends on ensuring the first cell height re­
mains the same.
6.3. Discretization
The flow governing equations were solved using a pressure-based
finite volume discretization process. A control-volume-based tech­
nique was employed, which converts a general scalar transport equation
to an algebraic equation that can be solved numerically (ANSYS Inc,
2021). This control volume technique consists of integrating the trans­
port equation to yield a discrete equation that expresses the conserva­
tion law. A second-order upwind scheme was applied. The momentum
equations were also discretized. The SIMPLE algorithm is used to couple
velocity and pressure for mass conservation, to obtain the pressure field.
A predictor-corrector method is then used to predict and correct the
pressure and flux fields.
The models were run for a varying number of iteration steps until the
scaled residuals were decreased and the solution was converged. The
drag coefficient of the pier leveled out to constant and the mean value of
the lift coefficient was zero (for steady-state RANS simulations) (Blevins,
1984).
7. CFD validation
A velocity profile was applied at the inlet with the mean flow velocity
as the main scaling parameter and run in an empty domain with the k-ω
SST turbulence closure. The resulting velocity profile at the location of
the cylinder, in the middle of the computational domain, was then
compared to the undisturbed experimental velocity profile. The velocity
profiles, for different values of D, at a constant inlet velocity, were also
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 3. Structured mesh: (a) isometric view, (b) section view at the axis of symmetry for y = 10D, and (c) top view. Note that the mesh element size decreases toward
the pier and the bottom surface (walls).

one of the first iterations with the unstructured mesh, we used a

Table 1
maximum global element size of 0.2 m. We added three prism layers to
Parameters of the rigid bed experiment (Roulund et al., 2005).
the bottom surface and the pier surface, with a maximum element size of
water depth, h (cm) 54 0.1 m, a maximum near wall height of 0.01 m, and a growth rate of 1.2.
boundary layer thickness, δ (cm) 54 The unstructured mesh was computed with 350k tetrahedral-shaped
mean flow velocity, ū (cm/s) 32.6 elements. When this unstructured mesh was used to simulate the flow
pier diameter, d (cm) 53.6 with the k-ε realizable turbulence closure, the solution converged. The
Rel = ūdρ/μ 1.7 × 105
friction velocity, uτ (cm/s) 1.3
drag coefficient leveled at a constant value, but the lift coefficient was
Froude number 0.14 irregular before nearing zero. To improve upon the coarseness of the
mesh, without significantly increasing the number of elements, we
placed a mesh density around the cylinder (pier).
The unstructured mesh requires more elements, compared to the
Table 2
Grid details, with the total number of elements (structured mesh). structured mesh, to produce consistent results. To increase the number
of elements without significantly increasing the computation time, the
total elements height count width count length count
size of the domain was optimized. The original size was chosen as 20D x
113,324 20 60 60 20D x 2D, to safely assume the effects of the walls did not impact the
277,264 20 100 100
results of flow around the cylinder and close to the bottom surface. The
436,796 32 100 100
476,504 35 100 100 domain size was decreased to a width of 11D, a height of 1.5D, and the
width was further decreased to 9D, to check if the results would change.
Each simulation was run using the k-ε realizable turbulence closure,
compared. The model was simulated using the RANS equations, with the since this model performed well for the structured mesh case. The results
k-ω SST turbulence closure, for each mesh in Table 3. The experimental of the mesh optimization are shown in Fig. 4, for the x-component of
data include the x-component of the velocity, at a distance 2D upstream velocity.
and downstream of the cylinder, in the plane of symmetry, or at y = 10D In Fig. 4, it is shown that the change in the domain size has a mini­
(Roulund et al., 2005). mum effect the ability to predict the x-component of the upstream ve­
We investigated the ability of structured and unstructured grids to locity flow. Because the physical experiment was conducted in a flume
replicate the flow characteristics from the experiment. A structured of 5.6D (width), there were likely effects from the flume walls that are
mesh may be more spatially efficient, but the fluid domain should be now incorporated into the numerical model by decreasing the domain
subdivided to control the mesh intensity, for accurate CFD simulations. width. This effect is further exaggerated in the downstream region of the
An unstructured mesh may use differently shaped elements, such as pier where the 9D width yields result close to those of the experiment.
tetrahedral shapes, to generate the volume mesh, with inputs such as the
maximum global size and surface size. With fewer inputs, the unstruc­
tured mesh is easier to apply to complex geometries. However, creating
an unstructured mesh is an iterative process, and the grid is usually
refined by trial and error.
We used the same pier and domain size to create the unstructured
mesh, as shown in Fig. 2. The maximum global element size, and the
maximum element size on any surface, can be set. ANSYS suggests
adding prismatic layers at solid surfaces to capture the shear stress and
other essential flow physics in the boundary layer (ANSYS Inc, 2021). In

Table 3
Parameters of two different unstructured meshes (size in m).
total no. mesh inner outer pier bottom pier
of density surface surface surface prism prism
elements size size size size height height

457k None 0.05 0.1 0.01 0.005 0.001

449k 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.005 0.001
Fig. 4. Domain size comparison of the x-velocity component at z = 9.3%D.

8
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

The simulation results for the reduced domain width, other than 9D,
were relatively close to each other in the downstream zone. In general,
only the 9D width domain seems to affect the simulation of the x-
component of velocity for the regions considered. Considering the
benefits of predicting the x-velocity component for a reduced domain
size of 11D, which also predicted the z-velocity components downstream
of the pier well when combined with a 1.5D height, this combination
seems to be the best optimum domain size, to be used for the investi­
gation of different flow countermeasures in the coming section.
Once an optimum domain size was determined, the mesh parameters
were optimized, to resolve the viscous sublayer. If the unstructured
mesh could adequately resolve the viscous sublayer, the standard k-ω,
and k-ω SST may prove to predict the flow velocities better than the k-ε
models since they are better at modeling adverse pressure gradients. The
Fig. 6. Unstructured mesh model comparison of the x-velocity component at z
wall and cylinder’s first cell height should be small, so a mesh was made
= 9.3 %D.
with smaller elements on the surface around the cylinder to reduce the
total number of elements and computational time. Another mesh was
made with a mesh density with a maximum size of 0.1 m at the same approximate the experimental data better with the unstructured mesh
location as the inner bottom surface. The parameters of the two different for a greater y+ value. This may be due to the improvement of the
meshes are listed in Table 3. Each mesh has five prism layers. Each mesh tetrahedral shape over the rectangular prisms of the structured mesh or
was used with the k-ω SST model since both k-ω models performed achieving a y + value close to 1.0 may not be that critical.
relatively similar compared to experimental data and the k-ω SST is The parameters of each mesh are listed in Table 4, and they are
regarded as an improvement upon the k-ω model. The density mesh was labeled mesh 1, 2, and 3. Each mesh has a mesh density to refine ele­
then used with the standard and realizable k-ε turbulence models, with ments around the pier. The unstructured mesh was optimized for the
enhanced wall treatment. The x and z velocity components from each realizable k-ε model so that the mesh parameters that most closely
simulation were compared with experimental results. match the experimental data could be applied to other pier shapes (to
In Figs. 5–6, all models yield the x-velocity component upstream of investigate the performance of different flow countermeasures in a
the pier closely although the results vary more when z = 1.9%D. This is comparative study).
likely due to the mesh near the bottom surface not adequately capturing
the flow at this height. For the downstream region of the pier, the k-ω 8. Numerical investigations of different countermeasures to
realizable and the standard models predict the flow better than the case reduce local scour
of using the structured mesh. This could be a feature of the tetrahedral
element shape which may provide better vertical coverage of the We investigated four different countermeasures to reduce local scour
boundary layer, since the elements do not form distinct layers in the (Fig. 8). The proposed countermeasures are: (1) tapered streamlined
vertical direction, compared to the structured mesh. The standard k-ε sheath, (2) delta vane, (3) guide wall with slanting vanes, and (4) angled
and realizable k-ε closures more closely match the experimental data plate footing.
downstream of the pier for the x-velocity components. The realizable k-ε
tends to predict the downstream velocity slightly better than the stan­ 8.1. Tapered streamline sheath
dard k-ε as shown in Figs. 5–6.
Another finding of the mesh simulations using the parameters in The tapered streamlined sheath was modeled in AutoCAD (Fig. 8-a).
Table 3 include the difference in the wall y+ values, between structured The pier has the same dimensions as those in (Roulund et al., 2005). In
and unstructured grids. Fig. 7-(a) shows the wall y+ values are between terms of the diameter, the width of the sheath is 1D and the total length
0.1 and 1.0 for the structured mesh. The unstructured mesh would is equal to 3D. The sheath extends 0.5D vertically where it meets the
require many more elements than the structured mesh to achieve a pier. The countermeasure was then meshed using tetrahedral-shaped
similar wall y+ value. The unstructured y+ values are shown in Fig. 7- elements with the same parameters as those of the unstructured mesh.
(b), where they vary between 1.0 and 17. The two k-ω models tended to Three prism layers with a growth rate of 1.2 are applied at the wall. The

Fig. 5. Unstructured mesh model comparison of the x-velocity component at z = 1.9%D.

9
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 7. Wall y+ values for the cylindrical pier: (a) structured mesh, and (b)
unstructured mesh.
total elements are 1.36 million. The generated mesh is shown in Fig. 9.
The streamlined tapered pier was simulated using the model that best
represented the experimental data, the RANS equations with the real­
izable k-ε turbulence closure. The boundary conditions remained the
same from the previous structured and unstructured simulations so that
the resulting flow structures may be compared.
Contours of bed shear stress and velocity were obtained after the
simulations were completed. Each generated figure was compared
against the pier that most closely approximated the experimental data.
The bed shear stress is a critical parameter in determining an incipient
motion of sediment. Fig. 10 shows that the cylindrical pier experiences
shear stress of about 1 Pa, whereas the streamlined tapered sheath has
maximum shear stress of 0.8 Pa (20% reduction). There is a larger region
of higher shear stress for the cylindrical pier, compared to the stream­
lined pier. Sand could be transported in the red regions for the cylin­
drical pier, whereas only finer sands could be expected to be transported
along the sides of the streamlined tapered sheath. Both piers could cause
sediment with a critical shear stress of 0.5 Pa to be transported about the
same amount based on the green portion of the contour. Transport
occurring most along the sides of the piers is consistent with the previous
figures. The earlier figures indicated transport might also occur down­
stream of the streamlined tapered pier. From this figure, sediment with a
critical shear stress of 0.3 (coarse sand) could be transported just aft of
the tapered pier but only silts could be transported aft of the cylindrical
pier. This confirms the ability of the streamlined sheath to reduce scour
at the face of the pier, compared to the cylindrical pier.
Fig. 11 shows that the velocity at z = 1.9% is closely correlated with
the bed shear stress in Fig. 10. The streamlined sheath reduced the
magnitude of the velocity by approximately 10% (from 0.5 to 0.45 m/s)
which reduces the ability of the flow to initiate sediment movement. The
streamlined shape allows the velocity field in this plane to be more
constant compared to the cylindrical pier. Since this plane is approxi­
mately one cm above the bed, the velocity will decrease logarithmically
to zero. At this height, sand with a critical velocity ranging between
0.01 m/s and 0.1 m/s can be transported, except for the dark blue re­
gions (Fig. 11). The velocity is 0.35 m/s around the aft half of the
tapered sheath where it is sharply decreased to 0.002 m/s for the aft half
of the cylindrical pier. Accordingly, more sediment can be transported in
this region, for the streamlined pier.
Based on the reduction of bed shear stress by 20% and the decrease in
the velocity magnitude by 10%, the streamlined tapered sheath would
be a good flow-altering scour countermeasure, especially upstream of
the pier. Furthermore, the sheath at the face of the pier acts as a bed
armoring device as the downflow deflects from it instead of the sedi­
ment. For this mean flow velocity, one would expect sand to be trans­
ported along the sides of the pier just forward of center for the
cylindrical pier, and only finer sands along the sides for the streamlined
tapered pier. The streamlined tapered pier does not have a decrease in
flow velocity directly downstream of the pier to the extent of the cy­
lindrical pier. Immediately after the aft of the cylindrical pier, silt could
be transported based on the value of the critical shear stress, whereas
sand with a critical shear stress of 0.3 Pa could be transported aft of the
streamlined tapered sheath. At this flow rate, however, the tapered
streamlined sheath can effectively reduce the transport of coarser sand
and finer sediments in front of the pier.
8.2. Delta vane
The delta vane was modeled in AutoCAD (Fig. 8-b). The dimensions
for the delta vane are 2D from the apex to the opposite side and 1.5D for
the length of the side opposite to the apex. The apex is attached to the
bed upstream of the pier and the opposite side is raised and attached to
the pier so that the vane forms a 15◦ angle with the bed. A spinal rib is
also attached under the vane for support. The countermeasure was then
meshed using tetrahedral-shaped elements with the same parameters as
those of the unstructured mesh. Three prism layers with a growth rate of
1.2 are applied at the wall. The total elements are 1.5 million. The
generated mesh is shown in Fig. 12. The delta vane attached pier was
simulated using the RANS equations with the realizable k-ε turbulence
closure. The boundary conditions remained the same from the previous
structured and unstructured simulations so that the resulting flow
structures may be compared.
Contours of velocity, pressure coefficient, bed shear stress, and tur­
bulence intensity were obtained after the simulation was complete. Each
generated figure was compared against the cylindrical pier. Fig. 13
shows promising results in the delta vane’s ability to minimize shear
stress on the bed. The highest shear stress for the delta vane attached
plate is 0.7 Pa at the tip of the apex. This is approximately 30% less than
the maximum shear stress for the cylindrical pier. Furthermore, this is a

Table 4
Parameters of the unstructured mesh, optimized for the realizable k-ε model (size in m).
mesh total no. of mesh bottom surface bottom prism bottom prism pier surface pier pier prism
number elements density size height layers size prism layers
height

1 317k 0.1 0.1 0.005 5 0.05 0.001 10

2 372k 0.1 0.1 0.005 5 0.01 0.005 5
3 391k 0.1 0.1 0.005 5 0.01 0.001 5
4 1.2m 0.1 0.05 0.005 3 0.01 0.001 3

10
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
Fig. 8. Different shapes are designed and attached to the cylindrical pier: (a) streamlined tapered sheath, (b) delta vane, (c) guide wall with slanting plates, and (d)
angled plate footings.
small region at 0.7 Pa, which indicates sediment with critical shear stress
less than about 0.5 Pa (sand) will be transported. Both piers have about
the same area with 0.5 Pa shear stress and so would transport a similar
amount of sediment for this shear stress. The delta vane experiences a
larger zone bed shear stress of 0.3 Pa, compared to the cylindrical pier,
which indicates that more sediment could be transported. However,
unlike the tapered streamline pier, the delta vane decreases the bed
shear stress in the wake zone to about zero Pa, similar to the cylindrical
pier. This means that both the cylindrical pier and the delta vane
countermeasure may not transport significant sediment in the wake
zone. The delta vane countermeasure may direct the approaching flow
upward, away from the bed.
Fig. 14 shows the effectiveness of the delta vane to reduce the ve­
locity. The velocity magnitude is the largest at the apex of the vane,
where the flow is directed upward, away from the bed. The maximum
magnitude of the velocity is about 0.45 m/s which is 10% lower than the
corresponding maximum velocity experienced with the cylinder (0.5 m/
s). The velocity along the side of the pier is greatly reduced compared to
the delta vane, 0.33 m/s versus 0.5 m/s for the cylindrical pier. Based on
Fig. 14, the delta vane cause sediment transport with similar critical
velocities as the cylindrical pier in the wake (0–0.16 m/s) but will lead
to more sediment transport with a critical velocity equal to 0.35 m/s
than the cylindrical pier. These numbers will decrease exponentially
towards the bed. Larger sediment requiring a higher critical velocity
such as coarse sane may be transported in the case of the cylindrical pier
but not for the delta vane pier.
11
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
It should be noted that altering the orientation of the delta vane to
the bed or the pier will affect the resulting flow characteristics and bed
shear stress. If implemented on an actual bridge pier, the design orien­
tation would need to be maintained. This could be accomplished by
armoring the bed beneath the vane to ensure the apex of the vane re­
mains in contact with the bottom surface. The combination of a flow-
altering method with a bed-armoring method could extend the oper­
ating life or inspection intervals of the bed armoring technique by
reducing the velocities and shear stress the bed armoring device is
exposed to. Further studies would need to assess whether the cost of
construction of a delta vane on a pier could outweigh the potential
savings in maintenance costs for the bed armoring method.
The delta vane seems to be successful at directing the flow up and
away from the bed. There is a 30% reduction in maximum bed shear
stress for the delta vane compared to the cylindrical vane, which means
larger sediment may be transported such as coarser sand in this case. The
maximum velocity just above the bed is reduced 10% for the delta vane,
however, the delta vane has a larger region of 0.35 m/s which could
mean transporting more medium-sized sand at the bed. Both will
transport approximately the same amount of finer sediment such as silt
based on the bed shear stress contours. The delta vane is an improve­
ment over the streamlined taper sheath pier because it provides bed
armoring in the case of a strong downflow like the streamlined pier, but
it also reduces the velocity and bed shear stress in the wake like the
cylindrical pier.
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 9. Mesh of the streamlined tapered sheath: (a) top view of the domain, (b) zoomed top view showing the mesh around the countermeasure, and (c) a 3D view.

Fig. 10. Comparison of bed shear stress for the cylindrical pier (a) and the streamlined tapered sheath (b).

8.3. Guide wall with slanting vanes
The guide wall with slanting vanes was modeled in AutoCAD (Fig. 8-
c). The length of the guide wall is 0.2D and the slanting vanes are placed
every 0.2D. The slanting vanes taper to the sides of the pier so that the
effective width of the pier is not increased. Additionally, the guide wall
and slanting vanes are all 3 mm thick (0.5%D). The pier was meshed
using tetrahedral-shaped elements with the same parameters found in
the unstructured mesh results. The global mesh was set at 0.4 m, the
surface mesh for the pier was 0.02 m, and 0.1 m for the bottom surface.
Prism layers were not added to the pier since they produced a poorer
quality mesh. Three prism layers of growth rate 1.2 were applied to the
bottom surface with a maximum height of 0.005. The total elements
were approximately 460k. The guide wall with slanting vanes was
simulated using the RANS equations with the realizable k-ε turbulence
closure. The boundary conditions remained the same from the previous

12
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 11. Comparison of the velocity magnitude for the cylindrical pier (a) and the streamlined tapered sheath (b), at z = 1.9%D.

Fig. 12. Mesh of the delta vane countermeasure: (a) top view of the domain, (b) zoomed top view showing the mesh around the countermeasure, and (c) a 3D view.

structured and unstructured simulations so that the resulting flow
structures may be compared.
Contours of bed shear stress and velocity were obtained after the
simulation was complete. Each generated figure was compared against
the cylindrical pier. In Fig. 15, the maximum bed shear stress is reduced
from about 1.0 Pa to 0.85 Pa or a 15% reduction. The area that has a bed
shear stress equal to 0.85 is small, compared to the area equal to this
value or higher for the cylindrical pier. This means the guide wall with
slanting vanes pier could cause little transport of sediment with a critical
shear stress of 0.85, whereas the cylindrical pier could cause transport of
sediment equal to and up to 1.0 Pa (or coarse sand versus coarse sand).
The amount of sediment with a critical shear velocity equal to 0.5 would
be transported less for the guide wall with slanting vanes as well as this
region is a little smaller in the guide wall pier contour. The guide wall
with slanting vanes seems to reduce the magnitude of shear stress along
the sides of the pier. This may be from the guide wall separating the flow
similar to the streamlined tapered sheath pier. Both piers would trans­
port similar amounts of sediment, such as silt in the wake.
The guide wall with slanting vanes reduces the maximum velocity at
z = 1.9% from 0.5 m/s to 0.45 m/s or about 10% (Fig. 16). This indicates
the cylindrical pier could allow transport of sediment with a critical
shear velocity 10% higher than the sediment allowed by the guide wall

13
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 13. Comparison of bed shear stress for the cylindrical pier (a) and the delta vane (b).

Fig. 14. Velocity magnitude for the cylindrical pier (a) and the delta vane (b), at z = 1.9%D.

Fig. 15. Comparison of the bed shear stress for the cylindrical pier (a) and the guide wall with slanting vanes (b).

14
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 16. Comparison of the velocity magnitude for the cylindrical pier (a) and the guide wall with slanting vanes (b), at z = 1.9%D.

with slanting vanes pier. The wake looks similar for both, indicating
sediment would likely be transported similarly between the two piers in
this region.
The guide wall with slanting vanes reduced the maximum bed shear
stress by 15% and the maximum velocity at z = 1.9% by 10% indicating
that this pier reduces the maximum size particle that could be trans­
ported. In this case, coarse sand to coarse sand. Even though the
reduction in magnitude was not as high as in some of the other pier
designs, there is a reduction in the area of shear stress equal to 0.5 Pa.
There will be less sediment transported at or below this critical velocity
for the guide wall with slanting vanes. The wake region remained similar
between the guide wall and slanting vanes pier and the cylindrical pier.
It is worth mentioning that one experimental study on the guide wall
with slanting vanes was considered. The mentioned efficiencies may not
be reliable, as this device loses its efficiency during high flow intensities,
since the horseshoe vortex develops a few centimeters upstream of the
pier. To show how effective is this countermeasure during high flow
intensities by numerical simulations, Large Eddy Simulations (LES)
should be considered (Tafarojnoruz and Lauria, 2020).

Fig. 17. Mesh of the angled plate footings: (a) top view of the domain, (b) zoomed top view showing the mesh around the countermeasure, and (c) a 3D view.

15
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
8.4. Angled plate footings
The angled plate countermeasure was modeled in AutoCAD. There
are four plates with two angled at 30◦ , facing the inlet, and the other two
are angled at 30◦ , facing the outlet of the domain. Each plate extends
0.5D from the outside surface of the pier. The height is also 0.5D. The
countermeasure was then meshed using tetrahedral-shaped elements
with the same parameters as those of the unstructured mesh. Three
prism layers with a growth rate of 1.2 are applied at the wall. The total
elements are approximately 450k. The generated mesh is shown in
Fig. 17. The angled plate footing pier was simulated using the RANS
equations with the realizable k-ε turbulence closure. The boundary
conditions remained the same from the previous structured and un­
structured simulations so that the resulting flow structures may be
compared.
Contours of bed shear stress and velocity were obtained after the
simulation was complete. Each generated figure was compared against
the cylindrical pier. In Fig. 18, the magnitude of shear stress is reduced
by about 30% for the pier with plate footings since there is a small region
of shear stress equal to approximately 0.7 Pa along the sides of the pier
with plate footings versus 1.0 Pa along the upstream sides of the cylin­
drical pier. Since this region is so small, one would expect sediment of
critical shear stress of 0.5 Pa or lowered to be transported. This region of
0.5 Pa is a little larger than the corresponding region for the cylindrical
pier, indicating more sediment with this critical shear velocity (sand)
will be transported for the pier with plate footings. Both piers perform
well in the wake with 0–0.1 Pa, which is conducive for silt transport.
The velocity magnitude above the bed corresponds well with the
shear stress contour in Fig. 18. The maximum velocity at the front sides
of the cylindrical pier is reduced from 0.5 m/s to 0.35 m/s (30%
reduction). There is a larger region of slower velocity at the front of the
pier with plate footings, which showed the velocity magnitudes of the
piers at the plane of symmetry. The lower velocity in the wake extends
farther downstream than the cylindrical pier, indicating this pier will
minimize sediment transport downstream more than the cylindrical
pier. The angle of the plate footings may act to capture sediment
colliding with the base of this pier. This region at the upstream base of
the pier also has a low velocity so as seen in Fig. 19 extending about 0.5D
farther upstream than the cylindrical pier, so sediment may build up in
this region. This may act counter or prevent future scour, but the sedi­
ment transport is still likely along the sides of this pier.
The angled plate footings pier reduced the maximum bed shear stress
by 30%, but most of the shear stress for this pier was about 0.5 Pa
indicating that sediment with a critical shear stress of this value or
lower, such as sand, will be transported. There is a 30% reduction in
Fig. 18. Comparison of bed shear stress for the cylindrical pier (a) and the angled plate footings (b).
16
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
maximum velocity above the bed for the pier with plate footings, but this
pier extends the region of lower velocity both upstream by about 0.5D
and downstream compared to the cylindrical pier. The angled plates
may act to capture sediment as an active scour control measure, so this
might be a useful test to perform with sediment in a laboratory study.
9. Delta vane countermeasure at higher Reynolds number
In Section 7, the delta vane pier attachment demonstrated a signifi­
cant decrease in bed shear stress, indicating a strong potential to reduce
scour. All investigated piers were analyzed under a Reynolds number of
1.7 × 105. This was based on the Reynolds number used to validate the
CFD model with experimental results. Even though the delta vane was
effective at this Reynolds number, it is crucial to ascertain that the shear
stress will be reduced at a higher Reynolds number (full-scale).
To determine a realistic, yet high, Reynolds number to reanalyze the
delta vane pier attachment, the estimated depth-averaged flow velocity
was determined using measured data from the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) (USGS, 2019). Flood data from the Mississippi River in
Baton Rouge are used to calculate a high Reynolds number that can be
experienced in this location. Historical maximum flow discharges for the
Mississippi River in Baton Rouge were considered to be about 41,626
m3/s (USGS, 2019). The depth-averaged velocity for the highest
discharge was calculated by dividing the discharge by the estimated
cross-sectional area located at Mississippi River mile marker 232. The
area is approximately 13,470 m2, and the average velocity is about 3
m/s (Little and Biedenharn, 2014).
If the diameter of a bridge pier or support structure is 1.6 m, then the
corresponding Reynolds number for a velocity of 3 m/s is 5.1 × 106. The
modeled pier is 0.536 m in diameter, so a velocity of 9.5 m/s was applied
at the inlet to obtain the same Reynolds number. Because of this high
Reynolds number, the mesh was refined so that the delta vane config­
uration has 2.6 million elements, and the cylindrical pier has 2.1 million
elements. Fig. 20 shows the bed shear stress for the cylindrical pier
versus the delta vane for a Reynolds number of 5.1 × 106. The calculated
maximum bed shear stress for the cylinder is approximately 450 Pa and
approximately 350 Pa for the delta vane, which indicates a 22%
reduction. This is less than the 30% reduction seen at the lower Reynolds
number. It may be that at higher Reynolds numbers the delta vane re­
duces the scour potential less, but it still causes a significant reduction in
maximum bed shear stress compared to the cylindrical pier. Fig. 21
shows the velocity magnitude for the plane at 1 cm above the bed. The
simulated maximum velocity for the cylinder was approximately 15 m/
s. The maximum velocity for the delta vane is approximately 14 m/s.
This indicates a 7% reduction, which is less than the 10% reduction seen
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326

Fig. 19. Velocity magnitude for the cylindrical pier (a) and the angled plate footings (b), at z = 1.9%D.

Fig. 20. Bed shear stress for the cylinder (a) and the delta vane (b) at Re = 5.1 × 106.

Fig. 21. Velocity magnitude above the bed for Re = 5.1 × 106 and z = 1.9%D: (a) cylinder, and (b) delta vane.

at the lower Reynolds number. Like the bed shear stress, the delta vane
seems to be less effective at reducing scour potential at a high Reynolds
number, but there is still a noticeable reduction.
The delta vane configuration reduced maximum bed shear stress by
22% compared to the cylindrical pier and the velocity above the bed by
7% for a Reynolds number equal to 5.1 × 106. Although both values are
less than the reductions at the lower Reynolds number, the delta vane
configuration still decreases the maximum bed shear stress and velocity
above the bed by a significant amount which correlates to a reduction in
scour potential. This higher Reynolds number was estimated using the
maximum parameters for a bridge pier in the Mississippi River near
Baton Rouge, Louisiana. It is likely that in most cases, for a given bridge
pier, the Reynolds number would be much smaller than this value. The
reduction of scour potential for the delta vane could be likely larger.
It is worth to mention that the study of different sediment is beyond
the scope of the current paper. The CFD investigation is conceptual, to

17
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
compare different scour countermeasures under the same flow condi­
tions. However, by reducing the bed shear stress, the proposed coun­
termeasures demonstrate their potential to mitigate scour. These
solutions have a strong potential to reduce the accelerated deterioration
and can protect bridges and other coastal and offshore infrastructure
against collapse due to scour.
10. Conclusions
Scour around bridge piers and monopile foundations, such as
offshore wind turbines, is a significant issue that contributes to the
failure and instability of structures. We investigated different turbulence
closures, including the standard k-ε, k-ε realizable, standard k-ω, and k-ω
SST, to understand their capability to predict the bed shear stress . We
then assessed the performance of different flow countermeasures in a
comparative study. The k-ω equations can simulate adverse pressure
gradients; however, the k-ε equations consistently performed better in
approximating the experimental data. In particular, the k-ε realizable
model predicted the components of velocity well. The use of unstruc­
tured mesh allowed the consideration of more complex geometry. Four
scour countermeasures are investigated at a Reynolds number of 1.7 ×
105: streamlined tapered sheath, delta vane, guide wall with slanting
plates, and angled plate footings. The findings are as follows.
➢ The optimized unstructured mesh may have y+ values varying be­
tween 1 and 17. The k− ω models approximate the experimental data
more, with the unstructured mesh, compared to the structured mesh,
for greater y+ values. This improved performance may be due to the
tetrahedral shapes, compared to the rectangular prisms, or that
achieving a y + value close to 1 is not that critical for the flow physics
considered in the current study.
➢ The delta vane and the angled plate footings reduced the maximum
bed shear stress by 30%. The two countermeasures reduced the
maximum velocity around the pier by about 10% and 30%, respec­
tively. In the wake of the pier, both countermeasures yield a bed
shear stress close to zero. The delta vane represents an upstream
physical barrier, which may armor the bed in the case of a strong
downflow.
➢ The streamlined tapered sheath reduced the maximum bed shear
stress and the maximum velocity by 20% and 10%, respectively. The
sheath armors the bed and deflects the downflows. The reductions in
the shear stress and the flow velocity at the front of the pier suggest
that the streamlined tapered sheath may reduce scour at this loca­
tion. However, the streamlined tapered sheath does not yield a
decrease in the flow velocity, directly downstream. Sediment such as
sand, with a critical shear stress of 0.3 Pa, can be transported aft of
the streamlined tapered sheath.
➢ The guide wall with slanting vanes was the least effective counter­
measure. This countermeasure reduced the maximum bed shear
stress and the maximum velocity above the bed by 15% and 10%,
respectively.
➢ The performance of the delta vane countermeasure was further
investigated at a Reynolds number of 5.1 × 106. At such a high
Reynolds number, the delta vane reduced the maximum bed shear
stress and maximum velocity by 22% and 7%, respectively. Overall,
the findings reveal that the delta vane countermeasure can reduce
the scour potential at low and high Reynolds numbers.
➢ To conclude, hydrodynamic models are crucial for the assessment
and performance comparison of scour countermeasures. The delta
vane and the angled plate footings performed well in reducing the
bed shear stress, followed by the streamlined tapered sheath. The
angled plate footing may capture sediment, and hence actively act as
a scour countermeasure.
18
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Aly Mousaad Aly: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software,
Validation, Investigation, Writing. Erin Dougherty: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Software, Validation, Investigation, Writing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The first author received funds from the Louisiana Board of Regents,
RCS program (contract no. LEQSF (2021-22)-RD-A-30). The second
author would like to thank the United States Coast Guard for funding her
education at Louisiana State University. The findings and conclusions
are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official
position of the sponsors.
References
Aghaee, Y., Hakimzadeh, H., 2010. Three dimensional numerical modeling of flow
around bridge piers using LES and RANS. River Flow 2010: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Fluvial Hydraulics. Bundesanstalt für Wasserbau,
Braunschweig, Germany, pp. 211–218. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11
970/99648.
Al-Shukur, A.H.K., Obeid, Z.H., 2016. Experimental study of bridge pier shape to
minimize local scour. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 7, 162–171. https://iaeme.com/Mas
terAdmin/Journal_uploads/IJCIET/VOLUME_9_ISSUE_7/IJCIET_09_07_120.pdf.
Aly, A.M., 2014. Atmospheric boundary-layer simulation for the built environment: Past,
present and future. Build. Environ. 75, 206–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2014.02.004.
Aly, A.M., 2016. On the evaluation of wind loads on solar panels: The scale issue. Sol.
Energy 135, 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.06.018.
Aly, A.M., Bitsuamlak, G., 2013. Aerodynamics of ground-mounted solar panels: Test
model scale effects. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 123, 250–260. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jweia.2013.07.007.
Aly, A.M., Bresowar, J., 2016. Aerodynamic mitigation of wind-induced uplift forces on
low-rise buildings: A comparative study. J. Build Eng. 5, 67–76. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jobe.2016.01.007.
Aly, A.M., Chokwitthaya, C., Poche, R., 2017. Retrofitting building roofs with
aerodynamic features and solar panels to reduce hurricane damage and enhance eco-
friendly energy production. Sustain. Cities Soc. 35, 581–593. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2017.09.002.
ANSYS Inc, 2021. Introduction to Ansys ICEM CFD. ANSYS Inc. https://engineering.
purdue.edu/~scalo/menu/teaching/me608/tutorial.pdf. (Accessed 13 June 2021).
ANSYS Inc, 2021. Ansys CFD (Fluent and CFX) Turbulence Modeling(Self-paced Learning
Available). ANSYS Inc. https://www.ansys.com/training-center/course-catalog/fl
uids/ansys-cfd-fluent-and-cfx-turbulence-modeling, 2021. (Accessed 13 June 2021).
Arneson, L.A., Zevenbergen, L.W., Lagasse, P.F., Clopper, P.E., 2012. Evaluating Scour at
Bridges, 5th. National Highway Institute, Arlington, Virginia, USA, FHWA-HIF-12-
003. http://ponce.sdsu.edu/hec-18-scour.pdf.
Azizi, S.H., Farsadizadeh, D., Arvanaghi, H., Abbaspour, A., 2016. Numerical simulation
of flow pattern around the bridge pier with submerged vanes. J. Hydraul. Struct. 2,
46–61. https://doi.org/10.22055/jhs.2016.12856.
Baghbadorani, D.A., Ataie-Ashtiani, B., Beheshti, A., Hadjzaman, M., Jamali, M., 2018.
Prediction of current-induced local scour around complex piers: review, revisit, and
integration. Coast. Eng. 133, 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
coastaleng.2017.12.006.
Banks, G., 2010. Safer levees and bridges thanks to new erosion and scour detector
[WWW Document], 9.20.11. https://newatlas.com/safer-levees-bridges-thanks-ero
sion-scour-detector/17020/.
Blevins, R.D., 1984. Applied Fluid Dynamics Handbook. Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, New York.
Bombardelli, F.A., Palermo, M., Pagliara, S., 2018. Temporal evolution of jet induced
scour depth in cohesionless granular beds and the phenomenological theory of
turbulence. Phys. Fluids 30, 85109. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5041800.
Breusers, N.T., Raudkivi, A.J., 1991. Scouring. Hydraulic Structures Design Manual, 2.
Taylor & Francis, New York.
Chang, W.Y., Lai, J.S., Yen, C.L., 2004. Evolution of scour depth at circular bridge piers.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 130, 905–913. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)
130:9(905).
Chaudhuri, S., Singh, S.K., Debnath, K., Manik, M.K., 2018. Pier scour within long
contraction in cohesive sediment bed. Environ. Fluid Mech. 18, 417–441. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10652-017-9560-x.
Chiew, Y.-M., 1992. Scour protection at bridge piers. J. Hydraul. Eng. 118, 1260–1269.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:9(1260).
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
Chortis, G., Askarinejad, A., Prendergast, L.J., Li, Q., Gavin, K., 2020. Influence of scour
depth and type on p–y curves for monopiles in sand under monotonic lateral loading
in a geotechnical centrifuge. Ocean. Eng., 106838 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2019.106838.
Daido, A., Yano, S., 1995. Local scour around bridge piers andits protection with guide
wall and slanting plate and piers surface. In: Proc. 6th Intl. Symp. River
Sedimentation, pp. 1181–1187.
Debnath, K., Chaudhuri, S., 2012. Local scour around non-circular piers in clay–sand
mixed cohesive sediment beds. Eng. Geol. 151, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2012.09.013.
Debnath, K., Chaudhuri, S., 2011. Effect of suspended sediment concentration on local
scour around cylinder for clay-sand mixed sediment beds. Eng. Geol. 117, 236–245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.11.003.
Debnath, K., Chaudhuri, S., 2010. Bridge pier scour in clay-sand mixed sediments at
near-threshold velocity for sand. J. Hydraul. Eng. 136, 597–609. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000221.
Dey, S., Raikar, R.V., 2007. Characteristics of horseshoe vortex in developing scour holes
at piers. J. Hydraul. Eng. 133, 399–413. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429
(2007)133:4(399).
Dey, S., Sumer, B.M., Fredsøe, J., 2006. Control of scour at vertical circular piles under
waves and current. J. Hydraul. Eng. 132, 270–279. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9429(2006)132:3(270).
EL-Ghorab, E.A.S., 2013. Reduction of scour around bridge piers using a modified
method for vortex reduction. Alexandria Eng. J. 52, 467–478. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.aej.2013.04.001.
Elnikhely, E.A., 2017. Minimizing scour around bridge pile using holes. Ain Shams Eng.
J. 8, 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2016.06.016.
Ettema, R., Kirkil, G., Muste, M., 2006. Similitude of large-scale turbulence in
experiments on local scour at cylinders. J. Hydraul. Eng. 132, 33–40. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2006)132:1(33).
Gaudio, R., Tafarojnoruz, A., Calomino, F., 2012. Combined flow-altering
countermeasures against bridge pier scour. J. Hydraul. Res. 50, 35–43. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00221686.2011.649548.
Graf, W.H., Istiarto, I., 2002. Flow pattern in the scour hole around a cylinder.
J. Hydraul. Res. 40, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221680209499869.
Guo, J., 2002. Hunter Rouse and Shields Diagram. In: Advances in Hydraulics and Water
Engineering: Proceedings of the 13th IAHR–APD Congress, Singapore, 6 – 8 August
2002. World Scientific, pp. 1096–1098. https://doi.org/10.1142/978981277
6969_0200.
Gupta, A.K., 2002. Hydrodynamic modification of the horseshoe vortex at a vertical pier
junction with ground. Phys. Fluids 30, 1213. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.866270.
Hamidifar, H., Omid, M.H., 2017. Local scour of cohesive beds downstream of a rigid
apron. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 44, 935–944. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2016-0398.
Johnson, E.B., Testik, F.Y., Ravichandran, N., Schooler, J., 2013. Levee scour from
overtopping storm waves and scour counter measures. Ocean. Eng. 57, 72–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.09.006.
Jones, J.S., 1984. Comparison of prediction equations for bridge pier and abutment
scour. In: Bridge Engineering Conference, 2nd, Washington, DC, USA.
Transportation Research Board, pp. 202–209. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepu
bs/trr/1984/950/950v2-022.pdf.
Jones, W.P., Launder, B.E., 1973. The calculation of low-Reynolds-number phenomena
with a two-equation model of turbulence. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 16, 119–1130.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(73)90125-7.
Julien, P.Y., 2018. River Mechanics, second ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316107072.
Julien, P.Y., 2010. Erosion and Sedimentation, second ed. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806049.
Khaled, M.D., Aly, A.M., Elshaeir, A., 2021. Computational efficiency of CFD modeling
for building engineering: an empty domain study. J. Build Eng., 102792 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102792.
Khalid, M., Muzzammil, M., Alam, J., 2018. Reliability analysis of local scour at bridge
pier in clay-sand mixed sediments. Aquademia 2, 1. https://doi.org/10.20897/awet/
86715.
Khosronejad, A., Kang, S., Sotiropoulos, F., 2012. Experimental and computational
investigation of local scour around bridge piers. Adv. Water Resour. 37, 73–85.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.09.013.
Kundu, P.K., Cohen, I.M., Dowling, D.R., 2012. Fluid Mechanics, fifth ed. Fluid
Mechanics. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-382100-3.10008-
3.
Launder, B.E., Spalding, D.B., 1974. The numerical computation of turbulent flows.
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 3, 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-
7825(74)90029-2.
Lee, S.O., Sturm, T.W., 2009. Effect of sediment size scaling on physical modeling of
bridge pier scour. J. Hydraul. Eng. 135, 793–802. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
HY.1943-7900.0000091.
Lin, X., Zhang, Jisheng, Wang, R., Zhang, Jing, Liu, W., Zhang, Y., 2019. Scour around a
mono-pile foundation of a horizontal axis tidal stream turbine under steady current.
Ocean. Eng. 192, 106571 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106571.
Little, C.D., Biedenharn, D.S., 2014. Mississippi river hydrodynamic and delta
management study (MRHDM)–Geomorphic assessment [WWW document]. https
://www.mvn.usace.army.mil/Missions/Environmental/Louisiana-Coastal-Area
/Mississippi-River-Hydrodynamic-and-Delta-Managemen/.
Liu, M., Jin, X., Wang, L., Yang, F., Tang, J., 2019. Numerical investigation of local scour
around a vibrating pipeline under steady currents. Ocean. Eng. 221, s https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108546.
19
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
Lodhi, A.S., Jain, R.K., Karna, N., 2017. Temporal variation of scour at wake of the spur
dikes in cohesive sediment mixtures. In: 22nd International Conference on
Hydraulics, Water Resources and Coastal Engineering. LD College of Engineering,
Ahmedabad, India, pp. 625–632. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3226
83427_TEMPORAL_VARIATION_OF_SCOUR_AT_WAKE_OF_THE_SPUR_DIKES_IN_C
OHESIVE_SEDIMENT_MIXTURES.
Lodhi, A.S., Jain, R.K., Sharma, P.K., Karna, N., 2018. Influence of cohesion on scour at
wake of partially submerged spur dikes in cohesive sediment mixtures. ISH J.
Hydraul. Eng. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2018.1525325.
Melville, B.W., 1997. Pier and Abutment Scour: Integrated Approach. J. Hydraul. Eng.
123, 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1997)123:2(125).
Melville, B.W., Coleman, S.E., 2000. Bridge Scour. Water Resources Publications, LLC,
Highlands Ranch, CO.
Menter, F.R., 1993. Zonal Two Equation k-w Turbulence Models For Aerodynamic Flows.
In: 23rd Fluid Dynamics, Plasmadynamics, and Lasers Conference. American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics:, Orlando, FL, U.S.A., pp. 1–21. https://doi.
org/10.2514/6.1993-2906
Menter, F.R., 1992. Improved Two-Equation k-w Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic
Flows. In: NASA Technical Memorandum 103975. NASA, Moffett Field, CA. https
://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19930013620/downloads/19930013620.pdf?attach
ment=true.
Muzzammil, M., Alama, J., Danish, M., 2015. Scour prediction at bridge piers in cohesive
bed using gene expression programming. Aquat. Procedia 4, 789–796. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.098.
Najafzadeh, M., Barani, G.A., 2014. Experimental Study of Local Scour around a Vertical
Pier in Cohesive Soils. Sci. Iran. 21, 241–250. http://scientiairanica.sharif.edu/art
icle_1628.html.
Najafzadeh, M., Barani, G.A., Hessami-Kermani, M.R., 2015. Evaluation of GMDH
networks for prediction of local scour depth at bridge abutments in coarse sediments
with thinly armored beds. Ocean. Eng. 104, 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2015.05.016.
Ni, X., Xue, L., An, C., 2020. Experimental investigation of scour around circular
arrangement pile groups. Ocean. Eng., 108096 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2020.108096.
Niedoroda, A.W., Dalton, C., 1982. A review of the fluid mechanics of ocean scour.
Ocean. Eng. 9, 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-8018(82)90011-7.
Pandey, M., Azamathulla, H.M., Chaudhuri, S., Pu, J.H., Pourshahbaz, H., 2020a.
Reduction of time-dependent scour around piers using collars. Ocean. Eng. 213,
107692 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107692.
Pandey, M., Valyrakis, M., Qi, M., Sharma, A., Lodhi, A.S., 2020b. Experimental
assessment and prediction of temporal scour depth around a spur dike. Int. J.
Sediment Res. 36, 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2020.03.015.
Parker, G., Toro-Escobar, C., Voigt, R., 1998. Countermeasures to Protect Bridge Piers
from Scour. In: NCHRP 24-7, 1. St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, Minneapolis. https://c
onservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/108221.
Prendergast, L.J., Gavin, K., Doherty, P., 2015. An investigation into the effect of scour
on the natural frequency of an offshore wind turbine. Ocean. Eng. 101, 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.017.
Richardson, E.V., Davis, S.R., 2001. Evaluating Scour at Bridges, 4th. Federal Highway
Administration. Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 18, FHWA NHI 01-001.
Roulund, A., Sumer, B.M., Fredsoe, J., Mitchelsen, J., 2005. Numerical and experimental
investigation of flow and scour around a circular pile. J. Fluid Mech. 534, 351–401.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112005004507.
Salim, M., Jones, J.S., 1996. Scour around Exposed Pile Foundations. In: North American
Water and Environment Congress & Destructive Water. American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 2202–2211. https://cedb.asce.org/CEDBsearch/reco
rd.jsp?dockey=0099802.
Sheppard, D.M., Odeh, M., Glasser, T., 2004. Large scale clear-water local pier scour
experiments. J. Hydraul. Eng. 130, 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9429(2004)130:10(957).
Spalart, P.R., 2000. Strategies for turbulence modelling and simulations. Int. J. Heat
Fluid Flow 21, 252–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-727X(00)00007-2.
Sumer, B.M., Fredsøe, J., 2001a. Wave scour around a large vertical circular cylinder.
J. Waterw. Port, Coast. Ocean Eng. 127, 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-950X(2001)127:3(125).
Sumer, B.M., Fredsøe, J., 2001b. Scour around pile in combined waves and current.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 127, 403–411. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2001)
127:5(403).
Tafarojnoruz, A., Gaudio, R., Dey, S., 2010. Flow-altering countermeasures against scour
at bridge piers: a review. J. Hydraul. Res. 48, 441–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00221686.2010.491645.
Tafarojnoruz, A., Lauria, A., 2020. Large eddy simulation of the turbulent flow field
around a submerged pile within a scour hole under current condition. Coast Eng. J.
62, 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2020.1807453.
Trojnar, K., 2020. Simplified design of new hybrid monopile foundations for offshore
wind turbines. Ocean. Eng. 219, 108046 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2020.108046.
Tulimilli, B.R., Majumdar, P., Kostic, M., Lottes, S.A., 2010. Development of CFD
simulation for 3-D flooding flow and scouring around a bridge structure,
pp. 129–135, 3rd WSEAS International Conference on URBAN PLANNING AND
TRANSPORTATION. http://mdx2.plm.automation.siemens.com/sites/default/files/
conference_proceeding/pdf/WSEAS-UPT2010-19_Bhaskar_Scouring.pdf.
USGS, 2019. USGS 07374000 Mississippi river at Baton Rouge, LA [WWW document].
https://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/uv?site_no=07374000.
A.M. Aly and E. Dougherty
Wang, C., Yu, X., Liang, F., 2017. A review of bridge scour: mechanism, estimation,
monitoring and countermeasures. Nat. Hazards 87, 1881–1906. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11069-017-2842-2.
Wang, L., Melville, B.W., Whittaker, C.N., Guan, D., 2020. Temporal evolution of clear-
water scour depth at submerged weirs. J. Hydraul. Eng. 146, 6020001 https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001712.
Wardhana, K., Hadipriono, F.C., 2003. Analysis of recent bridge failures in the United
States. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 17, 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0887-3828(2003)17:3(144).
White, F.M., 2002. Fluid Mechanics, fifth ed. McGraw HillBoston, Boston.
Wilcox, D.C., 1993. Comparison of two-equation turbulence models for boundary layers
with pressure gradient. AIAA J. 31, 1414–1421. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.11790.
Yang, B., Wei, K., Yang, W., Li, T., Qin, B., 2020. A feasibility study of reducing scour
around monopile foundation using a tidal current turbine. Ocean. Eng., 108396
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108396.
Yang, S., Shi, B., Guo, Y., Yang, L., 2019. Investigation on scour protection of submarine
piggyback pipeline. Ocean. Eng. 182, 442–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2019.04.090.
Yang, Yifan, Melville, B.W., Macky, G.H., Shamseldin, A.Y., 2020. Temporal evolution of
clear-water local scour at aligned and skewed complex bridge piers. J. Hydraul. Eng.
146, 4020026 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001732.
Yang, Yilin, Qi, M., Wang, X., Li, J., 2020. Experimental study of scour around pile
groups in steady flows. Ocean. Eng. 195, 106651 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2019.106651.
Yanmaz, A.M., Altinbilek, H.D., 1991. Study of time-depenbent local scour around bridge
piers. J. Hydraul. Eng. 117, 1247–1268. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429
(1991)117:10(1247).
20
Ocean Engineering 234 (2021) 109326
Yao, W., An, H., Draper, S., Cheng, L., Harris, J., 2018. Experimental investigation of
local scour around submerged piles in steady current. Coast. Eng. 142, 27–41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.08.015.
Yao, W., Draper, S., An, H., Cheng, L., Harris, J.M., Whitehouse, R.J.S., 2020. Effect of a
skirted mudmat foundation on local scour around a submerged structure. Ocean.
Eng. 218, 108127 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108127.
Yazdanfar, Z., Lester, D., Robert, D., Setunge, S., 2021. A novel CFD-DEM upscaling
method for prediction of scour under live-bed conditions. Ocean. Eng. 220, 108442
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108442.
Yu, P., Zhu, L., 2020. Numerical simulation of local scour around bridge piers using novel
inlet turbulent boundary conditions. Ocean. Eng. 218, 108166 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108166.
Yuan, C., Melville, B.W., Adams, K.N., 2017. Scour at wind turbine tripod foundation
under steady flow. Ocean. Eng. 141, 277–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oceaneng.2017.06.038.
Zhang, Q., Zhou, X.L., Wang, J.H., 2017. Numerical investigation of local scour around
three adjacent piles with different arrangements under current. Ocean. Eng. 142,
625–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.07.045.
Zhao, E., Dong, Y., Tang, Y., Sun, J., 2021. Numerical investigation of hydrodynamic
characteristics and local scour mechanism around submarine pipelines under joint
effect of solitary waves and currents. Ocean. Eng. 222, 108553 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108553.
Zhao, M., Cheng, L., Zang, Z., 2010. Experimental and numerical investigation of local
scour around a submerged vertical circular cylinder in steady currents. Coast. Eng.
57, 709–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2010.03.002.
Zhou, L., 2017. Numerical Modelling of Scour in Steady Flows. Université de Lyon, Lyon,
France. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01598600.