Natural Hazards

, Volume 69, Issue 1, pp 869–887 | Cite as

Quantification of riverbank erosion and application in risk analysis

  • L. NardiEmail author
  • L. Campo
  • M. Rinaldi
Original Paper


The estimation of river bank erosion requires the knowledge of both local hydrodynamic and erodibility characteristics. Models exist in literature that allow the estimation of the river bank shear stress, the fundamental parameter in evaluating the retreat given the discharge flow and the geometry of the river channel. In this study, two hydrodynamic models (1-D and 2-D) were combined with three shear stress models in order to obtain an estimation of the retreat on a study case on the river Cecina in Tuscany, Central Italy. A calibration of the models was performed based on observations from aerial photos of the region over a period of 10 years (1994–2004), and the results of the different combinations of the models are discussed and compared. A framework was developed for the risk analysis of land loss due to bank erosion based on the analyses of discharge flow time series and an excess shear stress erosion model. An application to the study case is provided by using the results of fluvial erosion modelling.


Riverbank retreat Shear stress Hydraulic erosion Fluvial erosion risk 


  1. Abernethy B, Rutherfurd ID (2000) The effect of riparian tree roots on the mass-stability of riverbanks. Earth Surf Process Landf 25:921–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amiri-Tokaldany E, Darby SE, Tosswell P (2003) Bank stability analysis for predicting land loss and sediment yield. J Am Water Resour Assoc 39:897–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arulanandan K, Gillogley E, Tully R (1980) Development of a quantitative method to predict critical shear stress and rate of erosion of natural undisturbed cohesive soils. Report GL-80-5, US Army Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, VicksburgGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes HH (1967) Roughness characteristics of natural channels. USGS Water Supply Paper 1849Google Scholar
  5. Bravard JP, Amoros C, Pautou G (1986) Impact of civil engineering works on the successions of communities in a fluvial system. A methodological and predictive approach applied to a section of the Upper Rhone river, France. Oikos 47(1):92–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bravard JP, Kondolf GM, Piégay H (1999) Environmental and societal effects of channel incision and remedial strategies. In: Darby SE, Simon A (eds) Incised river channels. Wiley, New York, pp 303–341Google Scholar
  7. Bull LJ (1997) Magnitude and variation in the contribution of bank erosion to the suspended sediment load of the River Severn, UK. Earth Surf Process Landf 22:1109–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cassuli V, Cattani E (1994) Stability, accuracy and efficiency of a semi-implicit method for three-dimensional shallow water flow. Comput Math Appl 27:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Church M (1992) Channel morphology and typology. In: Calow P, Petts GE (eds) The rivers handbook. Hydrological and ecological principles. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 126–143Google Scholar
  10. Dapporto S, Rinaldi M (2003) Modelling of river bank retreat by combining fluvial erosion, seepage and mass failure. Geophys Res Abstracts EGS-AGU-EUG Joint Assembly, Nice, France, 6–11 April 2003Google Scholar
  11. Darby SE, Thorne CR (1996) Development and testing of river-bank stability analysis. J Hydraul Eng 122(8):443–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darby SE, Rinaldi M, Dapporto S (2007) Coupled simulations of fluvial erosion and mass wasting for cohesive riverbanks. J Geophys Res 112:1–15Google Scholar
  13. Darby SE, Trieu HQ, Carling PA, Sarkkula J, Koponen J, Kummu M, Conlan I, Leyland J (2010) A physically based model to predict hydraulic erosion of fine-grained riverbanks: the role of form roughness in limiting erosion. J Geophys Res 115:F04003. doi: 10.1029/2010JF001708 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Department of the Army US Army Engineer District, Alaska (2006) Kenai river bank erosion. Technical Report Kenai, AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  15. Downs PW, Simon A (2001) Fluvial geomorphological analysis of the recruitment of large woody debris in the Yalobusha river network, Central Mississippi, USA. Geomorphology 37:65–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Downward SR, Gurnell AM, Brookes A (1994) A methodology for quantifying river channel planform change using GIS: variability in stream erosion and sediment transport. In Olive LJ, Loughran RJ, Kesby JA (eds) International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Publication 224. Proceedings of the Canberra Symposium, Canberra, 1994, pp 449–456Google Scholar
  17. Duan JG (2005) Analytical approach to calculate rate of bank erosion. J Hydraul Eng 131(11):980–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eaton BC, Church M, Millar RG (2004) Rational regime model of alluvial channel morphology and response. Earth Surf Process Landf 29:511–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Florsheim JL, Mount JF, Chin A (2008) Bank erosion as a desirable attribute of rivers. Bioscience 58:519–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ghanem A, Steffler P, Hicks F, Katopodis C (1995) Two dimensional modeling of flow in aquatic habitats. Water Res Eng Rep No 95–S1. University of Alberta, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  21. Hanson GJ, Cook KR (2004) Apparatus, test procedures, and analytical methods to measure soil erodibility in situ. Appl Eng Agric 20(4):455–462Google Scholar
  22. Hanson GJ, Simon A (2001) Erodibility of cohesive streambeds in the loess area of the midwestern USA. Hydrol Process 15:23–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hopson TM (1999) The form drag of large natural vegetation along the banks of open channels. M. S. thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, p 114Google Scholar
  24. Kartha VC, Leutheusser HJ (1972) Distribution of tractive force in open channels. J Hydraul Div ASCE 96:1469–1483Google Scholar
  25. Kean JW, Smith JD (2006a) Form drag in rivers due to small-scale natural topographic features: 1. Regular sequences. J Geophys Res 111:F04009. doi: 10.1029/2006JF000467 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kean JW, Smith JD (2006b) Form drag in rivers due to small-scale natural topographic features: 2. Irregular sequences. J Geophys Res 111:F04010. doi: 10.1029/2006JF000490 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knight D, Demetriou JD, Hamed ME (1984) Boundary shear in smooth rectangular channels. J Hydraul Eng 110:405–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lane SN (1998) Hydraulic modelling in hydrology and geomorphology: a review of high resolution approaches. Hydrol Process 12:1279–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lawler DM, Thorne CR, Hooke JM (1997) Bank erosion and instability. In: Thorne CR, Hey RD, Newson MD (eds) Applied fluvial geomorphology for river engineering and management. Wiley, Chichester, pp 137–172Google Scholar
  30. Leutheusser HJ (1963) Turbulent flow in rectangular ducts. Proc Am Soc Civ Eng 89(HY3):1–19Google Scholar
  31. Luppi L, Rinaldi M, Teruggi LB, Darby SE, Nardi L (2009) Monitoring and numerical modelling of riverbank erosion processes: a case study along the Cecina River (Central Italy). Earth Surf Process Landf 34(4):530–546. doi: 10.1002/esp.1754 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mahdi T (2007) Pairing geotechnics and fluvial hydraulics for the prediction of the hazard zones of an exceptional flooding. Nat Hazards 42:225–236. doi: 10.1007/s11069-006-9096-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Malavoi JR, Bravard JP, Piégay H, Herouin E, Ramez P (1998) Determination de l’espace de liberte′ des cours d’eau. Guide technique no. 2, SDAGE RMC, p 39Google Scholar
  34. Marston RA, Girel J, Pautou G, Piégay H, Bravard JP, Arneson C (1995) Channel metamorphosis, floodplain disturbance, and vegetation development: Ain River, France. Geomorphology 13:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Millar RG, Quick MC (1993) Effect of bank stability on geometry of gravel rivers. J Hydraul Eng 119(12):1343–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nanson GC, Hickin EJ (1986) A statistical analysis of bank erosion and channel migration in western Canada. Geol Soc Am Bull 97:497–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comput J 7:308–313. doi: 10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Olsen NRB (2002) A three-dimensional numerical model for simulation of sediment movements in water intakes with moving option. User’s Manual, Department of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway 2002Google Scholar
  39. Partheniades E (1965) Erosion and deposition of cohesive soils. J Hydraul Div ASCE 91:105–139Google Scholar
  40. Piégay H, Darby SE, Mosselman E, Surian N (2005) A review of techniques available for delimiting the erodible river corridor: a sustainable approach to managing bank erosion. River Res Appl 21:773–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piégay H, Cuaz M, Javelle E, Mandier P (1997) Bank erosion management based on geomorphological, ecological and economic criteria on the Galaure River, France. Regul Rivers Res Manag 13:433–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pliefke T, Sperbeck ST, Urban M, Peil U, Budelmann H (2007) A standardized methodology for managing disaster risk—an attempt to remove ambiguity. 5th International Probabilistic Workshop, GhentGoogle Scholar
  43. Pollen N, Simon A (2005) Estimating the mechanical effects of riparian vegetation on stream bank stability using a fiber bundle model. Water Resour Res 41:W07025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pollen-Bankhead N, Simon A (2008) Enhanced application of root-reinforcement algorithms for bank-stability modeling. Earth Surf Process Landf 34(4):471–480Google Scholar
  45. Reneau SL, Drakos PG, Katzman D (2004) Geomorphic controls on contaminant distribution along an ephemeral stream. Earth Surf Process Landf 29:1209–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rinaldi M, Casagli N (1999) Stability of streambanks formed in partially saturated soils and effects of negative pore water pressures: the Sieve River (Italy). Geomorphology 26:253–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rinaldi M, Darby SE (2008) Modelling river-bank-erosion processes and mass failure mechanisms: progress towards fully coupled simulations. In: Habersack H, Piégay H, Rinaldi M (eds) Gravel-Bed rivers 6—from process understanding to river restoration. Series developments in earth surface processes, 11. Elsevier, Netherlands, pp 213–239Google Scholar
  48. Rinaldi M, Luppi L, Mengoni B, Darby SE, Mosselman E (2008) Numerical simulation of hydrodynamics and bank erosion in a river bend. Water Resour Res 44. doi: 10.1029/2008WR007008
  49. Simon A, Curini A (1998) Pore pressure and bank stability: the influence of matric suction. In: Abt SR, Young-Pezeshk J, Watson CC (eds) Water resources engineering ’98. ASCE, Reston, pp 358–363Google Scholar
  50. Simon A, Curini A, Darby SE, Langendoen EJ (2000) Bank and near-bank processes in an incised channel. Geomorphology 35:193–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Simon A, Langendoen EJ, Collison A, Layzell A (2003) Incorporating bank-toe erosion by hydraulic shear into a bank-stability model: Missouri River, Eastern Montana. Proceedings, EWRL-ASCE, World Water and Environmental Resources Congress, Cd-Rom, 11Google Scholar
  52. Simon A, Pollen NL, Langendoen EJ (2006) Influence of two woody riparian species on critical conditions for streambank stability: upper Truckee River, California. J Am Water Resour Assoc 42:99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Simons DB, Senturk F (1977) Sediment transport technology. Water Resour Pub, Forth CollinsGoogle Scholar
  54. Soil Conservation Service (1977) Design of open channels. Engineering Div., Technical Release, No 25, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  55. Steffler P, Blackburn J (2002) River2D: two-dimensional depth-averaged model of river hydrodynamics and fish habitats. University of Alberta, Edmonton, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  56. Thorne CR (1982) Processes and mechanisms of river bank erosion. In: Hey RD, Bathurst JC, Thorne CR (eds) Gravel-Bed rivers: fluvial processes, engineering, and management. Wiley, Chichester, pp 227–271Google Scholar
  57. US Army Corps of Engineers (1983) Sacramento River and tributaries bank protection and erosion control investigation. California Sediment Transport Studies, Sacramento Dist., US Corps of Eng., Sacramento, CAGoogle Scholar
  58. US Army Corps of Engineers (2002a) HEC-RAS River Analysis System. Hydraulic Reference Manual. Version 3.1. US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA, November 2002Google Scholar
  59. US Army Corps of Engineers (2002b) HEC-RAS River Analysis System. User’s Manual. Version 3.1. US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA, November 2002Google Scholar
  60. US Army Corps of Engineers (2002c) HEC-RAS River Analysis System. Application Guide. Version 3.1. US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA, November 2002Google Scholar
  61. Vardy S, Saunders JE, Tolhurst TJ, Davies PA, Paterson DM (2007) Calibration of the high-pressure cohesive strength meter (CSM). Cont Shelf Res 27:1190–1199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wasklewicz TA, Anderson S, Liu PS (2004) Geomorphic context of channel locational probabilities along the lower Mississippi River, USA. Geomorphology 63:145–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wiberg PL, Smith JD (1989) Model for calculating bed load transport of sediment. J Hydraul Eng 115(1):101–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wynn TM (2004) The effects of vegetation on streambank erosion. PhD Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  65. Wynn TM, Henderson MB, Vaughan DH (2008) Changes in streambank erodibility and critical shear stress due to subaerial processes along a headwater stream, southwestern Virginia, USA. Geomorphology 97(3–4):260–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations