Geology topics

Research about Rochester, Vermont

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Rochester, Vermont.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS1998

Level II scour analysis for Bridge 25 (ROCHTH00400025) on Town Highway 40, crossing Corporation Brook, Rochester, Vermont

This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure ROCHTH00400025 on Town Highway 40 crossing Corporation Brook, Rochester, Vermont (figures 1–8). A Level II study is a basic engineering analysis of the site, including a quantitative analysis of stream stability and scour (FHWA, 1993). Results of a Level I scour investigation also are included in appendix E of this report. A Level I investigation provides a qualitative geomorphic characterization of the study site. Information on the bridge, from Vermont Agency of Transportation files, was compiled prior to conducting Level I and Level II analyses and is found in appendix D. The site is in the Green Mountain section of the New England physiographic province in central Vermont. The 4.97-mi 2 drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is forest on the upstream left and right overbanks, and the downstream left overbank. On the downstream right overbank, the surface cover is predominately brushland. In the study area, Corporation Brook has an incised, sinuous channel with a slope of approximately 0.04 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 37 ft and an average bank height of 6 ft. The channel bed material ranges from gravel to boulders with a median grain size (D 50 ) of 101 mm (0.332 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I site visit on April 12, 1995 and Level I and II site visit on July 8, 1996, indicated that the reach was stable. The Town Highway 40 crossing of Corporation Brook is a 31-ft-long, one-lane bridge consisting of a 26-foot steel stringer span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 22, 1995). The opening length of the structure parallel to the bridge face is 24 ft. The bridge is supported by vertical, concrete abutments. The channel is skewed approximately 15 degrees to the opening while the opening-skew-to-roadway is 15 degrees. A scour hole 1.0 ft deeper than the mean thalweg depth was observed in the channel at the downstream bridge face during the Level I assessment. Additionally, it was observed that the left abutment footing was exposed 1.0 ft and the right abutment footing was exposed 2.0 ft. Scour countermeasures at the site included type-1 stone fill (less than 12 inches diameter) along the upstream left and right banks and the downstream left bank. Type-2 stone fill (less than 36 inches diameter) scour protection extended along the downstream right bank and the upstream and downstream ends of the abutments. Additional details describing conditions at the site are included in the Level II Summary and appendices D and E. Scour depths and recommended rock rip-rap sizes were computed using the general guidelines described in Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (Richardson and Davis, 1995) for the 100- and 500-year discharges. In addition, the incipient roadway-overtopping discharge was determined and analyzed as another potential worst-case scour scenario. Total scour at a highway crossing is comprised of three components: 1) long-term streambed degradation; 2) contraction scour (due to accelerated flow caused by a reduction in flow area at a bridge) and; 3) local scour (caused by accelerated flow around piers and abutments). Total scour is the sum of the three components. Equations are available to compute depths for contraction and local scour and a summary of the results of these computations follows. Contraction scour for all modelled flows ranged from 0.1 to 1.5 ft. The worst-case contraction scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. Left abutment scour ranged from 6.5 to 7.0 ft. The worst-case left abutment scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. Right abutment scour ranged from 5.6 to 6.0 ft. The worst-case right abutment scour occurred at the incipient roadway-overtopping discharge. Additional information on scour depths and depths to armoring are included in the section titled “Scour Results”. Scoured-streambed elevations, based on the calculated scour depths, are presented in tables 1 and 2. A cross-section of the scour computed at the bridge is presented in figure 8. Scour depths were calculated assuming an infinite depth of erosive material and a homogeneous particle-size distribution. It is generally accepted that the Froehlich equation (abutment scour) gives “excessively conservative estimates of scour depths” (Richardson and Davis, 1995, p. 46). Usually, computed scour depths are evaluated in combination with other information including (but not limited to) historical performance during flood events, the geomorphic stability assessment, existing scour protection measures, and the results of the hydraulic analyses. Therefore, scour depths adopted by VTAOT may differ from the computed values documented herein.

Vermont↗

USGS1998

Level II scour analysis for Bridge 28 (ROCHTH00370028) on Town Highway 37, crossing Brandon Brook, Rochester, Vermont

This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure ROCHTH00370028 on Town Highway 37 crossing Brandon Brook, Rochester, Vermont (figures 1–8). A Level II study is a basic engineering analysis of the site, including a quantitative analysis of stream stability and scour (FHWA, 1993). Results of a Level I scour investigation also are included in appendix E of this report. A Level I investigation provides a qualitative geomorphic characterization of the study site. Information on the bridge, gleaned from VTAOT files, was compiled prior to conducting Level I and Level II analyses and is found in appendix D. The site is in the Green Mountain section of the New England physiographic province in central Vermont. The 8.0-mi 2 drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is pasture on the upstream left overbank although the immediate banks have dense woody vegetation. The upstream right overbank and downstream left and right overbanks are forested. In the study area, the Brandon Brook has an incised, sinuous channel with a slope of approximately 0.01 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 44 ft and an average bank height of 7 ft. The channel bed material ranges from gravel to cobbles with a median grain size (D 50 ) of 84.2 mm (0.276 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I site visit on April 12, 1995 and Level II site visit on July 8, 1996, indicated that the reach was stable. The Town Highway 37 crossing of the Brandon Brook is a 33-ft-long, one-lane bridge consisting of a 31-foot timber-stringer span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 22, 1995). The opening length of the structure parallel to the bridge face is 29.6 ft. The bridge is supported by vertical, timber log cribbing abutments with wingwalls. The channel is skewed approximately 5 degrees to the opening while the computed opening-skew-to-roadway is zero degrees. A scour hole 1.0 ft deeper than the mean thalweg depth was observed along the upstream left wingwall and the left abutment during the Level I assessment. The only scour protection measure at the site was type-5 protection, an artificial levee, extending along the upstream right bank to the end of the upstream right wingwall. Additional details describing conditions at the site are included in the Level II Summary and appendices D and E. Scour depths and recommended rock rip-rap sizes were computed using the general guidelines described in Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (Richardson and others, 1995) for the 100- and 500-year discharges. Total scour at a highway crossing is comprised of three components: 1) long-term streambed degradation; 2) contraction scour (due to accelerated flow caused by a reduction in flow area at a bridge) and; 3) local scour (caused by accelerated flow around piers and abutments). Total scour is the sum of the three components. Equations are available to compute depths for contraction and local scour and a summary of the results of these computations follows. Contraction scour for all modelled flows was zero ft. Left abutment scour ranged from 7.1 to 9.9 ft where the worst-case scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. Right abutment scour ranged from 4.4 to 5.1 ft where the worst-case scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. Additional information on scour depths and depths to armoring are included in the section titled “Scour Results.” Scoured-streambed elevations, based on the calculated scour depths, are presented in tables 1 and 2. A cross-section of the scour computed at the bridge is presented in figure 8. Scour depths were calculated assuming an infinite depth of erosive material and a homogeneous particle-size distribution. It is generally accepted that the Froehlich equation (abutment scour) gives “excessively conservative estimates of scour depths” (Richardson and Davis, 1995, p. 46). Usually, computed scour depths are evaluated in combination with other information including (but not limited to) historical performance during flood events, the geomorphic stability assessment, existing scour protection measures, and the results of the hydraulic analyses. Therefore, scour depths adopted by VTAOT may differ from the computed values documented herein

Vermont↗

USGS1997

Level II scour analysis for Bridge 34 (ROCHTH00210034) on Town Highway 21, crossing the White River, Rochester, Vermont

This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure ROCHTH00210034 on Town Highway 21 crossing the White River, Rochester, Vermont (figures 1–8). A Level II study is a basic engineering analysis of the site, including a quantitative analysis of stream stability and scour (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993). Results of a Level I scour investigation also are included in Appendix E of this report. A Level I investigation provides a qualitative geomorphic characterization of the study site. Information on the bridge, obtained from Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTAOT) files, was compiled prior to conducting Level I and Level II analyses and is found in Appendix D. The site is in the Green Mountain section of the New England physiographic province in central Vermont. The 74.8-mi 2 drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is suburban on the upstream and downstream left overbanks, though brush prevails along the immediate banks. On the upstream and downstream right overbanks, the surface cover is pasture with brush and trees along the immediate banks. In the study area, the White River has an incised, straight channel with a slope of approximately 0.002 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 102 ft and an average bank height of 5 ft. The channel bed material ranges from sand to cobble with a median grain size (D 50 ) of 74.4 mm (0.244 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I and Level II site visit on July 23, 1996, indicated that the reach was stable. The Town Highway 21 crossing of the White River is a 72-ft-long, two-lane bridge consisting of 70-foot steel stringer span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 22, 1995). The opening length of the structure parallel to the bridge face is 67.0 ft. The bridge is supported by vertical, concrete abutments with wingwalls. The channel is skewed approximately 15 degrees to the opening while the opening-skew-to-roadway is zero degrees. Channel scour, 1.5 ft deeper than the mean thalweg depth was observed along the left abutment and wingwalls during the Level I assessment. Scour countermeasures at the site includes type-1 stone fill (less than 12 inches diameter) along the upstream left bank and the upstream and downstream left road embankments, type-2 (less than 36 inches diameter) along the upstream end of the upstream left wingwall and downstream left bank, and type-3 (less than 48 inches diameter) along the downstream end of the downstream left wingwall. Additional details describing conditions at the site are included in the Level II Summary and Appendices D and E. Scour depths and recommended rock rip-rap sizes were computed using the general guidelines described in Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (Richardson and others, 1995). In addition, the incipient roadway-overtopping discharge is analyzed since it has the potential of being the worst-case scour scenario. Total scour at a highway crossing is comprised of three components: 1) long-term streambed degradation; 2) contraction scour (due to accelerated flow caused by a reduction in flow area at a bridge) and; 3) local scour (caused by accelerated flow around piers and abutments). Total scour is the sum of the three components. Equations are available to compute depths for contraction and local scour and a summary of the results of these computations follows. Contraction scour for all modelled discharges was zero. Left abutment scour ranged from 6.8 to 21.2 ft. Right abutment scour ranged from 13.9 to 18.4 ft. The worst-case abutment scour occurred at the 500-year discharge at the left and right abutments. Additional information on scour depths and depths to armoring are included in the section titled “Scour Results”. Scoured-streambed elevations, based on the calculated scour depths, are presented in tables 1 and 2. A cross-section of the scour computed at the bridge is presented in figure 8. Scour depths were calculated assuming an infinite depth of erosive material and a homogeneous particle-size distribution. It is generally accepted that the Froehlich equation (abutment scour) gives “excessively conservative estimates of scour depths” (Richardson and others, 1995, p. 47). Usually, computed scour depths are evaluated in combination with other information including (but not limited to) historical performance during flood events, the geomorphic stability assessment, existing scour protection measures, and the results of the hydraulic analyses. Therefore, scour depths adopted by VTAOT may differ from the computed values documented herein.

Vermont↗

USGS1997

Level II scour analysis for Bridge 144 (ROCHVT01000144) on State Route 100, crossing the White River, Rochester, Vermont

This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure ROCHVT01000144 on State Route 100 crossing the White River, Rochester, Vermont (figures 1–8). A Level II study is a basic engineering analysis of the site, including a quantitative analysis of stream stability and scour (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993). Results of a Level I scour investigation also are included in Appendix E of this report. A Level I investigation provides a qualitative geomorphic characterization of the study site. Information on the bridge, gleaned from Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTAOT) files, was compiled prior to conducting Level I and Level II analyses and is found in Appendix D. The site is in the Green Mountain section of the New England physiographic province in central Vermont. The 68.9-mi 2 drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is pasture with forest on the valley walls. In the study area, the White River has a meandering channel with a slope of approximately 0.003 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 119 ft and an average channel depth of 4 ft. The predominant channel bed material is gravel and cobbles with a median grain size (D 50 ) of 72.5 mm (0.238 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I and Level II site visit on July 22, 1996, indicated that the reach was laterally unstable due to a cut-bank present on the upstream left bank and wide point bars upstream and downstream in the vicinity of this site. The State Route 100 crossing of the White Riveris a 103-ft-long, two-lane bridge consisting of one 101-foot steel-beam span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 8, 1995). The bridge is supported by vertical, concrete abutment walls with spill-through embankments in front of each abutment wall and no wingwalls. The channel is skewed approximately 10 degrees to the opening while the opening-skew-toroadway is 5 degrees. The scour protection measures at the site are type-2 stone fill (less than 36 inches diameter) on the upstream left bank, both abutment spill-through embankments, and the downstream banks. There also is type-1 stone fill (less than 12 inches diameter) on the upstream right bank. The stone fill is continuous on both sides of the river in the vicinity of the bridge. Additional details describing conditions at the site are included in the Level II Summary and Appendices D and E. Scour depths and rock rip-rap sizes were computed using the general guidelines described in Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (Richardson and others, 1995). Total scour at a highway crossing is comprised of three components: 1) long-term streambed degradation; 2) contraction scour (due to accelerated flow caused by a reduction in flow area at a bridge) and; 3) local scour (caused by accelerated flow around piers and abutments). Total scour is the sum of the three components. Equations are available to compute depths for contraction and local scour and a summary of the results of these computations follows. There was no computed contraction scour for the modelled flows. Abutment scour ranged from 6.9 to 10.9 ft. The worst-case abutment scour occurred at the incipient overtopping discharge, which was less than the 100-year discharge. Additional information on scour depths and depths to armoring are included in the section titled “Scour Results”. Scoured-streambed elevations, based on the calculated scour depths, are presented in tables 1 and 2. A cross-section of the scour computed at the bridge is presented in figure 8. Scour depths were calculated assuming an infinite depth of erosive material and a homogeneous particlesize distribution. It is generally accepted that the Froehlich equation (abutment scour) gives “excessively conservative estimates of scour depths” (Richardson and others, 1995, p. 47). Usually, computed scour depths are evaluated in combination with other information including (but not limited to) historical performance during flood events, the geomorphic stability assessment, existing scour protection measures, and the results of the hydraulic analyses. Therefore, scour depths adopted by VTAOT may differ from the computed values documented herein.

Vermont↗