EARTH SURFACE PROCESSES AND LANDFORMS, VOL.

18,835-843 (1993)

ANALYSIS OF RIVERBANK INSTABILITY D U E TO TOE

SCOUR A N D LATERAL EROSION
COLIN R. THORNE
Department of Geography, University Park, Nottingham. NG7 2RD. U.K.
AND
STEVEN R. ABT
Department of Civil Engineering, Colorado State University. Fort Collins, Colorado 80523, U.S.A.

Reeeioed I0 April I993

Revised 20 September 1993

ABSTRACT
This paper provides instruction in the use of the computer spreadsheet to undertake the calculations necessary to apply
the Osman-Thorne bank stability analysis for steep, eroding riverbanks. The guide explains how to input the necessary
parameters into the LOTUS 123 spreadsheet in order to:
(i) find the initial factor of safety of the bank with respect to slab-type failure;
(ii) test the sensitivity of bank stability to changes in the engineering properties of the bank material;
(iii) analyse the response of bank stability to toe scour and/or lateral erosion and find the critical condition;
(iv) find the geometry of the failure surface and failure block;
(v) analyse the response of bank stability to further toe scour and/or lateral erosion;
(vi) find the geometry of the failure surface and failure block in subsequent failures.

KEY WORDS Toe scour River bank erosion Bank stability

BACKGROUND
Serious riverbank retreat usually occurs through a combination of fluvial erosion of intact bank material and
mass failure of the bank under gravity. Failure takes place when erosion of the bank and the channel bed
adjacent to the bank have increased the height and steepness of the bank to the point that it reaches a
condition of limiting stability. The mechanics of failure then depend on the engineering properties of the
bank material and the geometry of the bank at the point of collapse.
Eroding banks are usually steep and often fail by a slab-type mechanism where a block of soil falls forward
into the channel. The weakening effects of tension cracks between the block and the bank are often important
in controlling the geometry of the failure block and the timing of failure. For these reasons, tension cracks
should be accounted for in any analysis of bank stability with respect to slab-type failure.
Following failure, slump debris comes to rest around the bank toe, that is on the lower bank and the river
bed next to the toe. While in place this debris acts to increase bank stability by loading the toe, buttressing
the bank and protecting the intact bank material below from direct attack and entrainment by the flow.
However, the slump debris is more or less disturbed and disaggregated in the failure and so it is much less
resistant to erosion by the flow than the intact bank. Hence, the residence time of slump debris at the toe is
often quite short, because flow in the channel is quickly able to entrain and remove it. This is especially so if

0197-9331193/090835-09$09.50
0 1993 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
836 C. R. THORNE AND S. R. ABT

the forces of fluvial erosion are concentrated on the bank and the bed adjacent to the toe, as is the case at the
outer bank in meander bends and in unstable channels subject to degradation and rapid widening.
After removing the slump debris in the basal clean-out phase of the erosion cycle, the flow once more
attacks the intact bank and bed material, again reducing bank stability to the critical level and leading to
further mass failures. If in the long term the flow is able to complete basal clean-out and re-erode the banks
sufficiently to trigger further failures, then the bank profile remains unchanged over the course of time. The
bank retreats by ‘parallel retreat’ at a rate determined by the capacity of the flow to erode and remove
sediment (intact plus slump debris) from the toe area.
When analysing bank retreat it is important to recognize the cycle of erosion and retreat, and the roles
played by bed scouring, lateral erosion and mass instability in contributing to the problem. This is the
case for two major reasons. First, prediction of the future rates and locations of serious bank retreat and
selection of the best engineering solution to bank protection and stabilization depend on a sound
understan’ding of the place of mass bank instability in the evolution of the channel system as a whole. Second,
proper handling of the bank retreat problem depends on correct identification of the actual cause of bank
erosion, which may be associated with local scour, general scour, lateral instability or system-wide
degradation.

THEORETICAL BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS

The analysis of bank stability with regard to mass instability was undertaken by Osman (1985). The method
uses the resolution of driving and resisting forces in static equilibrium on the most critical potential failure
surface (plane or circular) to define a factor of safety (FS) for a bank with respect to mass failure. Osman and
Thorne (1988) presented the results of this analysis for slab-type failures, which are the most common types of
failure observed on streams with serious bank stability problems in the south-east United States. A value of
FS greater than one indicates stability, while a value equal to one defines the critical case, with the bank on
the point of collapse. A value less than unity indicates that the bank would be unstable with the geometry and
soil properties given, suggesting that either the data are unrealistic, or that the bank would have already
failed and could not have the given geometry.
Initially, the bank has the simple geometry shown in Figure la. At this stage the bank is stable with respect
to slab-failure, but as the bed scours and lateral erosion occurs, stability is reduced until the limiting
condition is reached and the first slab-failure occurs (Figure lb).
Following the initial failure the bank is at first stable in its new configuration (Figure 2a). But after basal
clean-out the flow again attacks the intact bank material and lateral erosion begins again. A large number of
field observations support the contention that further extensive degradation of the bed adjacent to the bank

A2
’-I
(a1 dW

(bl

Figure 1. (a) Initial bank geometry, (b) geometry at initial failure

 RIVERBANK TOE SCOUR AND LATERAL EROSION 837

O G

(b)

Figure 2. (a) Geometry after initial failure and basal clean-out and (b) geometry at subsequent failure

Table I. Data required for analysis of bank stability

Variable Symbol Units

Total bank height H ft

Erosion bank height HI ft
Bank slope angle I degrees
Soil specific weight sp. wt 1bftc3
Soil friction angle phi degrees
Soil cohesion C 1bftc2
Tension crack index K

is unlikely once the critical bank height for mass instability has been reached. Subsequent failures of the bank
are primarily caused by lateral bank erosion leading to oversteepening of the already over-heightened banks.
In this case, the slope angle can be approximated by the failure plane angle of the initial slope. The bank fails
when lateral erosion reduces the value of HI to the critical value for slab failure (Figure 2b). The cycle of
events is repeated in further subsequent failures at a frequency determined by the time necessary for the flow
to clean-out slump debris and re-erode the bank to the critical state.

DATA REQUIREMENTS
The data listed in Table I are required to perform the analysis. The tension crack index, K , is defined by:

H
where Y = tension crack depth (ft) and H = total bank height (ft). Experience shows that the tension crack
depth is usually equal to less than half the bank height and, if no site-specific data are available, 0.5 may be
used as the default value for K. In cases of uncertainty, the program may be used to assess the sensitivity of
FS to the value selected for K. Generally, varying K from 0.3 to 0 7 (its realistic range) does not change FS by
more than 10 per cent.
Bank height and angle information are best obtained from site surveys. However, cross-sections from
hydrographic surveys can be used when site survey is impossible. A note of caution is required when using
hydrographic survey data, however. Experience shows that field crews usually avoid banks that are steeper
than about 45" because they cannot be walked on and are hazardous to survey. As a result, bank angle
838 C. R. THORNE AND S. R. ABT

distributions based on such surveys tend to be truncated at about 45” and steeper banks are grossly under-
represented. Allowance for this effect should therefore be made by adjusting bank angles upwards when using
hydrographic survey data.
Information on the geotechnical properties of the bank material may also be difficult to obtain. The results
of test borings for foundation studies may be used, or investigations may be undertaken specifically for the
study of bank stability. However, whichever source of data is used, it should be remembered that failure is
usually associated with ‘worst case’ conditions, when the strength of the soil is minimized and its weight
maximized due to high water content. Under these circumstances the specific weight is close to the saturated
value, while cohesion and friction are at their lowest recorded values. These conditions occur following heavy
and prolonged precipitation and/or snowmelt. Also, drawdown in the channel may further reduce the
operational strength of the bank material by generating positive pore water pressures. In the limit, the
effective friction angle may be reduced to zero. Accordingly, it may be desirable to use two sets of data to
analyse bank stability. In the first, ‘worst case’ conditions are assumed and the values of Sp. wt, c and phi
selected accordingly. This condition defines the short to medium term stability of the bank. In the second, the
‘worst case’ effective friction angle is replaced by a value of zero. This defines the long-term stability of the
bank, as failure would only be expected as a result of the coincidence of worst case and drawdown conditions
operating simultaneously.

RUNNING THE ANALYSIS

Entering the initial bank data
When the spreadsheet is retrieved, the display appears as shown in Figure 3, with zeros in the data cells. At
this time it is necessary to enter the data defining the initial bank geometry and bank material properties. To
do this the cursor bar is moved to the relevant cell, and the numerical value for that cell is entered by striking
‘Return’. The data to be entered for the bank geometry are:
Va riab1e Cell Explanation

H B7 The total bank height (ft) from the bank toe to the bank edge
HI c7 The bank height (ft) above the zone of lateral erosion. Initially, this is equal
to the total bank height and this is the figure to be entered
I D7 Bank angle (degrees)
The data to be entered for bank material properties are:
sp. wt E7 The specific weight of the soil (lbft-3)
phi F7 The soil friction angle (degrees)
C G7 The soil cohesion (lb ft - ’)
K H7 The tension crack index ( Y / H )
Finding the initial factor of safety of the bank with respect to slab-type failure
Once all of these data have been entered, the program automatically calculates the FS of the bank in its
initial configuration and displays this in cell E13. At this stage the spreadsheet appears as in Figure 4. Since
there has, as yet, been no lateral erosion or toe scour, the values of DW and DZ are zero and the values of
total bank height (H) and upper bank height (HI)displayed in cells B13 and C13, respectively, are the same as
the initial values entered in B7 and C7.
The interpretation of FS appears in cells F12 and F13 next to its numerical value.
If FS is greater than one, the legend ‘BANK STABLE’ appears. This indicates that the bank, as initially
specified, would not fail by the slab-type mechanism unless overheightened and/or oversteepened by toe
scour and/or lateral erosion.
 RIVERBANK TOE SCOUR AND LATERAL EROSION 839
.*****.. BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS ****tooo
By
Colin R. Thorne and Lyle W. Zevenbergen
** INITIAL BANK GEOMETRY AND MATERIAL DATA **

H Hl I SPWT PHI C K
FT FT ffi LBIFT"3 ffi LBIFT"2 -
0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dz [XnJ
0 0

HNEW H1 NEW FS
0 0 E!44

Figure 3. Spreadsheet as retrieved from the disk

*.* BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS ********

B/
Colin R. Thorne and Lyle W. Zevenbergen
** INITIAL BANK GEOMETRY AND MATERIAL DATA **

H H1 I SPWT PHI C K
FT FT ffi LBIFT"3 ffi LBIFTA2 -
15 15 65 110 20 300 0.5

HNEW H1 NEW FS BANK

15 15 1.29 STABLE

Figure 4. Spreadsheet with initial bank geometry and soil properties data input

If FS is less than one, the legend 'BANK FAILED PREVIOUSLY' appears. This indicates that the bank,
as originally specified, could not be stable with the soil parameters given and should already have failed. In
this case it is necessary to re-examine the initial data and check their reliability.
If FS is equal to one then the stability of the bank in its initial state is critical. The legend 'BANK
CRITICAL' appears, indicating that the bank, as specified, would be on the point of collapse without any
further overheightening and/or oversteepening by toe scour and/or lateral erosion. The program calculates
and displays the data defining the geometry of the failure surface and the dimensions and volume of the
failure block. The further analysis of these results is discussed below.
Testing the sensitivity of bank stability to changes in the engineering properties of the bank material
Usually, the bank is stable in its initial condition. The sensitivity of that stability to changes in the
engineering properties of the bank materials can be easily investigated using the spreadsheet. To do this,
simply move the cursor to the cell containing the soil variable to be changed and enter a new value as desired.
By changing one variable while leaving all others fixed, it is possible to determine if the factor of safety is
sensitive or insensitive to changes in that variable.
This exercise is very useful in two ways. First, in deciding how much precision is required in the
measurement of each variable, and second, in characterization of each variable and in determining the impact
of reducing or increasing each of the soil factors through, for example, environmental effects (frost action in
840 C.R. THORNE AND S . R. ABT

weakening the soil, reduced friction due to elevated pore water pressures), floodplain activities (soak aways
and septic tanks raising the water table), or engineering procedures (sub-surface drainage, soil reinforcement
or cementation enhancing bank stability).
Analysing the response of bank stability to toe scour and/or lateral erosion and jinding the
critical condition
The primary purpose of the program is to calculate how the FS of the bank responds to toe scour and/or
lateral erosion, and define the critical case. To do this the amounts of toe scour and lateral erosion are entered
into the relevant cells as follows:
Variable Cell Explanation

DZ B10 Amount of toe scouring (ft) below initial bed elevation

DW c11 Amount of lateral erosion of lower bank (ft) from initial toe location
The spreadsheet automatically calculates the increase in total bank height (H) caused by toe scouring and
the reduction in upper bank height (HI)caused by lateral erosion and displays the new, updated values in
cells B13 and C13, respectively. The FS is also updated and the current value appears in cell El3 together
with its interpretation in cell F13.
The amounts of scour and erosion are increased incrementally and their impact in reducing FS is
investigated until the critical case is found. Should unrealistically high values be entered, so that the critical
case is missed and FS is reduced below one, the legend 'BANK FAILED PREVIOUSLY' appears. This
indicates that the amounts of scour and/or erosion entered are more than enough to trigger bank collapse
and that failure would have occurred before that much erosion could have taken place.
When the critical case has been found, with FS equal to one and the legend 'BANK CRITICAL' displayed,
the geometry of the failure surface and failure block are calculated automatically.
Finding the geometry of the failure surface and failure block for the initial failure
Once the critical case has been found, the spreadsheet (Figure 5 ) displays the parameters defining the
geometry of the failure surface and failure block as follows:
*******.
BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS ********
EPI
Colin R. Thorne and Lyle W. Zevenbergen
** INITIAL BANK GEOMETRY AND MATERIAL DATA **

H H1 I SPWT PHI C K
Fr FT CEG LBIFT"3 ffi LBIFT"2 -
15 15 65 110 20 300 0.5

DZ CMI
2 1.2

HNNV H1 NEW FS BANK

17 12.43 1.00 CRITICAL

YCRlT BETA Bw VB
Fr ffi Fr FT"3IFT
8.5 45.8 2.47 69.3
.*...*****..***.* *.*...*.
FOR SUBSEQUENT ANALYSIS PAGE DOWN
Figure 5. Spreadsheet showing the critical case for the initial failure. In this case, 2 ft of bed scour and 1.2 ft of lateral erosion were
sufficient to trigger a mass failure
 RIVERBANK TOE SCOUR AND LATERAL EROSION 84 1

Variable Cell Explanation

YCRIT C17 Tension crack depth at failure (ft)

BETA D17 Failure plane angle to the horizontal (degrees)
BW El7 Top bank failure block width (ft)
VB F17 Failure block volume per foot of channel length (ft3ft-l)
These data may be used to infer the increase in channel width, decrease in bank angle and volume of bank
material input to the channel by the initial slab-type failure.

Analysing the response of bank stability to further toe scour andlor lateral erosion
Following the analysis of the initial failure, the spreadsheet may be used to go on to deal with subsequent
failures due to continued erosion. To move to the subsequent failure analysis, simply press the key marked
‘PAGE DOWN. The screen now appears as shown in Figure 6, displaying the data defining the new bank
geometry and soil parameters after the initial failure, along with the FS for the bank in its new configuration.
Variable Cell Explanation

H B27 Total bank height after initial failure (ft)

HI C27 The bank height (ft) above the zone of lateral erosion. At the start of the
subsequent failure analysis this is equal to the total bank and this is the figure
which appears here
I D27 Bank angle. After the initial failure the failure plane defines the new angle of
the intact bank. This is the figure which appears here. It is assumed that any
wedge or berm of slump debris is removed by the flow in the basal clean-out
phase of bank retreat prior to the subsequent failure analysis
Sp. wt, phi
c and K E27-H27 Soil parameters, unchanged from values at the time of the initial failure
FS E33 Factor of safety for subsequent slab-type failure
Having defined the FS for the bank in its new configuration, the impact of further scour and/or erosion in
reducing stability and triggering further bank failures can be investigated. To do this increments of toe
scour, DZ, and lateral erosion, DW, are entered as follows:
Variable Cell Explanation

DZ B30 Amount of toe scouring (ft) below bed elevation at the time of initial failure
DW C30 Amount of lateral erosion of lower bank (ft) from toe location after the initial
failure and basal clean-out
SUBSEQUENT BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS

H H1 I SPWT PHI C K
FT FT ffi LB/FTA3 ffi LB/FTA2 -
17 17 45.8 110 20 300 0.5
Dz MN
0 0

HNEW H1 NEW FS BANK

0 0 1.28 STABLE

Figure 6. Spreadsheet after PAGE DOWN command, displaying subsequent analysis

842 C. R. THORNE AND S. R. ABT

SUBSEQUENT BANK STABILITY ANALYSIS

H H1 I SPWT PHI C K
FT FT ffi LB/FTA3 ffi LB/FTA2 -
17 17 45.8 110 20 300 0.5

az w
0.3 4.5

HNEW H1 NEW FS BANK

17.30 12.37 1 .OOCRITICAL

YCRIT BETA Bw VB
F T f f i FT FTA3/FT
8.65
.....*..*........* f........
45.8 4.79 71.1

Figure 7. Spreadsheet showing the critical case for the subsequent failures

It should be remembered that experience shows that once the channel banks have reached the critical
height for initial failure under gravity, further toe scour and bed degradation are limited. Subsequent failures
seem to be generated primarily by lateral bank erosion with, possibly, relatively small amounts of further
toe scour.
The amount of erosion (and scour if desired) is increased incrementally and the impact in reducing the FS
is investigated until the critical case is found.
The spreadsheet automatically calculates the increase in total bank height (H)caused to toe scouring and
the reduction in upper bank height (H,) caused by lateral erosion, and displays the new, updated values in
cells B33 and C33, respectively. The factor of safety is also updated and the current value appears in cell E33
together with its interpretation in cell F33.
Should unrealistically high values be entered, so that the critical case is missed and FS is reduced below
one, the legend 'BANK FAILED PREVIOUSLY' appears. This indicates that the amount of erosion (and
scour) entered is more than enough to trigger bank collapse and that failure would have occurred before that
much erosion could have taken place.
When the critical case has been found, with FS equal to one and the legend 'BANK CRITICAL' displayed,
the geometry of the failure surface and failure block are calculated automatically.
Finding the geometry of the failure surface and block for subsequent failures
Once the critical case has been found, the spreadsheet (Figure 7) displays the parameters defining the
geometry of the failure surface and failure block as follows:
Variable Cell Explanation

YCRIT c37 Tension crack depth at failure (ft)

BETA D37 Failure plane angle to the horizontal (degrees)
BW E37 Top bank failure block width (ft)
VB F37 Failure block volume per foot of channel length (ft3 ft- I)

These data may be used to infer the increase in channel width and volume of bank material input to the
channel by the subsequent slab-type failures. This completes the analysis of bank stability using the
Osman-Thorne stability analysis and the LOTUS 123 spreadsheet.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The theory used in this program was developed at Colorado State University as part of the postgraduate
studies by Mohomed Osman. The spreadsheet program was originally converted to LOTUS 123 by Lyle
 RIVERBANK TOE SCOUR AND LATERAL EROSION 843

Zevenbergen, from a Hewlett-Packard program written by Colin Thorne. The version presented here was
developed by Colin Thorne from the original.

REFERENCES

Osman, M. A. 1985. Channel widrh response to changes injrow hydraulics and sediment load, Ph.D. Thesis, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
Osman, M. A. and Thorne, C. R. 1988. ‘Riverbank stability analysis.I: Theory’, A X E Journalof Hydraulic Engineering,114(2), 134-150.