Review on different shapes of spurs and their effects on channel morphology

Abstract

In this paper, the significance of the shape of spurs on flow and bed morphology is understood, accompanied by an appeal to investigate alternative shapes like L-head, T-head spurs, and hockey-shaped spurs, which could offer considerable benefits for river management. The spurs with T-head shape are found to be more efficient in reducing the bed scouring of the channel relatively, although it depends on the orientation of the spur, location of installation, and shape of the channel. Furthermore, development of horseshoe vortex is found insignificant near the base of the T-head spur dike. T-head spurs could more effectively redirect flow and prevent erosion while L-head spurs may enhance riverbank stability. This highlights the need for more investigation into how different spur shapes collectively affect river morphology, flow velocity, and sediment transport patterns. Temporal variations in bed morphology, especially the scour depth and sediment transport dynamics near spur dikes, should also be investigated to understand their changing impact better. Finally, this study provides a complete summary of existing knowledge gaps and future research initiatives relevant to various shapes of spur dikes and their role in riverbank erosion management. HIGHLIGHTS Review the shape of the spurs installed for the river bank protection.; There is a need of investigation into how different spur shapes collectively affect river morphology.; T-head spur dike shows significant development of vortex at its base.; L-head spurs show better riverbank stability.; Present work analyses the design principles of various shaped spurs.;

Keywords

• bed morphology
• scour depth
• spur dikes
• spur shapes