In: River Flow 2014, International Conference on Fluvial Hydraulics Eds: Anton J. Schleiss, Giovanni de Cesare, Mario J. Franca, Michael Pfister, EPFL Lausanne.
Most hydraulic engineering methods in rivers focus on bank enhancement for protecting the
banks from erosion. By contrast, submerged river training structures function by effectively guiding eroding
currents away from the banks and hence lowering shear stress in the bank area. Such installations known as
“micro groins” and “meandering ramps” are built of natural boulders. They operate from within the river bed,
not from the banks. Accordingly, these designs are covered under the term Instream River Training (IRT). A
further key feature is the generation of helicoidal secondary flows which have an effect on sediment transport
as well as on velocity and shear stress distributions. As opposed to conventional groins, IRT structures
protrude only marginally from the river bed (i.e. 0.15m), yet they operate efficiently during floods. In this paper
we present fundamentals as well as monitoring results of recently built IRT structures. The monitoring results
are promising. In 2011 micro groins and meandering ramps were installed in the Taverna river, canton
Freiburg, Switzerland. These submerged groins proved to successfully protect the outer banks from erosion
during a 30-year flood and to diversify bed morphology. The monitoring program for the Taverna river will
be continued until 2017 to further investigate IRT structures.
Original Title
Werdenberg et. al (2014) - Instream River Training: Fundamentals & Practical Example
In: River Flow 2014, International Conference on Fluvial Hydraulics Eds: Anton J. Schleiss, Giovanni de Cesare, Mario J. Franca, Michael Pfister, EPFL Lausanne.
Most hydraulic engineering methods in rivers focus on bank enhancement for protecting the
banks from erosion. By contrast, submerged river training structures function by effectively guiding eroding
currents away from the banks and hence lowering shear stress in the bank area. Such installations known as
“micro groins” and “meandering ramps” are built of natural boulders. They operate from within the river bed,
not from the banks. Accordingly, these designs are covered under the term Instream River Training (IRT). A
further key feature is the generation of helicoidal secondary flows which have an effect on sediment transport
as well as on velocity and shear stress distributions. As opposed to conventional groins, IRT structures
protrude only marginally from the river bed (i.e. 0.15m), yet they operate efficiently during floods. In this paper
we present fundamentals as well as monitoring results of recently built IRT structures. The monitoring results
are promising. In 2011 micro groins and meandering ramps were installed in the Taverna river, canton
Freiburg, Switzerland. These submerged groins proved to successfully protect the outer banks from erosion
during a 30-year flood and to diversify bed morphology. The monitoring program for the Taverna river will
be continued until 2017 to further investigate IRT structures.
In: River Flow 2014, International Conference on Fluvial Hydraulics Eds: Anton J. Schleiss, Giovanni de Cesare, Mario J. Franca, Michael Pfister, EPFL Lausanne.
Most hydraulic engineering methods in rivers focus on bank enhancement for protecting the
banks from erosion. By contrast, submerged river training structures function by effectively guiding eroding
currents away from the banks and hence lowering shear stress in the bank area. Such installations known as
“micro groins” and “meandering ramps” are built of natural boulders. They operate from within the river bed,
not from the banks. Accordingly, these designs are covered under the term Instream River Training (IRT). A
further key feature is the generation of helicoidal secondary flows which have an effect on sediment transport
as well as on velocity and shear stress distributions. As opposed to conventional groins, IRT structures
protrude only marginally from the river bed (i.e. 0.15m), yet they operate efficiently during floods. In this paper
we present fundamentals as well as monitoring results of recently built IRT structures. The monitoring results
are promising. In 2011 micro groins and meandering ramps were installed in the Taverna river, canton
Freiburg, Switzerland. These submerged groins proved to successfully protect the outer banks from erosion
during a 30-year flood and to diversify bed morphology. The monitoring program for the Taverna river will
be continued until 2017 to further investigate IRT structures.
2014 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-02674-2 Instream river training: Fundamentals and practical example N. Werdenberg Basler & Hofmann West, Zollikofen, Switzerland M. Mende IUB Engineering, Bern, Switzerland C. Sindelar IWHW, BOKU, Vienna, Austria ABSTRACT: Most hydraulic engineering methods in rivers focus on bank enhancement for protecting the banks from erosion. By contrast, submerged river training structures function by effectively guiding eroding currents away from the banks and hence lowering shear stress in the bank area. Such installations known as micro groins and meandering ramps are built of natural boulders. They operate from within the river bed, not from the banks. Accordingly, these designs are covered under the term Instream River Training (IRT). A further key feature is the generation of helicoidal secondary flows which have an effect on sediment transport as well as on velocity and shear stress distributions. As opposed to conventional groins, IRT structures protrude only marginally from the river bed (i.e. 0.15 m), yet they operate efficiently during floods. In this paper we present fundamentals as well as monitoring results of recently built IRT structures. The monitoring results are promising. In 2011 micro groins and meandering ramps were installed in the Taverna river, canton Freiburg, Switzerland. These submerged groins proved to successfully protect the outer banks from erosion during a 30-year flood and to diversify bed morphology. The monitoring program for the Taverna river will be continued until 2017 to further investigate IRT structures. fundamental cause for morphological changes, which lies in the flow itself. The second approach therefore focuses on the reduction of the hydraulic force including the sys- tematic modification of the flow. Consequently, this approach is treating causes rather than effects. Most common, it is applied by using river train- ing techniques which modify the flow by locally increasing the roughness and therefore reducing the velocity, such as conventional groins or bioen- gineering methods. Nevertheless, their use gener- ally evokes an increase in water level and therefore requires a sufficient freeboard, which restricts their implementation if space is limited. Furthermore, the application of bioengineering techniques, although ecologically favorable, is restricted to rivers with medium hydraulic force and mean flow depth. Therefore, they often require a combination with rock fill toe protection or other non- biological stabilizing measures. Another, relatively unknown approach to mod- ify the flow is the generation of secondary flows that interact with the main flow. This interaction is similar to the well known example of natural flow dynamics in a river bend, where the main flow is diverted to the outer bank and later to the 1 INTRODUCTION Over the last decades river training has become increasingly nature-orientated. A main objective of todays hydraulic engineering in rivers is the redevelopment of their natural dynamics, includ- ing broad scale channel dynamics and floodplain development. However, sufficient space to achieve this objective is often not available due to human land use. Therefore, most of the river training measures still implement the stabilization of the river banks and bed. This applies to flood protec- tion as well as to river restoration projects. Due to the lack of space, a more or less fixed river channel is required to resist hydraulic forces and to prevent morphological changes, i.e. bank erosion. To stabilize rivers there are basically two approaches. The most popular solution is to adapt the river channel in order to increase the resistance. For this purpose, longitudinal training techniques like rip rap or side walls are typically used. This results in high costs and ecologi- cal disadvantages like poor biological connec- tivity between aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Moreover, these measures can be qualified as treating symptoms rather than approaching the 1572 channel bottom (Rozovskii 1957, Meckel 1978). As a consequence of this helicoidal secondary flow, the outer bank of a river bend is usually character- ized by bank erosion and bend scour whereas the inner bank is characterized by sedimentation and low velocities. If a secondary flow is induced on purpose, the described process, which often causes problems for river engineers regarding bank stability, can be used to generate desirable effects. In fact, by inducing secondary flows, predictable changes in the veloc- ity distribution and cross section geometry can be achieved. This is the basic idea of Instream River Training (Mende & Sindelar 2010, Mende 2012), where submerged instream structures are used to generate secondary currents. 1.1 State of the art submerged instream structures The scientific investigation of submerged vanes is inextricably linked to Jacob Odgaard and his fellow researchers who explored the use of sub- merged vanes in the field, in physical model tests and theoretically. A comprehensive summary of this research along with design guidelines for sub- merged vanes is provided in Odgaard (2009). In the USA and in Canada instream rock structures are used for grade control, bank protection and river restoration. Experience-driven design guide- lines exist for stream barbs (USDA 2005) and rock vanes (Rosgen 2001). We will refer to this kind of structures as Rosgen-type structures. These rock structures project from the bankfull stage stre- ambank into the channel center. The structure is sloping such that the tip of the structure is level with the river bed or protrudes only slightly from the bed. At low flow conditions only the tip of the structure is submerged. Thus, recirculation eddies are often generated up- and down-stream of the non-submerged near-bank part of the structure which may enhance bank erosion. On bank-full discharge a hydraulic jump develops down-stream of the structure, potentially endangering bank sta- bility. In recent times, experimental and numerical investigations in the vicinity of rock structures contribute to better understand the functioning of rock structures and its implications on hydrody- namics and morphodynamics (e.g. Jamieson et al. 2013, Khosronejad et al. 2013, Minor et al. 2007). Independent of the investigations on submerged vanes and on Rosgen-type rock structures, instream structures have been developed in Styria, Austria, since the 1990es by river engineer Otmar Grober. We will refer to these structures as Grober-type structures. Field installations can be found in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Some of these installations have been investigated scientifically (Mende & Sindelar 2010, Sindelar et al. 2007) and have proven to ameliorate the habitat for fish (Pinter et al. 2009) and to invoke sediment sorting (Sindelar & Mende 2009, Sindelar, 2011). In con- trast to sub-merged vanes, Grober-type structures are built of rock boulders that easily blend in with the natural environment. Compared to Rosgen- type structures they are generally smaller and com- pletely submerged already at low flow conditions. In this paper we discuss two Grober-type instream structures, namely micro groins and meandering ramps (Chapter 2). They serve as examples of nature-orientated and efficient instream river training structures. In Chapter 3 we give a practical example of such Grober-type structures in the Taverna river in Switzerland and present monitoring results. 2 INSTREAM RIVER TRAINING 2.1 Definition Instream River Training (IRT) is a method of river engineering where the flow, being the main reason for bank and bed erosion, is modified by inducing one or more large-scale helicoidal sec- ondary flows (i.e. spiral flows). For this purpose, instream structures which are completely sub- merged at low flow conditions are used. Depend- ing on the field of application, the modification of the flow has one of the following goals: a. Channel stabilization while omitting or reduc- ing longitudinal bank enhancement structures (e.g. rip rap or side walls). b. Diversification of bed morphology. c. Sustainable sediment management. d. Initiation of a dynamic river channel development. Most importantly, the IRT structures described below offer the possibility to meet both ecologi- cal and stabilization requirements at the same time and thus to enhance the situation for a large part of todays degraded rivers, even where space is scarce. However, it has to be pointed out that IRT is no substitute for the loss of a natural river development corridor encompassing vegetation and enabling extensive dynamic processes (e.g. bend migration, mobile large woody debris) and the reduction of pollutants from the surroundings. 2.2 IRT structures 2.2.1 Micro groins The micro groin (in German Lenkbuhne) is a special type of groin which is already submerged at low flow conditions and therefore rather resembles ground sills than conventional groins. Ground sills 1573 as well as micro groins only protrude slightly from the river bed. A flow transition with a hydraulic jump, as it is typical for conventional groins at sub-mergence, only occurs at low discharge. There- fore, micro groins do not reduce the water surface slope (Mende & Sindelar 2010). In contrast to ground sills, which are mostly orientated perpendicular to the main flow and cover the width of the whole river bed, inclined and declined micro groins only cover a part of the rivers width and induce a helicoidal secondary flow at high sub-mergence. As shown by the example of an inclined micro groin in Figure 1, this spiral flow directs relatively slow flowing water sections from near the ground into the groin area, whereas fast flowing sections from near the water surface are directed away from it. Thus, the velocity in the micro groin area as well as the hydraulic force act- ing on the bank is considerably reduced. Sediment deposition occurs on the bank near to the micro groin, providing additional bank protection. Out- side of the groin area, the velocity increases and the river bed deepens slightly. So far, most micro groins have been used for bank protection, structuring of watercourses and sediment management (see Chapter 2.1). In con- trast to conventional groins, micro groins are char- acterized by their low height. Usually, they only protrude about 10 to 20 cm from the river bed. In the Mur river, the largest river in the district of Figure 1. Schematic isotach-picture (cross sections) of a straight river without (left) and with micro groins (adapted from Sindelar & Mende 2009). Figure 2. IRT structures implemented at Taverna river, Switzerland. a) Inclined micro groins. b) Funnel shaped micro groins. c) Snail shaped micro groins. d) Hook shaped micro groins. e) Meandering ramp. Styria (Austria) with a bed width of about 50 cm, micro groins have been constructed with a height of 50 to 80 cm. Compared to conventional groins, micro groins can save on material and construction costs, since they are much smaller. Due to their low height, micro groins do not increase the water level, hence they can also be implemented in situations where space is relatively scarce (i.e. in settlement areas). Furthermore, they are easy to combine with existing longitudinal structures, for example for morphological diversification of the river bed or for diminishing hydraulic force on old bank enhance- ment constructions (Werdenberg et al. 2012). 2.2.2 Meandering ramps In the Alpine region the use of step-pool ramps has become more and more popular in recent times due to the fact that they better ensure fish passage in comparison to block ramps (Sindelar & Knoblauch 2010). Step-pool ramps lend their design from step- pool systems that develop naturally in steep moun- tain streams. The steps of the ramp consist of big boulders which extend across the whole channel width. Pools with large water depths are located in between two steps. Design parameters such as vertical drop between two consecutive steps, step spacing and pool depth depend on the fish spe- 1574 cies populating the river reach where the ramp is constructed. The dominating flow regime is the cascading tumbling flow (Geiger & Sindelar 2012). The meandering ramp is a special kind of step-pool ramp with its steps alternately sloping to the left and right bank, respectively. Thus, a mean- dering thalweg develops on low flow conditions (see Fig. 2e). The alternating slopes along with the slight curvature of the steps induce helicoidal sec- ondary currents at high sub-mergence. Analogous to inclined micro groins, these spiral flows dimin- ish the hydraulic force on the river banks within the ramp. The boulders comprising a step are embed- ded into the river bed and the banks and protrude from the bed only a few decimeters. In contrast to other step-pool ramps the pools of a meander- ing ramp are not armored in general. This enables natural processes of scouring, deposition and sedi- ment sorting. Design guidelines for meandering ramps can be found in Sindelar (2011). 3 PRACTICAL EXAMPLE: IRT AT TAVERNA RIVER 3.1 Project description Between 2011 and 2013 about 60 IRT structures were implemented in an innovative flood protection and river rehabilitation project at Taverna river, a small river on the foothills of the Alps, located in the canton Freiburg, Switzerland. Depending on the rivers curvature, its slope and the desired effect (e.g. bank protection, diversification of bed mor- phology, fish passage) a broad variety of IRT struc- tures was installed at specific sections of Taverna river to guide the local flow energy accordingly (see Fig. 2). These submerged structures consist of boul- ders built into the river bed. The required boulder mass of ca. 1500 kg per boulder was determined by common stability criteria (Shields 1936, Stevens et al. 1976). The spacing, angles and heights of the IRT structures was determined by code of practice (Werdenberg et al. 2012). In general, the visible parts of these structures protrude only 10 to 20 cm from the river bed. The visible structure is comple- mented by boulders for scour protection (ca. 0.7 m below bed level) and for anchoring in the bank. Along a newly rehabilitated section of Taverna river, inclined and funnel shaped micro groins were installed into the channel to provide bank pro- tection and river bed diversity. Traditional bank enhancement structures were completely omitted. In this section, the performance of micro groins is currently being monitored (see Chapter 3.2). Also, further river sections with existing bank enhancement structures were treated with the installment of inclined, snail shaped and hook shaped micro groins in order to diversify the prevailing homogenous morphology and poor flow structure of these sections. Furthermore, a river section featuring a vertical drop was remodeled by implementing a meander- ing ramp (slope 5%) to reassure fish passage. 3.2 Monitoring of micro groins at Taverna river The performance of micro groins and their quali- fication for bank protection and for diversifica- tion of morphology is currently being monitored on behalf of the canton Freiburg and the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (Werdenberg et al. 2013). This long term monitoring program (2011 to 2017) focuses on the rehabilitated section of Taverna river, which is located on the outskirts of the village Flamatt. The section covers a total length of ca. 350 m and slopes between 1.2 and 2.0%. It consists of a double curve (length ca. 200 m) and a straight channel (length ca. 150 m), both newly built in early 2011, and without any bank stabiliz- ing vegetation established yet. Instead of tradi- tional bank enhancement, 15 inclined micro groins were installed along the curves and 6 funnel shaped micro groins along the straight channel. The outer banks of the curved channel are naturally more prone to erosion than the straight channel and therefore are of greater interest for monitoring bank stability. Hence, 6 cross sections were defined within the curved channel for peri- odic measurement of bank stability (Fig. 3). To clarify the importance of micro groin design for bank stability, a control section (length ca. 20 m) without micro groins was also included. For assess- ing morphologic diversification by inclined micro groins, an area F of 15 15 m was defined for peri- odic measurement. Furthermore, the development of both the curved and the straight channel is peri- odically documented by photographs. Since completion of the channel construction in June 2011, several flood events occurred at Taverna river. In October and in November 2012, two big floods with peak flows of ca. 30 m 3 /s were docu- Figure 3. The curved channel of Taverna river with localization of inclined micro groins (white lines), control section (dotted white line), cross sections 1 to 6 and area F. 1575 mented, which correspond to a 30-year flood event reduced by upstream retention. For comparison: a discharge of 38 m 3 /s corresponds to a 100-year flood reduced by upstream retention and equals the protection objective for the village Flamatt. 3.2.1 Results bank protection The comparison of the cross section data from June 2011 and June 2012 (Fig. 4) shows no differ- ences regarding bank geometry and bank stability for cross sections 1 to 5, though within the river bed, sediment turnover has induced minor differ- ences in bed level. By contrast, cross section 6, which is located in the control section without micro groins (Fig. 3), shows a lateral shift of the channel of about 3 m due to erosion of the outer bank. Observations during flood events showed that micro groins are efficiently deflecting the flow energy to the center of the channel, reducing flow speed on the banks. As shown in Figure 5a, river banks protected by micro groins remained unal- tered by big flood events, although the micro groins were submerged more than 1 m during these floods (see floating debris on banks). By contrast, observations in the control section showed that flow energy was concentrated along the outer bank, leading to the bank erosion during the first big flood in 2012 (Fig. 5b). Consistent with these results, also the straight channel, where funnel shaped micro groins were implemented, showed no erosion signs after the 30-year floods (Fig. 6). 3.2.2 Results bed morphology Morphologic effects of inclined micro groins were investigated in the area F (Fig. 3). Measurements from 2013 (Fig. 7a, b) show the formation of a pronounced scour pool downstream of the micro groin. Scour depth ranges between 0.5 and 0.7 m. Next to the scour pool, a sediment cone was deposited along the outer bank. The sediment cone consists of loose bed material deposited in layers of different fractions (sediment sorting). The frac- tions range from gravel to sand (Fig. 7c). Figure 4. Development of cross sections 1 to 6, showing data of June 2011 (grey lines) and June 2013 (black lines). Figure 5. a) Upper curve protected by inclined micro groins (white lines) after 30-year flood. View against stream direction. b) Lower curve with erosion in the unprotected control section after 30-year flood. View against stream direction. Figure 6. Straight channel section protected by funnel shaped micro groin (white lines) after 30-year flood. View against stream direction. Overall, the investigated area shows a high degree of morphologic diversity. Together with the generally high flow diversity around micro groins, the area provides valuable living space and spawning habitat for salmonids and other aquatic organisms. Additionally, the drawn-out scour pool is considered to improve longitudinal connectivity under low flow conditions. 1576 The above results are consistent with the effects observed around all micro groin types implemented throughout Taverna river. 4 CONCLUSIONS A tempting prospect indeed: achieving common engineering objectives like bank stabilization, sedi- ment management or morphologic diversification by altering the rivers flow seems not only feasible, but also efficient and cost effective. As shown by the various existing approaches (see Chapter 1.1) river training with submerged structures is a relatively young field with ongoing investigation on possibilities and limits of these methods. Instream River Training, one of the most progressive of these approaches, focuses on small instream structures built of natural materials like rock boulders or wood, which are completely sub- merged already at low flow conditions but function efficiently even during big floods due to the gen- eration of secondary flows that interact with the main flow (see Chapter 2). Until recently, such unconventional methods have only been rarely implemented by hydraulic engineers in Europe. But in the last few years, bet- ter scientific understanding and efficient practical examples in Austria, Germany and Switzerland have raised an increased interest in IRT. The results from the ongoing long-term moni- toring at Taverna river in Switzerland (Chapter 3) as well as other practical examples clearly show the ability of submerged instream river training struc- tures for bank protection and for diversification of bed morphology: Micro groins efficiently protect the rivers banks from erosion while guiding the flow energy towards the center of the channel, where river bed sediment is mobilized and ecologically valuable scour pools and deposition areas are formed. In the construction phase, the implementation of micro groins saves on material compared to common bank enhancement with rip rap: At Taverna river, the use of micro groins proved to be 30% to 50% less expensive than rip rap (Werdenberg et al. 2012). IRT structures have been successfully imple- mented in the alpine region as well as in flatland rivers. While of course there are limits to this method (e.g. extremely steep slopes, extremely dis- turbed sediment regimes, bed widths below 1 m) it can be argued that a broad range of flood pro- tection and river restoration projects could benefit ecologically and financially from the implementa- tion of IRT structures. REFERENCES Geiger, H. & Sindelar, C. 2012. Simultane Druckmessungen um einen Einzelstein. In G. Zenz (Ed.), Wasser Energieglobal denkenlokal handeln. Graz: Technical University Graz. Jamieson, E.C., Rennie, C.D. & Townsend, R.D. 2013. 3D Flow and Sediment Dynamics in a Laboratory Chan- nel Bend with and without Stream Barbs. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 139(2), 154166. doi:10.1061/ (ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000655. Khosronejad, A., Hill, C., Kang, S. & Sotiropoulos, F. 2013. Computational and experimental investigation of scour past laboratory models of stream restoration rock structures. Advances in Water Resources, 54(0), 191207. doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2013.01.008. Meckel, H. 1978. Spiralstrmungen und Sedimentbewe- gung in Fluss- und Kanalkrmmungen. Wasserwirt- schaft, 68(19), 287294. Mende, M. 2012. Instream River Training Naturnaher Flussbau mit minimalem Materialeinsatz. Korrespondenz Wasserwirtschaft, 5(10), 537543. Mende, M. & Sindelar, C. 2010. Instream River Train- ingLenkbuhnen und Pendelrampen. Wasserbau Symposium 2010: Wasserbau in Bewegung Von der Statik zur Dynamik. Beitrge zum 15. Gemeinschafts- Symposium der Wasserbau-Institute TU Mnchen, TU Graz und ETH Zrich vom 1. Bis 3. Juli 2010 in Wallgau, Oberbayern. Berichte des Lehrstuhls und der Versuchsanstalt fr Wasserbau und Wasserwirtschaft Nr. 124, 3544. Minor, B., Rennie, C.D. & Townsend, R.D. 2007. Barbs for river bend bank protection: application of a three- dimensional numerical mode. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 34(9), 10871095. doi:10.1139/L07-088. Odgaard, A.J. 2009. River Training and Sediment Man- agement with Submerged Vanes. (H.Q. Shang, Ed.). Reston, Va: ASCE. Pinter K., Unfer G., Wiesner C. 2009. Fischbestandserhe- bung der Mur im Bereich St. Michael. Steiermrkische Landesregierung, Fachabteilung 19b. Rosgen D.L. 2001. The cross vane, w-weir and J-hook structures: their description, design and application for stream stabilization and river restoration. In: Proc. Wetland engineering and river restoration conference, Reston, VA: ASCE. Figure 7. a) Topography of river bed downstream of inclined micro groin. b) Actual view of river bed. c) Details of sediment. 1577 Rozovskii, I.L. 1957. Flow of water in bends of open chan- nels. Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, Insti- tute of Hydrology and Hydraulic Engineering, Kiev. Shields, A. 1936. Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der Turbulenzforschung auf die Geschiebebewe- gung. Mitteilungen Heft 26. Berlin: Preussische Ver- suchsanstalt fr Wasserbau und Schiffbau. Sindelar, C. 2011. Design of a Meandering Ramp. Uni- versity of Technology Graz, Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Water Resources Management. Sindelar, C. & Knoblauch, H. 2010. Design of a Mean- dering Ramp located at the River Groe Tulln. In A. Dittrich, K. Koll, J. Aberle, & P. Geisenhainer (Eds.), Riverflow 2010 (pp. 12391246). Bundesanstalt fr Wasserbau. Sindelar, C., Knoblauch, H., Badura, H., & Grober, O. 2007. Monitoring of a Bent Training Structure at the River Mur. In E.A. Cowen & D. Hill (Eds.), Hydrau- lic Measurements and Experimental Methods, Book of Extended Abstracts (pp. 118123). ASCE/IAHR. Sindelar, C. & Mende, M. (2009). Lenkbuhnen zur Struk- turierung und Stabilisierung von Fliegewssern. Wasserwirtschaft, 12, 7075. Stevens, M.A., Simons, D.B. & Lewis, G.L. 1976. Safety factors for riprap protection. Journal of the Hydrau- lics Division 102(HY5): 637655. United States Department of Agriculture 2005. Design of Stream Barbs Version 2.0, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Oregon, Engineering Technical Note 23. Werdenberg, N., Meile, T. & Steiner R. 2012. Erfahrung mit Lenkbuhnen bei Hochwasserschutz und Renatu- rierung, Instream River Training am Voralpenfluss Taverna, In G. Zenz (ed.), Wasserbau Symposium 2012: WasserEnergie, Global denkenlokal handeln, Graz, 1215 September 2012. D7: 533540. Graz: Technische Universitt Graz. Werdenberg, N., Widmer, A. & Bhrer, T. 2013. Erfolgs- kontrolle Lenkbuhnen an der Taverna, Zwischenbericht 2013-1. Basler & Hofmann West AG, unpublished.