Figure 7. The simulated velocity (a) and simulated pressure pattern (b) across the Parshall flume. The patterns match the physical behavior of actual Parshall flumes [7].

Parshall Flumes의 효율성 향상을 위한 수치 및 실험 모델링의 적용: 최신 기술 검토

Mehdi Heyrani 1,* , Abdolmajid Mohammadian 1, Ioan Nistor 1 and Omerul Faruk Dursun 2

Abstract

열린 채널에서 흐름을 관리하는 기본 단계 중 하나는 속성을 결정하는 것입니다. 개방 수로의 흐름에 관한 추가 정보를 제공하기 위해 경험적 방정식이 개발되었습니다. 이러한 실험 방정식을 얻는 것은 비용과 시간이 많이 소요됩니다. 따라서 대체 솔루션이 모색되었습니다.

지난 세기 동안 움직이는 부분이 없는 정적 측정 장치인 Parshall 수로가 개방 수로의 흐름을 측정하는 데 중요한 역할을 했습니다. 많은 연구자들이 관개 및 폐수 관리와 같은 다양한 분야에서 Parshall 수로의 적용을 연구하는 데 관심을 집중해 왔습니다.

여러 학자들이 실험 결과를 사용하여 Parshall 수로의 등급 방정식을 향상시켰지만 다른 학자들은 수치 시뮬레이션을 사용하여 높이-방전 관계 방정식을 재보정하기 위해 대체 데이터 소스를 사용했습니다. 컴퓨팅 하드웨어가 지난 수십 년 동안 크게 발전하여 과거에 경험했던 제한된 해상도를 뛰어넘는 것이 가능해짐에 따라 CFD(Computational Fluid Dynamic) 소프트웨어가 오늘날 대중화되고 있습니다.

여러 CFD 모델은 가용성에 따라 오픈 소스 또는 상업적으로 허가되어 수위 결과를 생성하기 위해 다양한 구성의 수로, 특히 Parshall 수로에 대한 수치 시뮬레이션을 수행하는 데 사용되었습니다.

FLOW-3D, Ansys Fluent, OpenFOAM 등 지금까지 사용되어 온 다양한 CFD 도구에 대해 실험 데이터로 정밀 교정한 결과, 출력이 안정적이고 실제 시나리오에 구현할 수 있음이 확인되었습니다.

결과를 생성하기 위해 이 기술을 사용하는 이점은 필요한 경우 유속 또는 구조적 형상과 같은 초기 조건을 조정하는 CFD 접근 방식의 능력입니다. 수로 크기와 수로가 위치한 부지의 조건과 관련하여 상황에 적합한 특정 Parshall 수로로 선택이 좁혀집니다.

표준 Parshall 수로를 선택하는 것이 항상 가능한 것은 아닙니다. 따라서 엔지니어는 가장 가까운 수로 크기에 약간의 수정을 제공하고 정확한 유량을 생성하기 위해 새로운 등급 곡선을 제공합니다.

이 검토는 기존 등급 방정식을 향상시키거나 구조의 기하학에 대한 추가 수정을 제안하기 위해 Parshall 수로에서 수치 시뮬레이션 및 물리적 실험 데이터의 적용을 목표로 하는 여러 학자의 작업에 대해 수행되었습니다.

One of the primary steps in managing the flow in an open channel is determining its properties. Empirical equations are developed to provide further information regarding the flow in open channels. Obtaining such experimental equations is expensive and time consuming; therefore, alternative solutions have been sought. Over the last century, the Parshall flume, a static measuring device with no moving parts, has played a significant role in measuring the flow in open channels. Many researchers have focused their interest on studying the application of Parshall flumes in various fields like irrigation and wastewater management. Although various scholars used experimental results to enhance the rating equation of the Parshall flume, others used an alternative source of data to recalibrate the height–discharge relation equation using numerical simulation. Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) software is becoming popular nowadays as computing hardware has advanced significantly within the last few decades, making it possible to go beyond the limited resolution that was experienced in the past. Multiple CFD models, depending on their availability, either open-source or commercially licensed, have been used to perform numerical simulations on different configurations of flumes, especially Parshall flumes, to produce water level results. Regarding various CFD tools that have been used, i.e., FLOW-3D, Ansys Fluent, or OpenFOAM, after precise calibration with experimental data, it has been determined that the output is reliable and can be implemented to the actual scenarios. The benefit of using this technique to produce results is the ability of the CFD approach to adjust the initial conditions, like flow velocity or structural geometry, where necessary. With respect to channel size and the condition of the site where the flume is located, the choices are narrowed to the specific Parshall flume suitable to the situation. It is not always possible to select the standard Parshall flume; therefore, engineers provide some modification to the closest flume size and provide a new rating curve to produce accurate flowrates. This review has been performed on the works of a number of scholars who targeted the application of numerical simulation and physical experimental data in Parshall flumes to either enhance the existing rating equation or propose further modification to the structure’s geometry.

Keywords

Parshall flume; CFD; OpenFOAM; FLOW-3D; numerical simulation; turbulence model

Figure 1. Parshall flume measuring structure, installed [2].
Figure 1. Parshall flume measuring structure, installed [2].
Figure 2. Parshall flume measuring structure, uninstalled [3]
Figure 2. Parshall flume measuring structure, uninstalled [3]
Figure 4. Mesh sensitivity analysis: top view and side view of the Parshall flume: (a) contains 27,000 cells; (b) 52,000 cells; (c) 75,000 cells; (d) 270,000 cells. The C setup was used in their simulation [7].
Figure 4. Mesh sensitivity analysis: top view and side view of the Parshall flume: (a) contains 27,000 cells; (b) 52,000 cells; (c) 75,000 cells; (d) 270,000 cells. The C setup was used in their simulation [7].
Figure 7. The simulated velocity (a) and simulated pressure pattern (b) across the Parshall flume. The patterns match the physical behavior of actual Parshall flumes [7].
Figure 7. The simulated velocity (a) and simulated pressure pattern (b) across the Parshall flume. The patterns match the physical behavior of actual Parshall flumes [7].
Figure 8. Computational grid system in the Side A flume. (a) contains a triangular grid system (b) demonstrates the rectangular grid system. (c) and (d) are three-dimensional schematics showing the superimposed grid system. (e) magnifies the dashed section in (b). (Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2020 ELSEVIER). ).
Figure 8. Computational grid system in the Side A flume. (a) contains a triangular grid system (b) demonstrates the rectangular grid system. (c) and (d) are three-dimensional schematics showing the superimposed grid system. (e) magnifies the dashed section in (b). (Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2020 ELSEVIER). ).
Figure 10. The results of flow patterns in different flumes; (a) Cutthroat flume, (b) airfoil-shaped flume, (c) airfoil pillar-shaped flume, (d) optimized airfoil-shaped flume [23]
Figure 10. The results of flow patterns in different flumes; (a) Cutthroat flume, (b) airfoil-shaped flume, (c) airfoil pillar-shaped flume, (d) optimized airfoil-shaped flume [23]
Figure 11. Experimental setup: contraction ratio used on each flume [23].
Figure 11. Experimental setup: contraction ratio used on each flume [23].
Figure 12. Entire flume geometry [25]
Figure 12. Entire flume geometry [25]

References

  1. Cone, V.M. The Venturi Flume; U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1917.
  2. 20-Foot Concrete Parshall Flume with Radius Wing Walls. Available online: https://www.openchannelflow.com/assets/uploads/
    media/_large/20-foot-parshall-flume-curved-wing-walls.jpg (accessed on 12 January 2021).
  3. Fiberglass 6-Inch Parshall Flume with Gauge. Available online: https://www.openchannelflow.com/assets/uploads/media/
    _large/flume-parshall-6-inch-fiberglass.png (accessed on 12 January 2021).
  4. Parshall, R.L. The Parshall Measuring Flume; Colorado State College, Colorado Experiment Station: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1936.
  5. Selecting Between a Weir and a Flume. 2022. Available online: https://www.openchannelflow.com/blog/selecting-a-primarydevice-part-1-choosing-between-a-weir-and-a-flume (accessed on 29 December 2021).
  6. Parshall, R.L. The Improved Venturi Flume. Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 1928, 89, 841–851. [CrossRef]
  7. Heyrani, M.; Mohammadian, A.; Nistor, I. Numerical Simulation of Flow in Parshall Flume Using Selected Nonlinear Turbulence
    Models. Hydrology 2021, 8, 151. [CrossRef]
  8. Heyrani, M.; Mohammadian, A.; Nistor, I.; Dursun, O.F. Numerical Modeling of Venturi Flume. Hydrology 2021, 8, 27. [CrossRef]
  9. Alfonsi, G. Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Equations for Turbulence Modeling. Appl. Mech. Rev. 2009, 62, 040802. [CrossRef]
  10. Imanian, H.; Mohammadian, A. Numerical Simulation of Flow over Ogee Crested Spillways under High Hydraulic Head Ratio.
    Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech. 2019, 13, 983–1000. [CrossRef]
  11. Khosronejad, A.; Herb, W.; Sotiropoulos, F.; Kang, S.; Yang, X. Assessment of Parshall Flumes for Discharge Measurement of
    Open-Channel Flows: A Comparative Numerical and Field Case Study. Measurement 2020, 167, 108292. [CrossRef]
  12. Dursun, O.F. An Experimental Investigation of the Aeration Performance of Parshall Flume and Venturi Flumes. KSCE J. Civ. Eng.
    2016, 20, 943–950. [CrossRef]
  13. Shih, T.-H.; Liu, N.-S.; Chen, K.-H. A Non-Linear k-Epsilon Model for Turbulent Shear Flows. In Proceedings of the 34th
    AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Cleveland, OH, USA, 13 July 1998; p. 3983.
  14. Lien, F.S. Low-Reynolds-Number Eddy-Viscosity Modelling Based on Non-Linear Stress-Strain/Vorticity Relations. In Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Measurement, Heraklion, Greece, 27 May 1996.
  15. Davis, R.W.; Deutsch, S. A Numerical-Experimental Study of Parhall Flumes. J. Hydraul. Res. 1980, 18, 135–152. [CrossRef]
  16. Xiao, Y.; Wang, W.; Hu, X.; Zhou, Y. Experimental and Numerical Research on Portable Short-Throat Flume in the Field. Flow
    Meas. Instrum. 2016, 47, 54–61. [CrossRef]
  17. Wright, S.J.; Tullis, B.P.; Long, T.M. Recalibration of Parshall Flumes at Low Discharges. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1994, 120, 348–362.
    [CrossRef]
  18. Heiner, B.; Barfuss, S.L. Parshall Flume Discharge Corrections: Wall Staff Gauge and Centerline Measurements. J. Irrig. Drain.
    Eng. 2011, 137, 779–792. [CrossRef]
  19. Savage, B.M.; Heiner, B.; Barfuss, S. Parshall Flume Discharge Correction Coefficients through Modelling. Proc. ICE Water Manag.
    2013, 167, 279–287. [CrossRef]
  20. Zerihun, Y.T. A Numerical Study on Curvilinear Free Surface Flows in Venturi Flumes. Fluids 2016, 1, 21. [CrossRef]
  21. Sun, B.; Zhu, S.; Yang, L.; Liu, Q.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, J. ping Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Measurement
    Mechanism and Hydraulic Performance on Curved Flume in Rectangular Channel. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2020. [CrossRef]
  22. Hu, H.; Huang, J.; Qian, Z.; Huai, W.; Yu, G. Hydraulic Analysis of Parabolic Flume for Flow Measurement. Flow Meas. Instrum.
    2014, 37, 54–64. [CrossRef]
  23. Sun, B.; Yang, L.; Zhu, S.; Liu, Q.; Wang, C.; Zhang, C. Study on the Applicability of Four Flumes in Small Rectangular Channels.
    Flow Meas. Instrum. 2021, 80, 101967. [CrossRef]
  24. Willeitner, R.P.; Barfuss, S.L.; Johnson, M.C. Using Numerical Modeling to Correct Flow Rates for Submerged Montana Flumes. J.
    Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2013, 139, 586–592. [CrossRef]
  25. Ran, D.; Wang, W.; Hu, X. Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulation of Flow in Trapezoidal Cutthroat Flumes Based on FLOW-3D.
    Front. Agric. Sci. Eng. 2018, 5, 168–176. [CrossRef]
  26. Kim, S.-Y.; Lee, J.-H.; Hong, N.-K.; Lee, S.-O. Numerical Simulation for Determining Scale of Parshall Flume. Proc. Korea Water
    Resour. Assoc. Conf. 2010, 719–723.
  27. Tekade, S.A.; Vasudeo, A.D.; Ghare, A.D.; Ingle, R.N. Measurement of Flow in Supercritical Flow Regime Using Cutthroat Flumes.
    Sadhana 2016, 41, 265–272. [CrossRef]
  28. Wahl, T.L.; Replogle, J.A.; Wahlin, B.T.; Higgs, J.A. New Developments in Design and Application of Long-Throated Flumes. In
    Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Water Resource Engineering and Water Resources Planning and Management, Minneapolis,
    MN, USA, 30 July–2 August 2000.
  29. Howes, D.J.; Burt, C.M.; Sanders, B.F. Subcritical Contraction for Improved Open-Channel Flow Measurement Accuracy with an
    Upward-Looking ADVM. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2010, 136, 617–626. [CrossRef]
  30. Tiwari, N.K.; Sihag, P. Prediction of Oxygen Transfer at Modified Parshall Flumes Using Regression Models. ISH J. Hydraul. Eng.
    2020, 26, 209–220. [CrossRef]
  31. Thornton, C.I.; Smith, B.A.; Abt, S.R.; Robeson, M.D. Supercritical Flow Measurement Using a Small Parshall Flume. J. Irrig.
    Drain. Eng. 2009, 135, 683–692. [CrossRef]
  32. Cox, A.L.; Thornton, C.I.; Abt, S.R. Supercritical Flow Measurement Using a Large Parshall Flume. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2013, 139,
    655–662. [CrossRef]
  1. Ribeiro, Á.S.; Sousa, J.A.; Simões, C.; Martins, L.L.; Dias, L.; Mendes, R.; Martins, C. Parshall Flumes Flow Rate Uncertainty
    Including Contributions of the Model Parameters and Correlation Effects. Meas. Sens. 2021, 18, 100108. [CrossRef]
  2. Singh, J.; Mittal, S.K.; Tiwari, H.L. Discharge Relation for Small Parshall Flume in Free Flow Condition. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol.
    2014, 3, 317–321.
  3. Kim, S.-D.; Lee, H.-J.; Oh, B.-D. Investigation on Application of Parshall Flume for Flow Measurement of Low-Flow Season in
    Korea. Meas. Sci. Rev. 2010, 10, 111. [CrossRef]
  4. Willeitner, R.P.; Barfuss, S.L.; Johnson, M.C. Montana Flume Flow Corrections under Submerged Flow. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2012,
    138, 685–689. [CrossRef]
  5. Dufresne, M.; Vazquez, J. Head–Discharge Relationship of Venturi Flumes: From Long to Short Throats. J. Hydraul. Res. 2013, 51,
    465–468. [CrossRef]
PDF Download