Fig. 11. Velocity vectors along x-direction through the center of the box culvert for B0, B30, B50, and B70 respectively.

Numerical investigation of scour characteristics downstream of blocked culverts

막힌 암거 하류의 세굴 특성 수치 조사

NesreenTahabMaged M.El-FekyaAtef A.El-SaiadaIsmailFathya
aDepartment of Water and Water Structures Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
bLab Manager, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt

Abstract

횡단 구조물을 통한 막힘은 안정성을 위협하는 위험한 문제 중 하나입니다. 암거의 막힘 형상 및 하류 세굴 특성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구는 거의 없습니다.

이 연구의 목적은 수면과 세굴 모두에서 상자 암거를 통한 막힘의 작용을 수치적으로 논의하는 것입니다. 이를 위해 FLOW 3D v11.1.0을 사용하여 퇴적물 수송 모델을 조사했습니다.

상자 암거를 통한 다양한 차단 비율이 연구되었습니다. FLOW 3D 모델은 실험 데이터로 보정되었습니다. 결과는 FLOW 3D 프로그램이 세굴 다운스트림 상자 암거를 정확하게 시뮬레이션할 수 있음을 나타냅니다.

막힌 경우에 대한 속도 분포, 최대 세굴 깊이 및 수심을 플롯하고 비차단된 사례(기본 사례)와 비교했습니다.

그 결과 암거 높이의 70% 차단율은 상류의 수심을 암거 높이의 2.3배 증가시키고 평균 유속은 기본 경우보다 3배 더 증가시키는 것으로 입증되었다. 막힘 비율의 함수로 상대 최대 세굴 깊이를 추정하는 방정식이 만들어졌습니다.

Blockage through crossing structures is one of the dangerous problems that threaten its stability. There are few researches concerned with blockage shape in culverts and its effect on characteristics of scour downstream it.

The study’s purpose is to discuss the action of blockage through box culvert on both water surface and scour numerically. A sediment transport model has been investigated for this purpose using FLOW 3D v11.1.0. Different ratios of blockage through box culvert have been studied. The FLOW 3D model was calibrated with experimental data.

The results present that the FLOW 3D program was capable to simulate accurately the scour downstream box culvert. The velocity distribution, maximum scour depth and water depths for blocked cases have been plotted and compared with the non-blocked case (base case).

The results proved that the blockage ratio 70% of culvert height makes the water depth upstream increases by 2.3 times of culvert height and mean velocity increases by 3 times more than in the base case. An equation has been created to estimate the relative maximum scour depth as a function of blockage ratio.

1. Introduction

Local scour is the removal of granular bed material by the action of hydrodynamic forces. As the depth of scour hole increases, the stability of the foundation of the structure may be endangered, with a consequent risk of damage and failure [1]. So the prediction and control of scour is considered to be very important for protecting the water structures from failure. Most previous studies were designed to study the different factors that impact on scour and their relationship with scour hole dimensions like fluid characteristics, flow conditions, bed properties, and culvert geometry. Many previous researches studied the effect of flow rate on scour hole by information Froude number or modified Froude number [2][3][4][5][6]. Cesar Mendoza [6] found a good correlation between the scour depth and the discharge Intensity (Qg−.5D−2.5). Breusers and Raudkiv [7] used shear velocity in the outlet-scour prediction procedure. Ali and Lim [8] used the densimetric Froude number in estimation of the scour depth [1][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. “The densimetric Froude number presents the ratio of the tractive force on sediment particle to the submerged specific weight of the sediment” [15](1)Fd=uρsρ-1gD50

Ali and Lim [8] pointed to the consequence of tailwater depth on scour behavior [1][2][8][13]. Abida and Townsend [2] indicated that the maximum depth of local scour downstream culvert was varying with the tailwater depth in three ways: first, for very shallow tailwater depths, local scouring decreases with a decrease in tailwater depth; second, when the ratio of tailwater depth to culvert height ranged between 0.2 and 0.7, the scour depth increases with decreasing tailwater depth; and third for a submerged outlet condition. The tailwater depth has only a marginal effect on the maximum depth of scour [2]. Ruff et al. [16] observed that for materials having similar mean grain sizes (d50) but different standard deviations (σ). As (σ) increased, the maximum scour hole depth decreased. Abt et al. [4] mentioned to role of soil type of maximum scour depth. It was noticed that local scour was more dangerous for uniform sands than for well-graded mixtures [1][2][4][9][17][18]. Abt et al [3][19] studied the culvert shape effect on scour hole. The results evidenced that the culvert shape has a limited effect on outlet scour. Under equivalent discharge conditions, it was noted that a square culvert with height equal to the diameter of a circular culvert would reduce scour [16][20]. The scour hole dimension was also effected by the culvert slope. Abt et al. [3][21] showed that the culvert slope is a key element in estimating the culvert flow velocity, the discharge capacity, and sediment transport capability. Abt et al. [21][22] tested experimentally culvert drop height effect on maximum scour depth. It was observed that as the drop height was increasing, the depth of scour was also increasing. From the previous studies, it could have noticed that the most scour prediction formula downstream unblocked culvert was the function of densimetric Froude number, soil properties (d50, σ), tailwater depth and culvert opening size. Blockage is the phenomenon of plugging water structures due to the movement of water flow loaded with sediment and debris. Water structures blockage has a bad effect on water flow where it causes increasing of upstream water level that may cause flooding around the structure and increase of scour rate downstream structures [23][24]. The blockage phenomenon through was studied experimentally and numerical [15][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. Jaeger and Lucke [33] studied the debris transport behavior in a natural channel in Australia. Froude number scale model of an existing culvert was used. It was noticed that through rainfall event, the mobility of debris was impressed by stream shape (depth and width). The condition of the vegetation (size and quantities) through the catchment area was the main factor in debris transport. Rigby et al. [26] reported that steep slope was increasing the ability to mobilize debris that form field data of blocked culverts and bridges during a storm in Wollongong city.

Streftaris et al. [32] studied the probability of screen blockage by debris at trash screens through a numerical model to relate between the blockage probability and nature of the area around. Recently, many commercial computational fluid programs (CFD) such as SSIIM, Fluent, and FLOW 3D are used in the analysis of the scour process. Scour and sediment transport numerical model need to validate by using experimental data or field data [34][35][36][37][38]. Epely-Chauvin et al. [36] investigated numerically the effect of a series of parallel spur diked. The experimental data were compared by SSIIM and FLOW 3D program. It was found that the accuracy of calibrated FLOW 3D model was better than SSIIM model. Nielsen et al. [35] used the physical model and FLOW 3D model to analyze the scour process around the pile. The soil around the pile was uniform coarse stones in the physical models that were simulated by regular spheres, porous media, and a mixture of them. The calibrated porous media model can be used to determine the bed shear stress. In partially blocked culverts, there aren’t many studies that explain the blockage impact on scour dimensions. Sorourian et al. [14][15] studied the effect of inlet partial blockage on scour characteristics downstream box culvert. It resulted that the partial blockage at the culvert inlet could be the main factor in estimating the depth of scour. So, this study is aiming to investigate the effects of blockage through a box culvert on flow and scour characteristics by different blockage ratios and compares the results with a non-blocked case. Create a dimensionless equation relates the blockage ratio of the culvert with scour characteristics downstream culvert.

2. Experimental data

The experimental work of the study was conducted in the Hydraulics and Water Engineering Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Egypt. The flume had a rectangular cross-section of 66 cm width, 65.5 cm depth, and 16.2 m long. A rectangular culvert was built with 0.2 m width, 0.2 m height and 3.00 m long with θ = 25° gradually outlet and 0.8 m fixed apron. The model was located on the mid-point of the channel. The sediment part was extended for a distance 2.20 m with 0.66 m width and 0.20 m depth of coarse sand with specific weight 1.60 kg/cm3, d50 = 2.75 mm and σ (d90/d50) = 1.50. The particle size distribution was as shown in Fig. 1. The experimental model was tested for different inlet flow (Q) of 25, 30, 34, 40 l/s for different submerged ratio (S) of 1.25, 1.50, 1.75.

3. Dimensional analysis

A dimensional analysis has been used to reduce the number of variables which affecting on the scour pattern downstream partial blocked culvert. The main factors affecting the maximum scour depth are:(2)ds=f(b.h.L.hb.lb.Q.ud.hu.hd.D50.ρ.ρs.g.ls.dd.ld)

Fig. 2 shows a definition sketch of the experimental model. The maximum scour depth can be written in a dimensionless form as:(3)dsh=f(B.Fd.S)where the ds/h is the relative maximum scour depth.

4. Numerical work

The FLOW 3D is (CFD) program used by many researchers and appeared high accuracy in solving hydrodynamic and sediment transport models in the three dimensions. Numerical simulation with FLOW 3D was performed to study the impacts of blockage ratio through box culvert on shear stress, velocity distribution and the sediment transport in terms of the hydrodynamic features (water surface, velocity and shear stress) and morphological parameters (scour depth and sizes) conditions in accurately and efficiently. The renormalization group (RNG) turbulence model was selected due to its high ability to predict the velocity profiles and turbulent kinetic energy for the flow through culvert [39]. The one-fluid incompressible mode was used to simulate the water surface. Volume of fluid (VOF) method was employed in FLOW 3D to tracks a liquid interface through arbitrary deformations and apply the correct boundary conditions at the interface [40].1.

Governing equations

Three-dimensional Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) equation was applied for incompressible viscous fluid motion. The continuity equation is as following:(4)VF∂ρ∂t+∂∂xρuAx+∂∂yρvAy+∂∂zρwAz=RDIF(5)∂u∂t+1VFuAx∂u∂x+vAy∂u∂y+ωAz∂u∂z=-1ρ∂P∂x+Gx+fx(6)∂v∂t+1VFuAx∂v∂x+vAy∂v∂y+ωAz∂v∂z=-1ρ∂P∂y+Gy+fy(7)∂ω∂t+1VFuAx∂ω∂x+vAy∂ω∂y+ωAz∂ω∂z=-1ρ∂P∂z+Gz+fz

ρ is the fluid density,

VF is the volume fraction,

(x,y,z) is the Cartesian coordinates,

(u,v,w) are the velocity components,

(Ax,Ay,Az) are the area fractions and

RDIF is the turbulent diffusion.

P is the average hydrodynamic pressure,

(Gx, Gy, Gz) are the body accelerations and

(fx, fy, fz) are the viscous accelerations.

The motion of sediment transport (suspended, settling, entrainment, bed load) is estimated by predicting the erosion, advection and deposition process as presented in [41].

The critical shields parameter is (θcr) is defined as the critical shear stress τcr at which sediments begin to move on a flat and horizontal bed [41]:(8)θcr=τcrgd50(ρs-ρ)

The Soulsby–Whitehouse [42] is used to predict the critical shields parameter as:(9)θcr=0.31+1.2d∗+0.0551-e(-0.02d∗)(10)d∗=d50g(Gs-1ν3where:

d* is the dimensionless grain size

Gs is specific weight (Gs = ρs/ρ)

The entrainment coefficient (0.005) was used to scale the scour rates and fit the experimental data. The settling velocity controls the Soulsby deposition equation. The volumetric sediment transport rate per width of the bed is calculated using Van Rijn [43].2.

Meshing and geometry of model

After many trials, it was found that the uniform cell size with 0.03 m cell size is the closest to the experimental results and takes less time. As shown in Fig. 3. In x-direction, the total model length in this direction is 700 cm with mesh planes at −100, 0, 300, 380 and 600 cm respectively from the origin point, in y-direction, the total model length in this direction is 66 cm at distances 0, 23, 43 and 66 cm respectively from the origin point. In z-direction, the total model length in this direction is 120 cm. with mesh planes at −20, 0, 20 and 100 cm respectively.3.

Boundary condition

As shown in Fig. 4, the boundary conditions of the model have been defined to simulate the experimental flow conditions accurately. The upstream boundary was defined as the volume flow rate with a different flow rate. The downstream boundary was defined as specific pressure with different fluid elevation. Both of the right side, the left side, and the bottom boundary were defined as a wall. The top boundary defined as specified pressure with pressure value equals zero.

5. Validation of experimental results and numerical results

The experimental results investigated the flow and scour characteristics downstream culvert due to different flow conditions. The measured value of maximum scour depth is compared with the simulated depth from FLOW 3D model as shown in Fig. 5. The scour results show that the simulated results from the numerical model is quite close to the experimental results with an average error of 3.6%. The water depths in numerical model results is so close to the experimental results as shown in Fig. 6 where the experiment and numerical results are compared at different submerged ratios and flow rates. The results appear maximum error percentage in water depths upstream and downstream the culvert is about 2.37%. This indicated that the FLOW 3D is efficient for the prediction of maximum scour depth and the flow depths downstream box culvert.

6. Computation time

The run time was chosen according to reaching to the stability limit. Hydraulic stability was achieved after 50 s, where the scour development may still go on. For run 1, the numerical simulation was run for 1000 s as shown in Fig. 7 where it mostly reached to scour stability at 800 s. The simulation time was taken 500 s at about 95% of scour stability.

7. Analysis and discussions

Fig. 8 shows the study sections where sec 1 represents to upstream section, sec2 represents to inside section and sec3 represents to downstream stream section. Table 1 indicates the scour hole dimensions at different blockage case. The symbol (B) represents to blockage and the number points to blockage ratio. B0 case signifies to the non-blocked case, B30 is that blockage height is 30% to the culvert height and so on.

Table 1. The scour results of different blockage ratio.

Casehb cmB = hb/hQ lit/sSFdd50 mmds/h measuredls/hdd/hld/hds/h estimated
B000351.261.692.50.581.500.275.000.46
B3060.30351.261.682.50.481.250.274.250.40
B50100.50351.221.742.50.451.100.244.000.37
B70140.70351.231.732.50.431.500.165.500.33

7.1. Scour hole geometry

The scour hole geometry mainly depends on the properties of soil of the bed downstream the fixed apron. From Table 1, the results show that the maximum scour depth in B0 case is about 0.58 of culvert height while the maximum deposition in B0 is 0.27 culvert height. There is a symmetric scour hole as shown in Fig. 9 in B0 case. An asymmetric scour hole is created in B50 and B70 due to turbulences that causes the deviation of the jet direction from the center of the flume where appear in Fig. 11 and Fig. 19.

7.2. Flow water surface

Fig. 10 presents the relative free surface water (hw/h) along the x-direction at center of the box culvert. From the mention Figure, it is easy to release the effect of different blockage ratios. The upstream water level rises by increasing the blockage ratio. Increasing upstream water level may cause flooding over the banks of the waterway. In the 70% blockage case, the upstream water level rises to 2.3 times of culvert height more than the non-blocked case at the same discharge and submerged ratio. The water surface profile shows an increase in water level upstream the culvert due to a decrease in transverse velocity. Because of decreasing velocity downstream culvert, there is an increase in water level before it reaches its uniform depth.

7.3. Velocity vectors

Scour downstream hydraulic structures mainly affects by velocities distribution and bed shear stress. Fig. 11 shows the velocity vectors and their magnitude in xz plane at the same flow conditions. The difference in the upstream water level due to the different blockage ratios is so clear. The maximum water level is in B70 and the minimum level is in B0. The inlet mean velocity value is about 0.88 m/s in B0 increases to 2.86 m/s in B70. As the blockage ratio increases, the inlet velocity increases. The outlet velocity in B0 case makes downward jet causes scour hole just after the fixed apron in the middle of the bed while the blockage causes upward water flow that appears clearly in B70. The upward jet decreases the scour depth to 0.13 culvert height less than B0 case. After the scour hole, the velocity decreases and the flow becomes uniform.

7.4. Velocity distribution

Fig. 12 represents flow velocity (Vx) distribution along the vertical depth (z/hu) upstream the inlet for the different blockage ratios at the same flow conditions. From the Figure, the maximum velocity creates closed to bed in B0 while in blocked case, the maximum horizontal velocity creates at 0.30 of relative vertical depth (z/hu). Fig. 13 shows the (Vz) distribution along the vertical depth (z/hu) upstream culvert at sec 1. From the mentioned Figure, it is easy to note that the maximum vertical is in B70 which appears that as the blockage ratio increases the vertical ratio also increases. In the non-blocked case. The vertical velocity (Vz) is maximum at (z/hu) equals 0.64. At the end of the fixed apron (sec 3), the horizontal velocity (Vx) is slowly increasing to reach the maximum value closed to bed in B0 and B30 while the maximum horizontal velocity occurs near to the top surface in B50 and B70 as shown in Fig. 14. The vertical velocity component along the vertical depth (z/hd) is presented in Fig. 15. The vertical velocity (Vz) is maximum in B0 at vertical depth (z/hd) 0.3 with value 0.45 m/s downward. Figs. 16 and 17 observe velocity components (Vx, Vz) along the vertical depth just after the end of blockage length at the centerline of the culvert barrel. It could be noticed the uniform velocity distribution in B0 case with horizontal velocity (Vx) closed to 1.0 m/s and vertical velocity closed to zero. In the blocked case, the maximum horizontal velocity occurs in depth more than the blockage height.

7.5. Bed velocity distribution

Fig. 18 presents the x-velocity vectors at 1.5 cm above the bed for different blockage ratios from the velocity vectors distribution and magnitude, it is easy to realize the position of the scour hole and deposition region. In B0 and B30, the flow is symmetric so that the scour hole is created around the centerline of flow while in B50 and B70 cases, the flow is asymmetric and the scour hole creates in the right of flow direction in B50. The maximum scour depth is found in the left of flow direction in B70 case where the high velocity region is found.

8. Maximum scour depth prediction

Regression analysis is used to estimate maximum scour depth downstream box culvert for different ratios of blockage by correlating the maximum relative scour by other variables that affect on it in one formula. An equation is developed to predict maximum scour depth for blocked and non-blocked. As shown in the equation below, the relative maximum scour depth(ds/hd) is a function of densimetric Froude number (Fd), blockage ratio (B) and submerged ratio (S)(11)dsh=0.56Fd-0.20B+0.45S-1.05

In this equation the coefficient of correlation (R2) is 0.82 with standard error equals 0·08. The developed equation is valid for Fd = [0.9 to 2.10] and submerged ratio (S) ≥ 1.00. Fig. 19 shows the comparison between relative maximum scour depths (ds/h) measured and estimated for different blockage ratios. Fig. 20 clears the comparison between residuals and ds/h estimated for the present study. From these figures, it could be noticed that there is a good agreement between the measured and estimated relative scour depth.

9. Comparison with previous scour equations

Many previous scour formulae have been produced for calculation the maximum scour depth downstream non-blockage culvert. These equations have been included the effect of flow regime, culvert shape, soil properties and the flow rate on maximum scour depth. Two of previous experimental studies data have been chosen to be compared with the present study results in non-blocked study data. Table 2 shows comparison of culvert shape, densmetric Froude number, median particle size and scour equations for these previous studies. By applying the present study data in these studies scour formula as shown in Fig. 21, it could be noticed that there are a good agreement between present formula results and others empirical equations results. Where that Lim [44] and Abt [4] are so closed to the present study data.

Table 2. Comparison of some previous scour formula.

ResearchersFdCulvert shaped50(mm)Proposed equationSubmerged ratio
Present study0.9–2.11square2.75dsh=0.56Fd-0.20B+0.45S-1.051.25–1.75
Lim [44]1–10Circular1.65dsh=0.45Fd0.47
Abt [4]Fd ≥ 1Circular0.22–7.34-dsh=3.67Fd0.57∗D500.4∗σ-0.4

10. Conclusions

The present study has shown that the FLOW 3D model can accurately simulate water surface and the scour hole characteristics downstream the box culvert with error percentage in water depths does not exceed 2.37%. Velocities distribution through and outlets culvert barrel helped on understanding the scour hole shape.

The blockage through culvert had caused of increasing of water surface upstream structure where the upstream water level in B70 was 2.3 of culvert height more than non-blocked case at the same discharge that could be dangerous on the stability of roads above. The depth averaged velocity through culvert barrel increased by 3 times its value in non-blocked case.

On the other hand, blockage through culvert had a limited effect on the maximum scour depth. The little effect of blockage on maximum scour depth could be noticed in Fig. 11. From this Figure, it could be noted that the residual part of culvert barrel after the blockage part had made turbulences. These turbulences caused the deviation of the flow resulting in the formation of asymmetric scour hole on the side of channel. This not only but in B70 the blockage height caused upward jet which made a wide far scour hole as cleared from the results in Table 1.

An empirical equation was developed from the results to estimate the maximum scour depth relative to culvert height function of blockage ratio (B), submerged ratio (S), and densimetric Froude number (Fd). The equation results was compared with some scour formulas at the same densimetric Froude number rang where the present study results was in between the other equations results as shown in Fig. 21.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1]P. Sarathi, M. Faruque, R. BalachandarInfluence of tailwater depth, sediment size and densimetric Froude number on scour by submerged square wall jetsJ. Hydraul. Res., 46 (2) (2008), pp. 158-175CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[2]H. Abida, R. TownsendLocal scour downstream of box-culvert outletsJ. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 117 (3) (1991), pp. 425-440CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[3]S.R. Abt, C.A. Donnell, J.F. Ruff, F.K. DoehringCulvert Slope and Shape Effects on Outlet ScourTransp. Res. Rec., 1017 (1985), pp. 24-30View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[4]S.R. Abt, R.L. Kloberdanz, C. MendozaUnified culvert scour determinationJ. Hydraul. Eng., 110 (10) (1984), pp. 1475-1479CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[5]J.P. Bohan, Erosion And Riprap Requirements At Culvert And Storm-Drain Outlets, ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MISS1970.Google Scholar[6]C. Mendoza, S.R. Abt, J.F. RuffHeadwall influence on scour at culvert outletsJ. Hydraul. Eng., 109 (7) (1983), pp. 1056-1060CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[7]H. Breusers, A. Raudkivi, Scouring, hydraulic structures design manual, vol. 143, IAHR, AA Balkema, Rotterdam, 1991.Google Scholar[8]K. Ali, S. LimLocal scour caused by submerged wall jetsProc. Inst. Civ. Eng., 81 (4) (1986), pp. 607-645CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[9]O. Aderibigbe, N. RajaratnamEffect of sediment gradation on erosion by plane turbulent wall jetsJ. Hydraul. Eng., 124 (10) (1998), pp. 1034-1042View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[10]F.W. Blaisdell, C.L. AndersonA comprehensive generalized study of scour at cantilevered pipe outletsJ. Hydraul. Res., 26 (4) (1988), pp. 357-376CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[11]Y.-M. Chiew, S.-Y. LimLocal scour by a deeply submerged horizontal circular jetJ. Hydraul. Eng., 122 (9) (1996), pp. 529-532View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[12]R.A. Day, S.L. Liriano, W.R. WhiteEffect of tailwater depth and model scale on scour at culvert outletsProc. Instit. Civil Eng. – Water Marit. Eng., 148 (3) (2001), pp. 189-198http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/wame.2001.148.3.18910.1680/wame.2001.148.3.189View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[13]S. Emami, A.J. SchleissPrediction of localized scour hole on natural mobile bed at culvert outletsScour and Erosion (2010), pp. 844-853CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[14]S. Sorourian, A. Keshavarzi, J. Ball, B. SamaliStudy of Blockage Effect on Scouring Pattern Downstream of a Box Culvert under Unsteady FlowAustr. J Water Resor. (2013)Google Scholar[15]S. Sorourian, Turbulent Flow Characteristics At The Outlet Of Partially Blocked Box Culverts, in: 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, the Netherlands, 2015.Google Scholar[16]J. Ruff, S. Abt, C. Mendoza, A. Shaikh, R. KloberdanzScour at culvert outlets in mixed bed materialsUnited States. Federal Highway Administration. Office of Research and Development (1982)Google Scholar[17]S.A. Ansari, U.C. Kothyari, K.G.R. RajuInfluence of cohesion on scour under submerged circular vertical jetsJ. Hydraul. Eng., 129 (12) (2003), pp. 1014-1019View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[18]B. Crookston B. Tullis, Scour and Riprap Protection in a Bottomless Arch Culvert, in: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2008: Ahupua’A, 2008, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar[19]S.R. Abt, J. Ruff, F. Doehring, C. DonnellInfluence of culvert shape on outlet scourJ. Hydraul. Eng., 113 (3) (1987), pp. 393-400View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[20]Y.H. Chen, Scour at outlets of box culverts, Colorado State University, 1970.Google Scholar[21]S. Abt, P. Thompson, T. LewisEnhancement of the culvert outlet scour estimation equationsTransp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board, 1523 (1996), pp. 178-185View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[22]F.K. Doehring, S.R. AbtDrop height influence on outlet scourJ. Hydraul. Eng., 120 (12) (1994), pp. 1470-1476CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[23]W. Weeks, A. Barthelmess, E. Rigby, G. Witheridge, R. Adamson, Australian rainfall and runoff revison project 11: blockage of hydraulic structures, 2009.Google Scholar[24]W. Weeks, G. Witheridge, E. Rigby, A. BarthelmessProject 11: blockage of hydraulic structuresEngineers Australia (2013)Google Scholar[25]S.R. Abt, T.E. Brisbane, D.M. Frick, C.A. McKnightTrash rack blockage in supercritical flowJ. Hydraul. Eng., 118 (12) (1992), pp. 1692-1696View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[26]E. Rigby, M. Boyd, S. Roso, P. Silveri, A. Davis, Causes and effects of culvert blockage during large storms, in: Global solutions for urban drainage, 2002, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar[27]S. Roso, M. Boyd, E. Rigby, R. VanDrie“Prediction of increased flooding in urban catchments due to debris blockage and flow diversionsProceedings Novatech (2004), pp. 8-13View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[28]C.-D. Jan, C.-L. ChenDebris flows caused by Typhoon Herb in Taiwanin Debris-Flow Hazards and Related Phenomena, Springer (2005), pp. 539-563CrossRefGoogle Scholar[29]L.W. Zevenbergen, P.F. Lagasse, P.E. Clopper, Effects of debris on bridge pier scour, in: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2007: Restoring Our Natural Habitat, 2007, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar[30]A. Barthelmess, E. Rigby, Estimating Culvert and Bridge Blockages-a Simplified Procedure, in: Proceedings of the 34th World Congress of the International Association for Hydro-Environment Research and Engineering: 33rd Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium and 10th Conference on Hydraulics in Water Engineering, Engineers Australia, 2011, pp. 39.Google Scholar[31]E. Rigby, A. Barthelmess, Culvert Blockage Mechanisms and their Impact on Flood Behaviour, in: Proceedings of the 34th World Congress of the International Association for Hydro-Environment Research and Engineering: 33rd Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium and 10th Conference on Hydraulics in Water Engineering, Engineers Australia, 2011, pp. 380.Google Scholar[32]G. Streftaris, N. Wallerstein, G. Gibson, S. ArthurModeling probability of blockage at culvert trash screens using Bayesian approachJ. Hydraul. Eng., 139 (7) (2012), pp. 716-726Google Scholar[33]R. Jaeger, T. LuckeInvestigating the relationship between rainfall intensity, catchment vegetation and debris mobilityInt. J. GEOMATE, 12 (33) (2017), pp. 22-29 Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[34]S. Amiraslani, J. Fahimi, H. Mehdinezhad, The Numerical Investigation of Free Falling Jet’s Effect On the Scour of Plunge Pool, in: XVIII International conference on water resources, Tehran University, Iran, 2008.Google Scholar[35]A.W. Nielsen, X. Liu, B.M. Sumer, J. FredsøeFlow and bed shear stresses in scour protections around a pile in a currentCoast. Eng., 72 (2013), pp. 20-38ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[36]G. Epely-Chauvin, G. De Cesare, S. SchwindtNumerical modelling of plunge pool scour evolution in non-cohesive sedimentsEng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech., 8 (4) (2014), pp. 477-487 Download PDFCrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[37]H. Karami, H. Basser, A. Ardeshir, S.H. HosseiniVerification of numerical study of scour around spur dikes using experimental dataWater Environ. J., 28 (1) (2014), pp. 124-134CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[38]S.-H. Oh, K.S. Lee, W.-M. JeongThree-dimensional experiment and numerical simulation of the discharge performance of sluice passageway for tidal power plantRenew. Energy, 92 (2016), pp. 462-473ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[39]M.A. Khodier, B.P. TullisExperimental and computational comparison of baffled-culvert hydrodynamics for fish passageJ. Appl. Water Eng. Res. (2017), pp. 1-9CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[40]F.S. Inc., FLOW-3D user’s manual, Flow Science, Inc., 2009.Google Scholar[41]G. Wei, J. Brethour, M. Grünzner, J. BurnhamSedimentation scour modelFlow Science Report, 7 (2014), pp. 1-29View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[42]R. Soulsby, R. Whitehouse, Threshold of sediment motion in coastal environments, in: Pacific Coasts and Ports’ 97: Proceedings of the 13th Australasian Coastal and Ocean Engineering Conference and the 6th Australasian Port and Harbour Conference, vol. 1, Centre for Advanced Engineering, University of Canterbury, 1997, pp. 145.Google Scholar[43]L.C.v. RijnSediment transport, part II: suspended load transportJ. Hydraul. Eng., 110 (11) (1984), pp. 1613-1641View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[44]S Y LIMScour below unsubmerged full-flowing culvert outletsProc. Instit. Civil Eng. – Water Marit. Energy, 112 (2) (1995), pp. 136-149http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/iwtme.1995.2765910.1680/iwtme.1995.27659View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University.

Flow velocity profiles for canals with a depth of 3 m and flow velocities of 5–5.3 m/s.

Optimization Algorithms and Engineering: Recent Advances and Applications

Mahdi Feizbahr,1 Navid Tonekaboni,2Guang-Jun Jiang,3,4 and Hong-Xia Chen3,4Show moreAcademic Editor: Mohammad YazdiReceived08 Apr 2021Revised18 Jun 2021Accepted17 Jul 2021Published11 Aug 2021

Abstract

Vegetation along the river increases the roughness and reduces the average flow velocity, reduces flow energy, and changes the flow velocity profile in the cross section of the river. Many canals and rivers in nature are covered with vegetation during the floods. Canal’s roughness is strongly affected by plants and therefore it has a great effect on flow resistance during flood. Roughness resistance against the flow due to the plants depends on the flow conditions and plant, so the model should simulate the current velocity by considering the effects of velocity, depth of flow, and type of vegetation along the canal. Total of 48 models have been simulated to investigate the effect of roughness in the canal. The results indicated that, by enhancing the velocity, the effect of vegetation in decreasing the bed velocity is negligible, while when the current has lower speed, the effect of vegetation on decreasing the bed velocity is obviously considerable.


강의 식생은 거칠기를 증가시키고 평균 유속을 감소시키며, 유속 에너지를 감소시키고 강의 단면에서 유속 프로파일을 변경합니다. 자연의 많은 운하와 강은 홍수 동안 초목으로 덮여 있습니다. 운하의 조도는 식물의 영향을 많이 받으므로 홍수시 유동저항에 큰 영향을 미칩니다. 식물로 인한 흐름에 대한 거칠기 저항은 흐름 조건 및 식물에 따라 다르므로 모델은 유속, 흐름 깊이 및 운하를 따라 식생 유형의 영향을 고려하여 현재 속도를 시뮬레이션해야 합니다. 근관의 거칠기의 영향을 조사하기 위해 총 48개의 모델이 시뮬레이션되었습니다. 결과는 유속을 높임으로써 유속을 감소시키는 식생의 영향은 무시할 수 있는 반면, 해류가 더 낮은 유속일 때 유속을 감소시키는 식생의 영향은 분명히 상당함을 나타냈다.

1. Introduction

Considering the impact of each variable is a very popular field within the analytical and statistical methods and intelligent systems [114]. This can help research for better modeling considering the relation of variables or interaction of them toward reaching a better condition for the objective function in control and engineering [1527]. Consequently, it is necessary to study the effects of the passive factors on the active domain [2836]. Because of the effect of vegetation on reducing the discharge capacity of rivers [37], pruning plants was necessary to improve the condition of rivers. One of the important effects of vegetation in river protection is the action of roots, which cause soil consolidation and soil structure improvement and, by enhancing the shear strength of soil, increase the resistance of canal walls against the erosive force of water. The outer limbs of the plant increase the roughness of the canal walls and reduce the flow velocity and deplete the flow energy in vicinity of the walls. Vegetation by reducing the shear stress of the canal bed reduces flood discharge and sedimentation in the intervals between vegetation and increases the stability of the walls [3841].

One of the main factors influencing the speed, depth, and extent of flood in this method is Manning’s roughness coefficient. On the other hand, soil cover [42], especially vegetation, is one of the most determining factors in Manning’s roughness coefficient. Therefore, it is expected that those seasonal changes in the vegetation of the region will play an important role in the calculated value of Manning’s roughness coefficient and ultimately in predicting the flood wave behavior [4345]. The roughness caused by plants’ resistance to flood current depends on the flow and plant conditions. Flow conditions include depth and velocity of the plant, and plant conditions include plant type, hardness or flexibility, dimensions, density, and shape of the plant [46]. In general, the issue discussed in this research is the optimization of flood-induced flow in canals by considering the effect of vegetation-induced roughness. Therefore, the effect of plants on the roughness coefficient and canal transmission coefficient and in consequence the flow depth should be evaluated [4748].

Current resistance is generally known by its roughness coefficient. The equation that is mainly used in this field is Manning equation. The ratio of shear velocity to average current velocity  is another form of current resistance. The reason for using the  ratio is that it is dimensionless and has a strong theoretical basis. The reason for using Manning roughness coefficient is its pervasiveness. According to Freeman et al. [49], the Manning roughness coefficient for plants was calculated according to the Kouwen and Unny [50] method for incremental resistance. This method involves increasing the roughness for various surface and plant irregularities. Manning’s roughness coefficient has all the factors affecting the resistance of the canal. Therefore, the appropriate way to more accurately estimate this coefficient is to know the factors affecting this coefficient [51].

To calculate the flow rate, velocity, and depth of flow in canals as well as flood and sediment estimation, it is important to evaluate the flow resistance. To determine the flow resistance in open ducts, Manning, Chézy, and Darcy–Weisbach relations are used [52]. In these relations, there are parameters such as Manning’s roughness coefficient (n), Chézy roughness coefficient (C), and Darcy–Weisbach coefficient (f). All three of these coefficients are a kind of flow resistance coefficient that is widely used in the equations governing flow in rivers [53].

The three relations that express the relationship between the average flow velocity (V) and the resistance and geometric and hydraulic coefficients of the canal are as follows:where nf, and c are Manning, Darcy–Weisbach, and Chézy coefficients, respectively. V = average flow velocity, R = hydraulic radius, Sf = slope of energy line, which in uniform flow is equal to the slope of the canal bed,  = gravitational acceleration, and Kn is a coefficient whose value is equal to 1 in the SI system and 1.486 in the English system. The coefficients of resistance in equations (1) to (3) are related as follows:

Based on the boundary layer theory, the flow resistance for rough substrates is determined from the following general relation:where f = Darcy–Weisbach coefficient of friction, y = flow depth, Ks = bed roughness size, and A = constant coefficient.

On the other hand, the relationship between the Darcy–Weisbach coefficient of friction and the shear velocity of the flow is as follows:

By using equation (6), equation (5) is converted as follows:

Investigation on the effect of vegetation arrangement on shear velocity of flow in laboratory conditions showed that, with increasing the shear Reynolds number (), the numerical value of the  ratio also increases; in other words the amount of roughness coefficient increases with a slight difference in the cases without vegetation, checkered arrangement, and cross arrangement, respectively [54].

Roughness in river vegetation is simulated in mathematical models with a variable floor slope flume by different densities and discharges. The vegetation considered submerged in the bed of the flume. Results showed that, with increasing vegetation density, canal roughness and flow shear speed increase and with increasing flow rate and depth, Manning’s roughness coefficient decreases. Factors affecting the roughness caused by vegetation include the effect of plant density and arrangement on flow resistance, the effect of flow velocity on flow resistance, and the effect of depth [4555].

One of the works that has been done on the effect of vegetation on the roughness coefficient is Darby [56] study, which investigates a flood wave model that considers all the effects of vegetation on the roughness coefficient. There are currently two methods for estimating vegetation roughness. One method is to add the thrust force effect to Manning’s equation [475758] and the other method is to increase the canal bed roughness (Manning-Strickler coefficient) [455961]. These two methods provide acceptable results in models designed to simulate floodplain flow. Wang et al. [62] simulate the floodplain with submerged vegetation using these two methods and to increase the accuracy of the results, they suggested using the effective height of the plant under running water instead of using the actual height of the plant. Freeman et al. [49] provided equations for determining the coefficient of vegetation roughness under different conditions. Lee et al. [63] proposed a method for calculating the Manning coefficient using the flow velocity ratio at different depths. Much research has been done on the Manning roughness coefficient in rivers, and researchers [496366] sought to obtain a specific number for n to use in river engineering. However, since the depth and geometric conditions of rivers are completely variable in different places, the values of Manning roughness coefficient have changed subsequently, and it has not been possible to choose a fixed number. In river engineering software, the Manning roughness coefficient is determined only for specific and constant conditions or normal flow. Lee et al. [63] stated that seasonal conditions, density, and type of vegetation should also be considered. Hydraulic roughness and Manning roughness coefficient n of the plant were obtained by estimating the total Manning roughness coefficient from the matching of the measured water surface curve and water surface height. The following equation is used for the flow surface curve:where  is the depth of water change, S0 is the slope of the canal floor, Sf is the slope of the energy line, and Fr is the Froude number which is obtained from the following equation:where D is the characteristic length of the canal. Flood flow velocity is one of the important parameters of flood waves, which is very important in calculating the water level profile and energy consumption. In the cases where there are many limitations for researchers due to the wide range of experimental dimensions and the variety of design parameters, the use of numerical methods that are able to estimate the rest of the unknown results with acceptable accuracy is economically justified.

FLOW-3D software uses Finite Difference Method (FDM) for numerical solution of two-dimensional and three-dimensional flow. This software is dedicated to computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and is provided by Flow Science [67]. The flow is divided into networks with tubular cells. For each cell there are values of dependent variables and all variables are calculated in the center of the cell, except for the velocity, which is calculated at the center of the cell. In this software, two numerical techniques have been used for geometric simulation, FAVOR™ (Fractional-Area-Volume-Obstacle-Representation) and the VOF (Volume-of-Fluid) method. The equations used at this model for this research include the principle of mass survival and the magnitude of motion as follows. The fluid motion equations in three dimensions, including the Navier–Stokes equations with some additional terms, are as follows:where  are mass accelerations in the directions xyz and  are viscosity accelerations in the directions xyz and are obtained from the following equations:

Shear stresses  in equation (11) are obtained from the following equations:

The standard model is used for high Reynolds currents, but in this model, RNG theory allows the analytical differential formula to be used for the effective viscosity that occurs at low Reynolds numbers. Therefore, the RNG model can be used for low and high Reynolds currents.

Weather changes are high and this affects many factors continuously. The presence of vegetation in any area reduces the velocity of surface flows and prevents soil erosion, so vegetation will have a significant impact on reducing destructive floods. One of the methods of erosion protection in floodplain watersheds is the use of biological methods. The presence of vegetation in watersheds reduces the flow rate during floods and prevents soil erosion. The external organs of plants increase the roughness and decrease the velocity of water flow and thus reduce its shear stress energy. One of the important factors with which the hydraulic resistance of plants is expressed is the roughness coefficient. Measuring the roughness coefficient of plants and investigating their effect on reducing velocity and shear stress of flow is of special importance.

Roughness coefficients in canals are affected by two main factors, namely, flow conditions and vegetation characteristics [68]. So far, much research has been done on the effect of the roughness factor created by vegetation, but the issue of plant density has received less attention. For this purpose, this study was conducted to investigate the effect of vegetation density on flow velocity changes.

In a study conducted using a software model on three density modes in the submerged state effect on flow velocity changes in 48 different modes was investigated (Table 1).Table 1 The studied models.

The number of cells used in this simulation is equal to 1955888 cells. The boundary conditions were introduced to the model as a constant speed and depth (Figure 1). At the output boundary, due to the presence of supercritical current, no parameter for the current is considered. Absolute roughness for floors and walls was introduced to the model (Figure 1). In this case, the flow was assumed to be nonviscous and air entry into the flow was not considered. After  seconds, this model reached a convergence accuracy of .

Figure 1 The simulated model and its boundary conditions.

Due to the fact that it is not possible to model the vegetation in FLOW-3D software, in this research, the vegetation of small soft plants was studied so that Manning’s coefficients can be entered into the canal bed in the form of roughness coefficients obtained from the studies of Chow [69] in similar conditions. In practice, in such modeling, the effect of plant height is eliminated due to the small height of herbaceous plants, and modeling can provide relatively acceptable results in these conditions.

48 models with input velocities proportional to the height of the regular semihexagonal canal were considered to create supercritical conditions. Manning coefficients were applied based on Chow [69] studies in order to control the canal bed. Speed profiles were drawn and discussed.

Any control and simulation system has some inputs that we should determine to test any technology [7077]. Determination and true implementation of such parameters is one of the key steps of any simulation [237881] and computing procedure [8286]. The input current is created by applying the flow rate through the VFR (Volume Flow Rate) option and the output flow is considered Output and for other borders the Symmetry option is considered.

Simulation of the models and checking their action and responses and observing how a process behaves is one of the accepted methods in engineering and science [8788]. For verification of FLOW-3D software, the results of computer simulations are compared with laboratory measurements and according to the values of computational error, convergence error, and the time required for convergence, the most appropriate option for real-time simulation is selected (Figures 2 and 3 ).

Figure 2 Modeling the plant with cylindrical tubes at the bottom of the canal.

Figure 3 Velocity profiles in positions 2 and 5.

The canal is 7 meters long, 0.5 meters wide, and 0.8 meters deep. This test was used to validate the application of the software to predict the flow rate parameters. In this experiment, instead of using the plant, cylindrical pipes were used in the bottom of the canal.

The conditions of this modeling are similar to the laboratory conditions and the boundary conditions used in the laboratory were used for numerical modeling. The critical flow enters the simulation model from the upstream boundary, so in the upstream boundary conditions, critical velocity and depth are considered. The flow at the downstream boundary is supercritical, so no parameters are applied to the downstream boundary.

The software well predicts the process of changing the speed profile in the open canal along with the considered obstacles. The error in the calculated speed values can be due to the complexity of the flow and the interaction of the turbulence caused by the roughness of the floor with the turbulence caused by the three-dimensional cycles in the hydraulic jump. As a result, the software is able to predict the speed distribution in open canals.

2. Modeling Results

After analyzing the models, the results were shown in graphs (Figures 414 ). The total number of experiments in this study was 48 due to the limitations of modeling.(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)Figure 4 Flow velocity profiles for canals with a depth of 1 m and flow velocities of 3–3.3 m/s. Canal with a depth of 1 meter and a flow velocity of (a) 3 meters per second, (b) 3.1 meters per second, (c) 3.2 meters per second, and (d) 3.3 meters per second.

Figure 5 Canal diagram with a depth of 1 meter and a flow rate of 3 meters per second.

Figure 6 Canal diagram with a depth of 1 meter and a flow rate of 3.1 meters per second.

Figure 7 Canal diagram with a depth of 1 meter and a flow rate of 3.2 meters per second.

Figure 8 Canal diagram with a depth of 1 meter and a flow rate of 3.3 meters per second.(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)Figure 9 Flow velocity profiles for canals with a depth of 2 m and flow velocities of 4–4.3 m/s. Canal with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of (a) 4 meters per second, (b) 4.1 meters per second, (c) 4.2 meters per second, and (d) 4.3 meters per second.

Figure 10 Canal diagram with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of 4 meters per second.

Figure 11 Canal diagram with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of 4.1 meters per second.

Figure 12 Canal diagram with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of 4.2 meters per second.

Figure 13 Canal diagram with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of 4.3 meters per second.(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(d)
(d)Figure 14 Flow velocity profiles for canals with a depth of 3 m and flow velocities of 5–5.3 m/s. Canal with a depth of 2 meters and a flow rate of (a) 4 meters per second, (b) 4.1 meters per second, (c) 4.2 meters per second, and (d) 4.3 meters per second.

To investigate the effects of roughness with flow velocity, the trend of flow velocity changes at different depths and with supercritical flow to a Froude number proportional to the depth of the section has been obtained.

According to the velocity profiles of Figure 5, it can be seen that, with the increasing of Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases.

According to Figures 5 to 8, it can be found that, with increasing the Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of the models 1 to 12, which can be justified by increasing the speed and of course increasing the Froude number.

According to Figure 10, we see that, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases.

According to Figure 11, we see that, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of Figures 510, which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

With increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases (Figure 12). But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of the higher models (Figures 58 and 1011), which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

According to Figure 13, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of Figures 5 to 12, which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

According to Figure 15, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases.

Figure 15 Canal diagram with a depth of 3 meters and a flow rate of 5 meters per second.

According to Figure 16, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of the higher model, which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

Figure 16 Canal diagram with a depth of 3 meters and a flow rate of 5.1 meters per second.

According to Figure 17, it is clear that, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of the higher models, which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

Figure 17 Canal diagram with a depth of 3 meters and a flow rate of 5.2 meters per second.

According to Figure 18, with increasing Manning’s coefficient, the canal bed speed decreases. But this deceleration is more noticeable than the deceleration of the higher models, which can be justified by increasing the speed and, of course, increasing the Froude number.

Figure 18 Canal diagram with a depth of 3 meters and a flow rate of 5.3 meters per second.

According to Figure 19, it can be seen that the vegetation placed in front of the flow input velocity has negligible effect on the reduction of velocity, which of course can be justified due to the flexibility of the vegetation. The only unusual thing is the unexpected decrease in floor speed of 3 m/s compared to higher speeds.(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)Figure 19 Comparison of velocity profiles with the same plant densities (depth 1 m). Comparison of velocity profiles with (a) plant densities of 25%, depth 1 m; (b) plant densities of 50%, depth 1 m; and (c) plant densities of 75%, depth 1 m.

According to Figure 20, by increasing the speed of vegetation, the effect of vegetation on reducing the flow rate becomes more noticeable. And the role of input current does not have much effect in reducing speed.(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)Figure 20 Comparison of velocity profiles with the same plant densities (depth 2 m). Comparison of velocity profiles with (a) plant densities of 25%, depth 2 m; (b) plant densities of 50%, depth 2 m; and (c) plant densities of 75%, depth 2 m.

According to Figure 21, it can be seen that, with increasing speed, the effect of vegetation on reducing the bed flow rate becomes more noticeable and the role of the input current does not have much effect. In general, it can be seen that, by increasing the speed of the input current, the slope of the profiles increases from the bed to the water surface and due to the fact that, in software, the roughness coefficient applies to the channel floor only in the boundary conditions, this can be perfectly justified. Of course, it can be noted that, due to the flexible conditions of the vegetation of the bed, this modeling can show acceptable results for such grasses in the canal floor. In the next directions, we may try application of swarm-based optimization methods for modeling and finding the most effective factors in this research [27815188994]. In future, we can also apply the simulation logic and software of this research for other domains such as power engineering [9599].(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)(a)
(a)(b)
(b)(c)
(c)Figure 21 Comparison of velocity profiles with the same plant densities (depth 3 m). Comparison of velocity profiles with (a) plant densities of 25%, depth 3 m; (b) plant densities of 50%, depth 3 m; and (c) plant densities of 75%, depth 3 m.

3. Conclusion

The effects of vegetation on the flood canal were investigated by numerical modeling with FLOW-3D software. After analyzing the results, the following conclusions were reached:(i)Increasing the density of vegetation reduces the velocity of the canal floor but has no effect on the velocity of the canal surface.(ii)Increasing the Froude number is directly related to increasing the speed of the canal floor.(iii)In the canal with a depth of one meter, a sudden increase in speed can be observed from the lowest speed and higher speed, which is justified by the sudden increase in Froude number.(iv)As the inlet flow rate increases, the slope of the profiles from the bed to the water surface increases.(v)By reducing the Froude number, the effect of vegetation on reducing the flow bed rate becomes more noticeable. And the input velocity in reducing the velocity of the canal floor does not have much effect.(vi)At a flow rate between 3 and 3.3 meters per second due to the shallow depth of the canal and the higher landing number a more critical area is observed in which the flow bed velocity in this area is between 2.86 and 3.1 m/s.(vii)Due to the critical flow velocity and the slight effect of the roughness of the horseshoe vortex floor, it is not visible and is only partially observed in models 1-2-3 and 21.(viii)As the flow rate increases, the effect of vegetation on the rate of bed reduction decreases.(ix)In conditions where less current intensity is passing, vegetation has a greater effect on reducing current intensity and energy consumption increases.(x)In the case of using the flow rate of 0.8 cubic meters per second, the velocity distribution and flow regime show about 20% more energy consumption than in the case of using the flow rate of 1.3 cubic meters per second.

Nomenclature

n:Manning’s roughness coefficient
C:Chézy roughness coefficient
f:Darcy–Weisbach coefficient
V:Flow velocity
R:Hydraulic radius
g:Gravitational acceleration
y:Flow depth
Ks:Bed roughness
A:Constant coefficient
:Reynolds number
y/∂x:Depth of water change
S0:Slope of the canal floor
Sf:Slope of energy line
Fr:Froude number
D:Characteristic length of the canal
G:Mass acceleration
:Shear stresses.

Data Availability

All data are included within the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Contract no. 71761030 and Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia under Contract no. 2019LH07003.

References

  1. H. Yu, L. Jie, W. Gui et al., “Dynamic Gaussian bare-bones fruit fly optimizers with abandonment mechanism: method and analysis,” Engineering with Computers, vol. 20, pp. 1–29, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. X. Zhao, D. Li, B. Yang, C. Ma, Y. Zhu, and H. Chen, “Feature selection based on improved ant colony optimization for online detection of foreign fiber in cotton,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 24, pp. 585–596, 2014.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. J. Hu, H. Chen, A. A. Heidari et al., “Orthogonal learning covariance matrix for defects of grey wolf optimizer: insights, balance, diversity, and feature selection,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 213, Article ID 106684, 2021.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. C. Yu, M. Chen, K. Chen et al., “SGOA: annealing-behaved grasshopper optimizer for global tasks,” Engineering with Computers, vol. 4, pp. 1–28, 2021.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. W. Shan, Z. Qiao, A. A. Heidari, H. Chen, H. Turabieh, and Y. Teng, “Double adaptive weights for stabilization of moth flame optimizer: balance analysis, engineering cases, and medical diagnosis,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 8, Article ID 106728, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  6. J. Tu, H. Chen, J. Liu et al., “Evolutionary biogeography-based whale optimization methods with communication structure: towards measuring the balance,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 212, Article ID 106642, 2021.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. Y. Zhang, R. Liu, X. Wang et al., “Towards augmented kernel extreme learning models for bankruptcy prediction: algorithmic behavior and comprehensive analysis,” Neurocomputing, vol. 430, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  8. H.-L. Chen, G. Wang, C. Ma, Z.-N. Cai, W.-B. Liu, and S.-J. Wang, “An efficient hybrid kernel extreme learning machine approach for early diagnosis of Parkinson׳s disease,” Neurocomputing, vol. 184, pp. 131–144, 2016.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. J. Xia, H. Chen, Q. Li et al., “Ultrasound-based differentiation of malignant and benign thyroid Nodules: an extreme learning machine approach,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 147, pp. 37–49, 2017.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. C. Li, L. Hou, B. Y. Sharma et al., “Developing a new intelligent system for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 153, pp. 211–225, 2018.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. X. Xu and H.-L. Chen, “Adaptive computational chemotaxis based on field in bacterial foraging optimization,” Soft Computing, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 797–807, 2014.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. M. Wang, H. Chen, B. Yang et al., “Toward an optimal kernel extreme learning machine using a chaotic moth-flame optimization strategy with applications in medical diagnoses,” Neurocomputing, vol. 267, pp. 69–84, 2017.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. L. Chao, K. Zhang, Z. Li, Y. Zhu, J. Wang, and Z. Yu, “Geographically weighted regression based methods for merging satellite and gauge precipitation,” Journal of Hydrology, vol. 558, pp. 275–289, 2018.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. F. J. Golrokh, G. Azeem, and A. Hasan, “Eco-efficiency evaluation in cement industries: DEA malmquist productivity index using optimization models,” ENG Transactions, vol. 1, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  15. D. Zhao, L. Lei, F. Yu et al., “Chaotic random spare ant colony optimization for multi-threshold image segmentation of 2D Kapur entropy,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 8, Article ID 106510, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  16. Y. Zhang, R. Liu, X. Wang, H. Chen, and C. Li, “Boosted binary Harris hawks optimizer and feature selection,” Engineering with Computers, vol. 517, pp. 1–30, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. L. Hu, G. Hong, J. Ma, X. Wang, and H. Chen, “An efficient machine learning approach for diagnosis of paraquat-poisoned patients,” Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 59, pp. 116–124, 2015.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. L. Shen, H. Chen, Z. Yu et al., “Evolving support vector machines using fruit fly optimization for medical data classification,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 96, pp. 61–75, 2016.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. X. Zhao, X. Zhang, Z. Cai et al., “Chaos enhanced grey wolf optimization wrapped ELM for diagnosis of paraquat-poisoned patients,” Computational Biology and Chemistry, vol. 78, pp. 481–490, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. Y. Xu, H. Chen, J. Luo, Q. Zhang, S. Jiao, and X. Zhang, “Enhanced Moth-flame optimizer with mutation strategy for global optimization,” Information Sciences, vol. 492, pp. 181–203, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. M. Wang and H. Chen, “Chaotic multi-swarm whale optimizer boosted support vector machine for medical diagnosis,” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 88, Article ID 105946, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. Y. Chen, J. Li, H. Lu, and P. Yan, “Coupling system dynamics analysis and risk aversion programming for optimizing the mixed noise-driven shale gas-water supply chains,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 278, Article ID 123209, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  23. H. Tang, Y. Xu, A. Lin et al., “Predicting green consumption behaviors of students using efficient firefly grey wolf-assisted K-nearest neighbor classifiers,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 35546–35562, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. H.-J. Ma and G.-H. Yang, “Adaptive fault tolerant control of cooperative heterogeneous systems with actuator faults and unreliable interconnections,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 3240–3255, 2015.View at: Google Scholar
  25. H.-J. Ma and L.-X. Xu, “Decentralized adaptive fault-tolerant control for a class of strong interconnected nonlinear systems via graph theory,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 66, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  26. H. J. Ma, L. X. Xu, and G. H. Yang, “Multiple environment integral reinforcement learning-based fault-tolerant control for affine nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 51, pp. 1–16, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. J. Hu, M. Wang, C. Zhao, Q. Pan, and C. Du, “Formation control and collision avoidance for multi-UAV systems based on Voronoi partition,” Science China Technological Sciences, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 65–72, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. C. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Qian, C. Chen, and X. Zhou, “Locality-constrained discriminative matrix regression for robust face identification,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 99, pp. 1–15, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. X. Zhang, D. Wang, Z. Zhou, and Y. Ma, “Robust low-rank tensor recovery with rectification and alignment,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 238–255, 2019.View at: Google Scholar
  30. X. Zhang, J. Wang, T. Wang, R. Jiang, J. Xu, and L. Zhao, “Robust feature learning for adversarial defense via hierarchical feature alignment,” Information Sciences, vol. 560, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  31. X. Zhang, R. Jiang, T. Wang, and J. Wang, “Recursive neural network for video deblurring,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 03, p. 1, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. X. Zhang, T. Wang, J. Wang, G. Tang, and L. Zhao, “Pyramid channel-based feature attention network for image dehazing,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 197-198, Article ID 103003, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. X. Zhang, T. Wang, W. Luo, and P. Huang, “Multi-level fusion and attention-guided CNN for image dehazing,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 3, p. 1, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. L. He, J. Shen, and Y. Zhang, “Ecological vulnerability assessment for ecological conservation and environmental management,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 206, pp. 1115–1125, 2018.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. Y. Chen, W. Zheng, W. Li, and Y. Huang, “Large group Activity security risk assessment and risk early warning based on random forest algorithm,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 144, pp. 1–5, 2021.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. J. Hu, H. Zhang, Z. Li, C. Zhao, Z. Xu, and Q. Pan, “Object traversing by monocular UAV in outdoor environment,” Asian Journal of Control, vol. 25, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  37. P. Tian, H. Lu, W. Feng, Y. Guan, and Y. Xue, “Large decrease in streamflow and sediment load of Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau driven by future climate change: a case study in Lhasa River Basin,” Catena, vol. 187, Article ID 104340, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. A. Stokes, C. Atger, A. G. Bengough, T. Fourcaud, and R. C. Sidle, “Desirable plant root traits for protecting natural and engineered slopes against landslides,” Plant and Soil, vol. 324, no. 1, pp. 1–30, 2009.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. T. B. Devi, A. Sharma, and B. Kumar, “Studies on emergent flow over vegetative channel bed with downward seepage,” Hydrological Sciences Journal, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 408–420, 2017.View at: Google Scholar
  40. G. Ireland, M. Volpi, and G. Petropoulos, “Examining the capability of supervised machine learning classifiers in extracting flooded areas from Landsat TM imagery: a case study from a Mediterranean flood,” Remote Sensing, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 3372–3399, 2015.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. L. Goodarzi and S. Javadi, “Assessment of aquifer vulnerability using the DRASTIC model; a case study of the Dezful-Andimeshk Aquifer,” Computational Research Progress in Applied Science & Engineering, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 17–22, 2016.View at: Google Scholar
  42. K. Zhang, Q. Wang, L. Chao et al., “Ground observation-based analysis of soil moisture spatiotemporal variability across a humid to semi-humid transitional zone in China,” Journal of Hydrology, vol. 574, pp. 903–914, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. L. De Doncker, P. Troch, R. Verhoeven, K. Bal, P. Meire, and J. Quintelier, “Determination of the Manning roughness coefficient influenced by vegetation in the river Aa and Biebrza river,” Environmental Fluid Mechanics, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 549–567, 2009.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. M. Fathi-Moghadam and K. Drikvandi, “Manning roughness coefficient for rivers and flood plains with non-submerged vegetation,” International Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2012.View at: Google Scholar
  45. F.-C. Wu, H. W. Shen, and Y.-J. Chou, “Variation of roughness coefficients for unsubmerged and submerged vegetation,” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol. 125, no. 9, pp. 934–942, 1999.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. M. K. Wood, “Rangeland vegetation-hydrologic interactions,” in Vegetation Science Applications for Rangeland Analysis and Management, vol. 3, pp. 469–491, Springer, 1988.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. C. Wilson, O. Yagci, H.-P. Rauch, and N. Olsen, “3D numerical modelling of a willow vegetated river/floodplain system,” Journal of Hydrology, vol. 327, no. 1-2, pp. 13–21, 2006.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. R. Yazarloo, M. Khamehchian, and M. R. Nikoodel, “Observational-computational 3d engineering geological model and geotechnical characteristics of young sediments of golestan province,” Computational Research Progress in Applied Science & Engineering (CRPASE), vol. 03, 2017.View at: Google Scholar
  49. G. E. Freeman, W. H. Rahmeyer, and R. R. Copeland, “Determination of resistance due to shrubs and woody vegetation,” International Journal of River Basin Management, vol. 19, 2000.View at: Google Scholar
  50. N. Kouwen and T. E. Unny, “Flexible roughness in open channels,” Journal of the Hydraulics Division, vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 713–728, 1973.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. S. Hosseini and J. Abrishami, Open Channel Hydraulics, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2007.
  52. C. S. James, A. L. Birkhead, A. A. Jordanova, and J. J. O’Sullivan, “Flow resistance of emergent vegetation,” Journal of Hydraulic Research, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 390–398, 2004.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. F. Huthoff and D. Augustijn, “Channel roughness in 1D steady uniform flow: Manning or Chézy?,,” NCR-days, vol. 102, 2004.View at: Google Scholar
  54. M. S. Sabegh, M. Saneie, M. Habibi, A. A. Abbasi, and M. Ghadimkhani, “Experimental investigation on the effect of river bank tree planting array, on shear velocity,” Journal of Watershed Engineering and Management, vol. 2, no. 4, 2011.View at: Google Scholar
  55. A. Errico, V. Pasquino, M. Maxwald, G. B. Chirico, L. Solari, and F. Preti, “The effect of flexible vegetation on flow in drainage channels: estimation of roughness coefficients at the real scale,” Ecological Engineering, vol. 120, pp. 411–421, 2018.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. S. E. Darby, “Effect of riparian vegetation on flow resistance and flood potential,” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol. 125, no. 5, pp. 443–454, 1999.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. V. Kutija and H. Thi Minh Hong, “A numerical model for assessing the additional resistance to flow introduced by flexible vegetation,” Journal of Hydraulic Research, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 99–114, 1996.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. T. Fischer-Antze, T. Stoesser, P. Bates, and N. R. B. Olsen, “3D numerical modelling of open-channel flow with submerged vegetation,” Journal of Hydraulic Research, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 303–310, 2001.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. U. Stephan and D. Gutknecht, “Hydraulic resistance of submerged flexible vegetation,” Journal of Hydrology, vol. 269, no. 1-2, pp. 27–43, 2002.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. F. G. Carollo, V. Ferro, and D. Termini, “Flow resistance law in channels with flexible submerged vegetation,” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol. 131, no. 7, pp. 554–564, 2005.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. W. Fu-sheng, “Flow resistance of flexible vegetation in open channel,” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol. S1, 2007.View at: Google Scholar
  62. P.-f. Wang, C. Wang, and D. Z. Zhu, “Hydraulic resistance of submerged vegetation related to effective height,” Journal of Hydrodynamics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 265–273, 2010.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. J. K. Lee, L. C. Roig, H. L. Jenter, and H. M. Visser, “Drag coefficients for modeling flow through emergent vegetation in the Florida Everglades,” Ecological Engineering, vol. 22, no. 4-5, pp. 237–248, 2004.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. G. J. Arcement and V. R. Schneider, Guide for Selecting Manning’s Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
  65. Y. Ding and S. S. Y. Wang, “Identification of Manning’s roughness coefficients in channel network using adjoint analysis,” International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 3–13, 2005.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. E. T. Engman, “Roughness coefficients for routing surface runoff,” Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 39–53, 1986.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  67. M. Feizbahr, C. Kok Keong, F. Rostami, and M. Shahrokhi, “Wave energy dissipation using perforated and non perforated piles,” International Journal of Engineering, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 212–219, 2018.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. M. Farzadkhoo, A. Keshavarzi, H. Hamidifar, and M. Javan, “Sudden pollutant discharge in vegetated compound meandering rivers,” Catena, vol. 182, Article ID 104155, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. V. T. Chow, Open-channel Hydraulics, Mcgraw-Hill Civil Engineering Series, Chennai, TN, India, 1959.
  70. X. Zhang, R. Jing, Z. Li, Z. Li, X. Chen, and C.-Y. Su, “Adaptive pseudo inverse control for a class of nonlinear asymmetric and saturated nonlinear hysteretic systems,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 916–928, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  71. C. Zuo, Q. Chen, L. Tian, L. Waller, and A. Asundi, “Transport of intensity phase retrieval and computational imaging for partially coherent fields: the phase space perspective,” Optics and Lasers in Engineering, vol. 71, pp. 20–32, 2015.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  72. C. Zuo, J. Sun, J. Li, J. Zhang, A. Asundi, and Q. Chen, “High-resolution transport-of-intensity quantitative phase microscopy with annular illumination,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 7654–7722, 2017.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  73. B.-H. Li, Y. Liu, A.-M. Zhang, W.-H. Wang, and S. Wan, “A survey on blocking technology of entity resolution,” Journal of Computer Science and Technology, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 769–793, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  74. Y. Liu, B. Zhang, Y. Feng et al., “Development of 340-GHz transceiver front end based on GaAs monolithic integration technology for THz active imaging array,” Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 21, p. 7924, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. J. Hu, H. Zhang, L. Liu, X. Zhu, C. Zhao, and Q. Pan, “Convergent multiagent formation control with collision avoidance,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1805–1818, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  76. M. B. Movahhed, J. Ayoubinejad, F. N. Asl, and M. Feizbahr, “The effect of rain on pedestrians crossing speed,” Computational Research Progress in Applied Science & Engineering (CRPASE), vol. 6, no. 3, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  77. A. Li, D. Spano, J. Krivochiza et al., “A tutorial on interference exploitation via symbol-level precoding: overview, state-of-the-art and future directions,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 796–839, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  78. W. Zhu, C. Ma, X. Zhao et al., “Evaluation of sino foreign cooperative education project using orthogonal sine cosine optimized kernel extreme learning machine,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 61107–61123, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  79. G. Liu, W. Jia, M. Wang et al., “Predicting cervical hyperextension injury: a covariance guided sine cosine support vector machine,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 46895–46908, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  80. Y. Wei, H. Lv, M. Chen et al., “Predicting entrepreneurial intention of students: an extreme learning machine with Gaussian barebone harris hawks optimizer,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 76841–76855, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  81. A. Lin, Q. Wu, A. A. Heidari et al., “Predicting intentions of students for master programs using a chaos-induced sine cosine-based fuzzy K-Nearest neighbor classifier,” Ieee Access, vol. 7, pp. 67235–67248, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  82. Y. Fan, P. Wang, A. A. Heidari et al., “Rationalized fruit fly optimization with sine cosine algorithm: a comprehensive analysis,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 157, Article ID 113486, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  83. E. Rodríguez-Esparza, L. A. Zanella-Calzada, D. Oliva et al., “An efficient Harris hawks-inspired image segmentation method,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 155, Article ID 113428, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  84. S. Jiao, G. Chong, C. Huang et al., “Orthogonally adapted Harris hawks optimization for parameter estimation of photovoltaic models,” Energy, vol. 203, Article ID 117804, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  85. Z. Xu, Z. Hu, A. A. Heidari et al., “Orthogonally-designed adapted grasshopper optimization: a comprehensive analysis,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 150, Article ID 113282, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  86. A. Abbassi, R. Abbassi, A. A. Heidari et al., “Parameters identification of photovoltaic cell models using enhanced exploratory salp chains-based approach,” Energy, vol. 198, Article ID 117333, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  87. M. Mahmoodi and K. K. Aminjan, “Numerical simulation of flow through sukhoi 24 air inlet,” Computational Research Progress in Applied Science & Engineering (CRPASE), vol. 03, 2017.View at: Google Scholar
  88. F. J. Golrokh and A. Hasan, “A comparison of machine learning clustering algorithms based on the DEA optimization approach for pharmaceutical companies in developing countries,” ENG Transactions, vol. 1, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
  89. H. Chen, A. A. Heidari, H. Chen, M. Wang, Z. Pan, and A. H. Gandomi, “Multi-population differential evolution-assisted Harris hawks optimization: framework and case studies,” Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 111, pp. 175–198, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  90. J. Guo, H. Zheng, B. Li, and G.-Z. Fu, “Bayesian hierarchical model-based information fusion for degradation analysis considering non-competing relationship,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 175222–175227, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  91. J. Guo, H. Zheng, B. Li, and G.-Z. Fu, “A Bayesian approach for degradation analysis with individual differences,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 175033–175040, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  92. M. M. A. Malakoutian, Y. Malakoutian, P. Mostafapour, and S. Z. D. Abed, “Prediction for monthly rainfall of six meteorological regions and TRNC (case study: north Cyprus),” ENG Transactions, vol. 2, no. 2, 2021.View at: Google Scholar
  93. H. Arslan, M. Ranjbar, and Z. Mutlum, “Maximum sound transmission loss in multi-chamber reactive silencers: are two chambers enough?,,” ENG Transactions, vol. 2, no. 1, 2021.View at: Google Scholar
  94. N. Tonekaboni, M. Feizbahr, N. Tonekaboni, G.-J. Jiang, and H.-X. Chen, “Optimization of solar CCHP systems with collector enhanced by porous media and nanofluid,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2021, Article ID 9984840, 12 pages, 2021.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  95. Z. Niu, B. Zhang, J. Wang et al., “The research on 220GHz multicarrier high-speed communication system,” China Communications, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 131–139, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  96. B. Zhang, Z. Niu, J. Wang et al., “Four‐hundred gigahertz broadband multi‐branch waveguide coupler,” IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 1175–1179, 2020.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  97. Z.-Q. Niu, L. Yang, B. Zhang et al., “A mechanical reliability study of 3dB waveguide hybrid couplers in the submillimeter and terahertz band,” Journal of Zhejiang University Science, vol. 1, no. 1, 1998.View at: Google Scholar
  98. B. Zhang, D. Ji, D. Fang, S. Liang, Y. Fan, and X. Chen, “A novel 220-GHz GaN diode on-chip tripler with high driven power,” IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 780–783, 2019.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  99. M. Taleghani and A. Taleghani, “Identification and ranking of factors affecting the implementation of knowledge management engineering based on TOPSIS technique,” ENG Transactions, vol. 1, no. 1, 2020.View at: Google Scholar
The 3D computational domain model (50–18.6) slope change, and boundary condition for (50–30 slope change) model.

Numerical investigation of flow characteristics over stepped spillways

Güven, Aytaç
Mahmood, Ahmed Hussein
Water Supply (2021) 21 (3): 1344–1355.
https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2020.283Article history

Abstract

Spillways are constructed to evacuate flood discharge safely so that a flood wave does not overtop the dam body. There are different types of spillways, with the ogee type being the conventional one. A stepped spillway is an example of a nonconventional spillway. The turbulent flow over a stepped spillway was studied numerically by using the Flow-3D package. Different fluid flow characteristics such as longitudinal flow velocity, temperature distribution, density and chemical concentration can be well simulated by Flow-3D. In this study, the influence of slope changes on flow characteristics such as air entrainment, velocity distribution and dynamic pressures distribution over a stepped spillway was modelled by Flow-3D. The results from the numerical model were compared with an experimental study done by others in the literature. Two models of a stepped spillway with different discharge for each model were simulated. The turbulent flow in the experimental model was simulated by the Renormalized Group (RNG) turbulence scheme in the numerical model. A good agreement was achieved between the numerical results and the observed ones, which are exhibited in terms of graphics and statistical tables.

배수로는 홍수가 댐 몸체 위로 넘치지 않도록 안전하게 홍수를 피할 수 있도록 건설되었습니다. 다른 유형의 배수로가 있으며, ogee 유형이 기존 유형입니다. 계단식 배수로는 비 전통적인 배수로의 예입니다. 계단식 배수로 위의 난류는 Flow-3D 패키지를 사용하여 수치적으로 연구되었습니다.

세로 유속, 온도 분포, 밀도 및 화학 농도와 같은 다양한 유체 흐름 특성은 Flow-3D로 잘 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 이 연구에서는 계단식 배수로에 대한 공기 혼입, 속도 분포 및 동적 압력 분포와 같은 유동 특성에 대한 경사 변화의 영향을 Flow-3D로 모델링 했습니다.

수치 모델의 결과는 문헌에서 다른 사람들이 수행한 실험 연구와 비교되었습니다. 각 모델에 대해 서로 다른 배출이 있는 계단식 배수로의 두 모델이 시뮬레이션되었습니다. 실험 모델의 난류 흐름은 수치 모델의 Renormalized Group (RNG) 난류 계획에 의해 시뮬레이션되었습니다. 수치 결과와 관찰 된 결과 사이에 좋은 일치가 이루어졌으며, 이는 그래픽 및 통계 테이블로 표시됩니다.

HIGHLIGHTS

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

  • A numerical model was developed for stepped spillways.
  • The turbulent flow was simulated by the Renormalized Group (RNG) model.
  • Both numerical and experimental results showed that flow characteristics are greatly affected by abrupt slope change on the steps.

Keyword

CFDnumerical modellingslope changestepped spillwayturbulent flow

INTRODUCTION

댐 구조는 물 보호가 생활의 핵심이기 때문에 물을 저장하거나 물을 운반하는 전 세계에서 가장 중요한 프로젝트입니다. 그리고 여수로는 댐의 가장 중요한 부분 중 하나로 분류됩니다. 홍수로 인한 파괴 나 피해로부터 댐을 보호하기 위해 여수로가 건설됩니다.

수력 발전, 항해, 레크리에이션 및 어업의 중요성을 감안할 때 댐 건설 및 홍수 통제는 전 세계적으로 매우 중요한 문제로 간주 될 수 있습니다. 많은 유형의 배수로가 있지만 가장 일반적인 유형은 다음과 같습니다 : ogee 배수로, 자유 낙하 배수로, 사이펀 배수로, 슈트 배수로, 측면 채널 배수로, 터널 배수로, 샤프트 배수로 및 계단식 배수로.

그리고 모든 여수로는 입구 채널, 제어 구조, 배출 캐리어 및 출구 채널의 네 가지 필수 구성 요소로 구성됩니다. 특히 롤러 압축 콘크리트 (RCC) 댐 건설 기술과 더 쉽고 빠르며 저렴한 건설 기술로 분류 된 계단식 배수로 건설과 관련하여 최근 수십 년 동안 많은 계단식 배수로가 건설되었습니다 (Chanson 2002; Felder & Chanson 2011).

계단식 배수로 구조는 캐비테이션 위험을 감소시키는 에너지 소산 속도를 증가시킵니다 (Boes & Hager 2003b). 계단식 배수로는 다양한 조건에서 더 매력적으로 만드는 장점이 있습니다.

계단식 배수로의 흐름 거동은 일반적으로 낮잠, 천이 및 스키밍 흐름 체제의 세 가지 다른 영역으로 분류됩니다 (Chanson 2002). 유속이 낮을 때 nappe 흐름 체제가 발생하고 자유 낙하하는 낮잠의 시퀀스로 특징 지워지는 반면, 스키밍 흐름 체제에서는 물이 외부 계단 가장자리 위의 유사 바닥에서 일관된 흐름으로 계단 위로 흐릅니다.

또한 주요 흐름에서 3 차원 재순환 소용돌이가 발생한다는 것도 분명합니다 (예 : Chanson 2002; Gonzalez & Chanson 2008). 계단 가장자리 근처의 의사 바닥에서 흐름의 방향은 가상 바닥과 가상으로 정렬됩니다. Takahashi & Ohtsu (2012)에 따르면, 스키밍 흐름 체제에서 주어진 유속에 대해 흐름은 계단 가장자리 근처의 수평 계단면에 영향을 미치고 슈트 경사가 감소하면 충돌 영역의 면적이 증가합니다. 전이 흐름 체제는 나페 흐름과 스키밍 흐름 체제 사이에서 발생합니다. 계단식 배수로를 설계 할 때 스키밍 흐름 체계를 고려해야합니다 (예 : Chanson 1994, Matos 2000, Chanson 2002, Boes & Hager 2003a).

CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics), 즉 수력 공학의 수치 모델은 일반적으로 물리적 모델에 소요되는 총 비용과 시간을 줄여줍니다. 따라서 수치 모델은 실험 모델보다 빠르고 저렴한 것으로 분류되며 동시에 하나 이상의 목적으로 사용될 수도 있습니다. 사용 가능한 많은 CFD 소프트웨어 패키지가 있지만 가장 널리 사용되는 것은 FLOW-3D입니다. 이 연구에서는 Flow 3D 소프트웨어를 사용하여 유량이 서로 다른 두 모델에 대해 계단식 배수로에서 공기 농도, 속도 분포 및 동적 압력 분포를 시뮬레이션합니다.

Roshan et al. (2010)은 서로 다른 수의 계단 및 배출을 가진 계단식 배수로의 두 가지 물리적 모델에 대한 흐름 체제 및 에너지 소산 조사를 연구했습니다. 실험 모델의 기울기는 각각 19.2 %, 12 단계와 23 단계의 수입니다. 결과는 23 단계 물리적 모델에서 관찰 된 흐름 영역이 12 단계 모델보다 더 수용 가능한 것으로 간주되었음을 보여줍니다. 그러나 12 단계 모델의 에너지 손실은 23 단계 모델보다 더 많았습니다. 그리고 실험은 스키밍 흐름 체제에서 23 단계 모델의 에너지 소산이 12 단계 모델보다 약 12 ​​% 더 적다는 것을 관찰했습니다.

Ghaderi et al. (2020a)는 계단 크기와 유속이 다른 정련 매개 변수의 영향을 조사하기 위해 계단식 배수로에 대한 실험 연구를 수행했습니다. 그 결과, 흐름 체계가 냅페 흐름 체계에서 발생하는 최소 scouring 깊이와 같은 scouring 구멍 치수에 영향을 미친다는 것을 보여주었습니다. 또한 테일 워터 깊이와 계단 크기는 최대 scouring깊이에 대한 실제 매개 변수입니다. 테일 워터의 깊이를 6.31cm에서 8.54 및 11.82cm로 늘림으로써 수세 깊이가 각각 18.56 % 및 11.42 % 증가했습니다. 또한 이 증가하는 테일 워터 깊이는 scouring 길이를 각각 31.43 % 및 16.55 % 감소 시킵니다. 또한 유속을 높이면 Froude 수가 증가하고 흐름의 운동량이 증가하면 scouring이 촉진됩니다. 또한 결과는 중간의 scouring이 횡단면의 측벽보다 적다는 것을 나타냅니다. 계단식 배수로 하류의 최대 scouring 깊이를 예측 한 후 실험 결과와 비교하기 위한 실험식이 제안 되었습니다. 그리고 비교 결과 제안 된 공식은 각각 3.86 %와 9.31 %의 상대 오차와 최대 오차 내에서 scouring 깊이를 예측할 수 있음을 보여주었습니다.

Ghaderi et al. (2020b)는 사다리꼴 미로 모양 (TLS) 단계의 수치 조사를 했습니다. 결과는 이러한 유형의 배수로가 확대 비율 LT / Wt (LT는 총 가장자리 길이, Wt는 배수로의 폭)를 증가시키기 때문에 더 나은 성능을 갖는 것으로 관찰되었습니다. 또한 사다리꼴 미로 모양의 계단식 배수로는 더 큰 마찰 계수와 더 낮은 잔류 수두를 가지고 있습니다. 마찰 계수는 다양한 배율에 대해 0.79에서 1.33까지 다르며 평평한 계단식 배수로의 경우 대략 0.66과 같습니다. 또한 TLS 계단식 배수로에서 잔류 수두의 비율 (Hres / dc)은 약 2.89이고 평평한 계단식 배수로의 경우 약 4.32와 같습니다.

Shahheydari et al. (2015)는 Flow-3D 소프트웨어, RNG k-ε 모델 및 VOF (Volume of Fluid) 방법을 사용하여 배출 계수 및 에너지 소산과 같은 자유 표면 흐름의 프로파일을 연구하여 스키밍 흐름 체제에서 계단식 배수로에 대한 흐름을 조사했습니다. 실험 결과와 비교했습니다. 결과는 에너지 소산 율과 방전 계수율의 관계가 역으로 실험 모델의 결과와 잘 일치 함을 보여 주었다.

Mohammad Rezapour Tabari & Tavakoli (2016)는 계단 높이 (h), 계단 길이 (L), 계단 수 (Ns) 및 단위 폭의 방전 (q)과 같은 다양한 매개 변수가 계단식 에너지 ​​소산에 미치는 영향을 조사했습니다. 방수로. 그들은 해석에 FLOW-3D 소프트웨어를 사용하여 계단식 배수로에서 에너지 손실과 임계 흐름 깊이 사이의 관계를 평가했습니다. 또한 유동 난류에 사용되는 방정식과 표준 k-ɛ 모델을 풀기 위해 유한 체적 방법을 적용했습니다. 결과에 따르면 스텝 수가 증가하고 유량 배출량이 증가하면 에너지 손실이 감소합니다. 얻은 결과를 다른 연구와 비교하고 경험적, 수학적 조사를 수행하여 결국 합격 가능한 결과를 얻었습니다.

METHODOLOGY

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: ListenFor all numerical models the basic principle is very similar: a set of partial differential equations (PDE) present the physical problems. The flow of fluids (gas and liquid) are governed by the conservation laws of mass, momentum and energy. For Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), the PDE system is substituted by a set of algebraic equations which can be worked out by using numerical methods (Versteeg & Malalasekera 2007). Flow-3D uses the finite volume approach to solve the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equation, by applying the technique of Fractional Area/Volume Obstacle Representation (FAVOR) to define an obstacle (Flow Science Inc. 2012). Equations (1) and (2) are RANS and continuity equations with FAVOR variables that are applied for incompressible flows.

formula

(1)

formula

(2)where  is the velocity in xi direction, t is the time,  is the fractional area open to flow in the subscript directions,  is the volume fraction of fluid in each cell, p is the hydrostatic pressure,  is the density, is the gravitational force in subscript directions and  is the Reynolds stresses.

Turbulence modelling is one of three key elements in CFD (Gunal 1996). There are many types of turbulence models, but the most common are Zero-equation models, One-equation models, Two-equation models, Reynolds Stress/Flux models and Algebraic Stress/Flux models. In FLOW-3D software, five turbulence models are available. The formulation used in the FLOW-3D software differs slightly from other formulations that includes the influence of the fractional areas/volumes of the FAVORTM method and generalizes the turbulence production (or decay) associated with buoyancy forces. The latter generalization, for example, includes buoyancy effects associated with non-inertial accelerations.

The available turbulence models in Flow-3D software are the Prandtl Mixing Length Model, the One-Equation Turbulent Energy Model, the Two-Equation Standard  Model, the Two-Equation Renormalization-Group (RNG) Model and large Eddy Simulation Model (Flow Science Inc. 2012).In this research the RNG model was selected because this model is more commonly used than other models in dealing with particles; moreover, it is more accurate to work with air entrainment and other particles. In general, the RNG model is classified as a more widely-used application than the standard k-ɛ model. And in particular, the RNG model is more accurate in flows that have strong shear regions than the standard k-ɛ model and it is defined to describe low intensity turbulent flows. For the turbulent dissipation  it solves an additional transport equation:

formula

(3)where CDIS1, CDIS2, and CDIS3 are dimensionless parameters and the user can modify them. The diffusion of dissipation, Diff ɛ, is

formula

(4)where uv and w are the x, y and z coordinates of the fluid velocity; ⁠, ⁠,  and ⁠, are FLOW-3D’s FAVORTM defined terms;  and  are turbulence due to shearing and buoyancy effects, respectively. R and  are related to the cylindrical coordinate system. The default values of RMTKE, CDIS1 and CNU differ, being 1.39, 1.42 and 0.085 respectively. And CDIS2 is calculated from turbulent production (⁠⁠) and turbulent kinetic energy (⁠⁠).The kinematic turbulent viscosity is the same in all turbulence transport models and is calculated from

formula

(5)where ⁠: is the turbulent kinematic viscosity.  is defined as the numerical challenge between the RNG and the two-equation k-ɛ models, found in the equation below. To avoid an unphysically large result for  in Equation (3), since this equation could produce a value for  very close to zero and also because the physical value of  may approach to zero in such cases, the value of  is calculated from the following equation:

formula

(6)where ⁠: the turbulent length scale.

VOF and FAVOR are classifications of volume-fraction methods. In these two methods, firstly the area should be subdivided into a control volume grid or a small element. Each flow parameter like velocity, temperature and pressure values within the element are computed for each element containing liquids. Generally, these values represent the volumetric average of values in the elements.Numerous methods have been used recently to solve free infinite boundaries in the various numerical simulations. VOF is an easy and powerful method created based on the concept of a fractional intensity of fluid. A significant number of studies have confirmed that this method is more flexible and efficient than others dealing with the configurations of a complex free boundary. By using VOF technology the Flow-3D free surface was modelled and first declared in Hirt & Nichols (1981). In the VOF method there are three ingredients: a planner to define the surface, an algorithm for tracking the surface as a net mediator moving over a computational grid, and application of the boundary conditions to the surface. Configurations of the fluids are defined in terms of VOF function, F (x, y, z, t) (Hirt & Nichols 1981). And this VOF function shows the volume of flow per unit volume

formula

(7)

formula

(8)

formula

(9)where  is the density of the fluid, is a turbulent diffusion term,  is a mass source,  is the fractional volume open to flow. The components of velocity (u, v, w) are in the direction of coordinates (x, y, z) or (r, ⁠).  in the x-direction is the fractional area open to flow,  and  are identical area fractions for flow in the y and z directions. The R coefficient is based on the selection of the coordinate system.

The FAVOR method is a different method and uses another volume fraction technique, which is only used to define the geometry, such as the volume of liquid in each cell used to determine the position of fluid surfaces. Another fractional volume can be used to define the solid surface. Then, this information is used to determine the boundary conditions of the wall that the flow should be adapted for.

Case study

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

In this study, the experimental results of Ostad Mirza (2016) was simulated. In a channel composed of two 4 m long modules, with a transparent sidewall of height 0.6 m and 0.5 m width. The upstream chute slope (i.e. pseudo-bottom angle) Ɵ1 = 50°, the downstream chute slope Ɵ2 = 30° or 18.6°, the step heights h = 0.06 m, the total number of steps along the 50° chute 41 steps, the total number of steps along the 30° chute 34 steps and the total number of steps along the 18.6° chute 20 steps.

The flume inflow tool contained a jetbox with a maximum opening set to 0.12 meters, designed for passing the maximum unit discharge of 0.48 m2/s. The measurements of the flow properties (i.e. air concentration and velocity) were computed perpendicular to the pseudo-bottom as shown in Figure 1 at the centre of twenty stream-wise cross-sections, along the stepped chute, (i.e. in five steps up on the slope change and fifteen steps down on the slope change, namely from step number −09 to +23 on 50°–30° slope change, or from −09 to +15 on 50°–18.6° slope change, respectively).

Sketch of the air concentration C and velocity V measured perpendicular to the pseudo-bottom used by Mirza (Ostad Mirza 2016).
Sketch of the air concentration C and velocity V measured perpendicular to the pseudo-bottom used by Mirza (Ostad Mirza 2016).

Sketch of the air concentration C and velocity V measured perpendicular to the pseudo-bottom used by Mirza (Ostad Mirza 2016).

Pressure sensors were arranged with the x/l values for different slope change as shown in Table 1, where x is the distance from the step edge, along the horizontal step face, and l is the length of the horizontal step face. The location of pressure sensors is shown in Table 1.Table 1

Location of pressure sensors on horizontal step faces

Θ(°)L(m)x/l (–)
50.0 0.050 0.35 0.64 – – – 
30.0 0.104 0.17 0.50 0.84 – – 
18.6 0.178 0.10 0.30 0.50 0.7 0.88 
Location of pressure sensors on horizontal step faces
Inlet boundary condition for Q = 0.235 m3/s and fluid elevation 4.21834 m.
Inlet boundary condition for Q = 0.235 m3/s and fluid elevation 4.21834 m.

Inlet boundary condition for Q = 0.235 m3/s and fluid elevation 4.21834 m.

Numerical model set-up

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

A 3D numerical model of hydraulic phenomena was simulated based on an experimental study by Ostad Mirza (2016). The water surcharge and flow pressure over the stepped spillway was computed for two models of a stepped spillway with different discharge for each model. In this study, the package was used to simulate the flow parameters such as air entrainment, velocity distribution and dynamic pressures. The solver uses the finite volume technique to discretize the computational domain. In every test run, one incompressible fluid flow with a free surface flow selected at 20̊ was used for this simulation model. Table 2 shows the variables used in test runs.Table 2

Variables used in test runs

Test no.Θ1 (°)Θ2 (°)h(m)d0q (m3s1)dc/h (–)
50 18.6 0.06 0.045 0.1 2.6 
50 18.6 0.06 0.082 0.235 4.6 
50 30.0 0.06 0.045 0.1 2.6 
50 30.0 0.06 0.082 0.235 4.6 
Table 2 Variables used in test runs

For stepped spillway simulation, several parameters should be specified to get accurate simulations, which is the scope of this research. Viscosity and turbulent, gravity and non-inertial reference frame, air entrainment, density evaluation and drift-flux should be activated for these simulations. There are five different choices in the ‘viscosity and turbulent’ option, in the viscosity flow and Renormalized Group (RNG) model. Then a dynamical model is selected as the second option, the ‘gravity and non-inertial reference frame’. Only the z-component was inputted as a negative 9.81 m/s2 and this value represents gravitational acceleration but in the same option the x and y components will be zero. Air entrainment is selected. Finally, in the drift-flux model, the density of phase one is input as (water) 1,000 kg/m3 and the density of phase two (air) as 1.225 kg/m3. Minimum volume fraction of phase one is input equal to 0.1 and maximum volume fraction of phase two to 1 to allow air concentration to reach 90%, then the option allowing gas to escape at free surface is selected, to obtain closer simulation.

The flow domain is divided into small regions relatively by the mesh in Flow-3D numerical model. Cells are the smallest part of the mesh, in which flow characteristics such as air concentration, velocity and dynamic pressure are calculated. The accuracy of the results and simulation time depends directly on the mesh block size so the cell size is very important. Orthogonal mesh was used in cartesian coordinate systems. A smaller cell size provides more accuracy for results, so we reduced the number of cells whilst including enough accuracy. In this study, the size of cells in x, y and z directions was selected as 0.015 m after several trials.

Figure 3 shows the 3D computational domain model 50–18.6 slope change, that is 6.0 m length, 0.50 m width and 4.23 m height. The 3D model of the computational domain model 50–30 slope changes this to 6.0 m length, 0.50 m width and 5.068 m height and the size of meshes in x, y, and z directions are 0.015 m. For the 50–18.6 slope change model: both total number of active and passive cells = 4,009,952, total number of active cells = 3,352,307, include real cells (used for solving the flow equations) = 3,316,269, open real cells = 3,316,269, fully blocked real cells equal to zero, external boundary cells were 36,038, inter-block boundary cells = 0 (Flow-3D report). For 50–30 slope change model: both total number of active and passive cells = 4,760,002, total number of active cells equal to 4,272,109, including real cells (used for solving the flow equations) were 3,990,878, open real cells = 3,990,878 fully blocked real cells = zero, external boundary cells were 281,231, inter-block boundary cells = 0 (Flow-3D report).

The 3D computational domain model (50–18.6) slope change, and boundary condition for (50–30 slope change) model.
Figure3 The 3D computational domain model (50–18.6) slope change, and boundary condition for (50–30 slope change) model.

Figure 3VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

The 3D computational domain model (50–18.6) slope change, and boundary condition for (50–30 slope change) model.

When solving the Navier-Stokes equation and continuous equations, boundary conditions should be applied. The most important work of boundary conditions is to create flow conditions similar to physical status. The Flow-3D software has many types of boundary condition; each type can be used for the specific condition of the models. The boundary conditions in Flow-3D are symmetry, continuative, specific pressure, grid overlay, wave, wall, periodic, specific velocity, outflow, and volume flow rate.

There are two options to input finite flow rate in the Flow-3D software either for inlet discharge of the system or for the outlet discharge of the domain: specified velocity and volume flow rate. In this research, the X-minimum boundary condition, volume flow rate, has been chosen. For X-maximum boundary condition, outflow was selected because there is nothing to be calculated at the end of the flume. The volume flow rate and the elevation of surface water was set for Q = 0.1 and 0.235 m3/s respectively (Figure 2).

The bottom (Z-min) is prepared as a wall boundary condition and the top (Z-max) is computed as a pressure boundary condition, and for both (Y-min) and (Y-max) as symmetry.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

The air concentration distribution profiles in two models of stepped spillway were obtained at an acquisition time equal to 25 seconds in skimming flow for both upstream and downstream of a slope change 50°–18.6° and 50°–30° for different discharge as in Table 2, and as shown in Figure 4 for 50°–18.6° slope change and Figure 5 for 50°–30° slope change configuration for dc/h = 4.6. The simulation results of the air concentration are very close to the experimental results in all curves and fairly close to that predicted by the advection-diffusion model for the air bubbles suggested by Chanson (1997) on a constant sloping chute.

Figure 4 Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6. VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6.
Figure 4 Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6. VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6.

Figure 4VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6.

Figure5 Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +11, +19 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6.
Figure5 Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +11, +19 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6.

Figure 5VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Experimental and simulated air concentration distribution for steps number −5, +1, +5, +11, +19 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6.

Figure 6VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Figure 6 Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.
Figure 6 Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.

Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5, +8, +11 and +15 along the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.

Figure 7 Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5. +11, +15 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.
Figure 7 Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5. +11, +15 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.

Figure 7VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Experimental and simulated dimensionless velocity distribution for steps number −5, −1, +1, +5. +11, +15 and +22 along the 50°–30° slope change for dc/h = 2.6.

But as is shown in all above mentioned figures it is clear that at the pseudo-bottom the CFD results of air concentration are less than experimental ones until the depth of water reaches a quarter of the total depth of water. Also the direction of the curves are parallel to each other when going up towards the surface water and are incorporated approximately near the surface water. For all curves, the cross-section is separate between upstream and downstream steps. Therefore the (-) sign for steps represents a step upstream of the slope change cross-section and the (+) sign represents a step downstream of the slope change cross-section.

The dimensionless velocity distribution (V/V90) profile was acquired at an acquisition time equal to 25 seconds in skimming flow of the upstream and downstream slope change for both 50°–18.6° and 50°–30° slope change. The simulation results are compared with the experimental ones showing that for all curves there is close similarity for each point between the observed and experimental results. The curves increase parallel to each other and they merge near at the surface water as shown in Figure 6 for slope change 50°–18.6° configuration and Figure 7 for slope change 50°–30° configuration. However, at step numbers +1 and +5 in Figure 7 there are few differences between the simulated and observed results, namely the simulation curves ascend regularly meaning the velocity increases regularly from the pseudo-bottom up to the surface water.

Figure 8 (50°–18.6° slope change) and Figure 9 (50°–30° slope change) compare the simulation results and the experimental results for the presented dimensionless dynamic pressure distribution for different points on the stepped spillway. The results show a good agreement with the experimental and numerical simulations in all curves. For some points, few discrepancies can be noted in pressure magnitudes between the simulated and the observed ones, but they are in the acceptable range. Although the experimental data do not completely agree with the simulated results, there is an overall agreement.

Figure 8 Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number  −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 +3 and +20 on the horizontal step faces of 50°–18.6° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.
Figure 8 Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 +3 and +20 on the horizontal step faces of 50°–18.6° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.

Figure 8VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 +3 and +20 on the horizontal step faces of 50°–18.6° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.

Figure 9 Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number  −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 and +30, +31 on the horizontal step face of 50°–30° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.
Figure 9 Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 and +30, +31 on the horizontal step face of 50°–30° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.

Figure 9VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Comparison between simulated and experimental results for the dimensionless pressure for steps number −1, −2, −3 and +1, +2 and +30, +31 on the horizontal step face of 50°–30° slope change configuration, for dc/h = 4.6, x is the distance from the step edge.

The pressure profiles were acquired at an acquisition time equal to 70 seconds in skimming flow on 50°–18.6°, where p is the measured dynamic pressure, h is step height and ϒ is water specific weight. A negative sign for steps represents a step upstream of the slope change cross-section and a positive sign represents a step downstream of the slope change cross-section.

Figure 10 shows the experimental streamwise development of dimensionless pressure on the 50°–18.6° slope change for dc/h = 4.6, x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.3 on 18.6° sloping chute compared with the numerical simulation. It is obvious from Figure 10 that the streamwise development of dimensionless pressure before slope change (steps number −1, −2 and −3) both of the experimental and simulated results are close to each other. However, it is clear that there is a little difference between the results of the streamwise development of dimensionless pressure at step numbers +1, +2 and +3. Moreover, from step number +3 to the end, the curves get close to each other.

Figure 10 Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–18.6° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.3 on 18.6° sloping chute.
Figure 10 Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–18.6° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.3 on 18.6° sloping chute.

Figure 10VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–18.6° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.3 on 18.6° sloping chute.

Figure 11 compares the experimental and the numerical results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.17 on 30° sloping chute. It is apparent that the outcomes of the experimental work are close to the numerical results, however, the results of the simulation are above the experimental ones before the slope change, but the results of the simulation descend below the experimental ones after the slope change till the end.

Figure 11 Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.17 on 30° sloping chute.
Figure 11 Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.17 on 30° sloping chute.

Figure 11VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Comparison between experimental and simulated results for the streamwise development of the dimensionless pressure on the 50°–30° slope change, for dc/h = 4.6, and x/l = 0.35 on 50° sloping chute and x/l = 0.17 on 30° sloping chute.

CONCLUSION

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

In this research, numerical modelling was attempted to investigate the effect of abrupt slope change on the flow properties (air entrainment, velocity distribution and dynamic pressure) over a stepped spillway with two different models and various flow rates in a skimming flow regime by using the CFD technique. The numerical model was verified and compared with the experimental results of Ostad Mirza (2016). The same domain of the numerical model was inputted as in experimental models to reduce errors as much as possible.

Flow-3D is a well modelled tool that deals with particles. In this research, the model deals well with air entrainment particles by observing their results with experimental results. And the reason for the small difference between the numerical and the experimental results is that the program deals with particles more accurately than the laboratory. In general, both numerical and experimental results showed that near to the slope change the flow bulking, air entrainment, velocity distribution and dynamic pressure are greatly affected by abrupt slope change on the steps. Although the extent of the slope change was relatively small, the influence of the slope change was major on flow characteristics.

The Renormalized Group (RNG) model was selected as a turbulence solver. For 3D modelling, orthogonal mesh was used as a computational domain and the mesh grid size used for X, Y, and Z direction was equal to 0.015 m. In CFD modelling, air concentration and velocity distribution were recorded for a period of 25 seconds, but dynamic pressure was recorded for a period of 70 seconds. The results showed that there is a good agreement between the numerical and the physical models. So, it can be concluded that the proposed CFD model is very suitable for use in simulating and analysing the design of hydraulic structures.

이 연구에서 수치 모델링은 두 가지 다른 모델과 다양한 유속을 사용하여 스키밍 흐름 영역에서 계단식 배수로에 대한 유동 특성 (공기 혼입, 속도 분포 및 동적 압력)에 대한 급격한 경사 변화의 영향을 조사하기 위해 시도되었습니다. CFD 기술. 수치 모델을 검증하여 Ostad Mirza (2016)의 실험 결과와 비교 하였다. 오차를 최대한 줄이기 위해 실험 모형과 동일한 수치 모형을 입력 하였다.

Flow-3D는 파티클을 다루는 잘 모델링 된 도구입니다. 이 연구에서 모델은 실험 결과를 통해 결과를 관찰하여 공기 혼입 입자를 잘 처리합니다. 그리고 수치와 실험 결과의 차이가 작은 이유는 프로그램이 실험실보다 입자를 더 정확하게 다루기 때문입니다. 일반적으로 수치 및 실험 결과는 경사에 가까워지면 유동 벌킹, 공기 혼입, 속도 분포 및 동적 압력이 계단의 급격한 경사 변화에 크게 영향을받는 것으로 나타났습니다. 사면 변화의 정도는 상대적으로 작았지만 사면 변화의 영향은 유동 특성에 큰 영향을 미쳤다.

Renormalized Group (RNG) 모델이 난류 솔버로 선택되었습니다. 3D 모델링의 경우 계산 영역으로 직교 메쉬가 사용되었으며 X, Y, Z 방향에 사용 된 메쉬 그리드 크기는 0.015m입니다. CFD 모델링에서 공기 농도와 속도 분포는 25 초 동안 기록되었지만 동적 압력은 70 초 동안 기록되었습니다. 결과는 수치 모델과 물리적 모델간에 좋은 일치가 있음을 보여줍니다. 따라서 제안 된 CFD 모델은 수력 구조물의 설계 시뮬레이션 및 해석에 매우 적합하다는 결론을 내릴 수 있습니다.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

ListenReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

REFERENCES

Boes R. M. Hager W. H. 2003a Hydraulic design of stepped spillways. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 129 (9), 671–679.
Google Scholar
Boes R. M. Hager W. H. 2003b Two-Phase flow characteristics of stepped spillways. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 129 (9), 661–670.
Google Scholar
Chanson H. 1994 Hydraulics of skimming flows over stepped channels and spillways. Journal of Hydraulic Research 32 (3), 445–460.
Google Scholar
Chanson H. 1997 Air Bubble Entrainment in Free Surface Turbulent Shear Flows. Academic Press, London.
Google Scholar
Chanson H. 2002 The Hydraulics of Stepped Chutes and Spillways. Balkema, Lisse, The Netherlands.
Google Scholar
Felder S. Chanson H. 2011 Energy dissipation down a stepped spillway with nonuniform step heights. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 137 (11), 1543–1548.
Google Scholar
Flow Science, Inc. 2012 FLOW-3D v10-1 User Manual. Flow Science, Inc., Santa Fe, CA.
Ghaderi A. Daneshfaraz R. Torabi M. Abraham J. Azamathulla H. M. 2020a Experimental investigation on effective scouring parameters downstream from stepped spillways. Water Supply 20 (5), 1988–1998.
Google Scholar
Ghaderi A. Abbasi S. Abraham J. Azamathulla H. M. 2020b Efficiency of trapezoidal labyrinth shaped stepped spillways. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 72, 101711.
Google Scholar
Gonzalez C. A. Chanson H. 2008 Turbulence and cavity recirculation in air-water skimming flows on a stepped spillway. Journal of Hydraulic Research 46 (1), 65–72.
Google Scholar
Gunal M. 1996 Numerical and Experimental Investigation of Hydraulic Jumps. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester, Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, UK.
Hirt C. W. Nichols B. D. 1981 Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. Journal of Computational Physics 39 (1), 201–225.
Google Scholar
Matos J. 2000 Hydraulic design of stepped spillways over RCC dams. In: Intl Workshop on Hydraulics of Stepped Spillways (H.-E. Minor & W. Hager, eds). Balkema Publ, Zurich, pp. 187–194.
Google Scholar
Mohammad Rezapour Tabari M. Tavakoli S. 2016 Effects of stepped spillway geometry on flow pattern and energy dissipation. Arabian Journal for Science & Engineering (Springer Science & Business Media BV) 41 (4), 1215–1224.
Google Scholar
Ostad Mirza M. J. 2016 Experimental Study on the Influence of Abrupt Slope Changes on Flow Characteristics Over Stepped Spillways. Communications du Laboratoire de Constructions Hydrauliques, No. 64 (A. J. Schleiss, ed.). Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Roshan R. Azamathulla H. M. Marosi M. Sarkardeh H. Pahlavan H. Ab Ghani A. 2010 Hydraulics of stepped spillways with different numbers of steps. Dams and Reservoirs 20 (3), 131–136.
Google Scholar
Shahheydari H. Nodoshan E. J. Barati R. Moghadam M. A. 2015 Discharge coefficient and energy dissipation over stepped spillway under skimming flow regime. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 19 (4), 1174–1182.
Google Scholar
Takahashi M. Ohtsu I. 2012 Aerated flow characteristics of skimming flow over stepped chutes. Journal of Hydraulic Research 50 (4), 427–434.
Google Scholar
Versteeg H. K. Malalasekera W. 2007 An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method. Pearson Education, Harlow.
Google Scholar
© 2021 The Authors
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

education_banner

FLOW-3Dv12.0 온라인 교육

FLOW-3 D v12.0 온라인 교육 과정은 미국 FSI에서 제공되는 컨텐츠로 FLOW-3D 사용자(구매/임차 및 기술지원 계약이 되어 있는 고객)에게 제공되는 교육 리소스입니다. 이 온라인 교육 과정은 FLOW-3D 기본 모델 사용법 전반에 대한 온라인 주문형 비디오를 제공합니다.

각 과정에서는 사용자가 스스로 시뮬레이션을 설정할 수 있도록 예제와 설명을 제공합니다. 모든 신규 FLOW3D사용자는 프로젝트별 시뮬레이션 작업을 시작하기 전에 기본 과정을 완료하는 것이 좋습니다.

또한 기존 사용자는 FLOW3D v12.0모델 설정 프로세스에서 사용할 수 있는 향상된 기능과 새로운 기능에 대해 배우고 기본 모델 설정 항목에 대한 리프레시로 배우는 데 유용한 새로운 교육 시리즈를 찾게 될 것입니다. 과정 비디오는 특정 주제 및 세그먼트를 쉽게 찾을 수 있도록 구성되어 있고, 즐겨 찾기에 추가될 수 있으며, 언제든지 참조할 수 있는 유용한 리소스를 제공합니다.

본 교육 과정은 미국 본사 정책에 따라 유지보수 계약이 체결된 고객 ID를 통해 미국의 Users Site 에서 제공됩니다.

FLOW-3D Training Modules

FLOW-3D GUI PART 1 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

FLOW-3D GUI

  • Introduction to FLOW-3D graphical user interface
  • Simulation Manager Tab
  • Portfolio
  • Running Simulations and the Queue
  • Runtime Diagnostics: Text Output
  • Runtime Diagnostics: Plots
  • Runtime Controls
  • FLOW-3D File Structure
    Review the important files that are created when running simulations in FLOW-3D. Access the simulation files through a link on the Simulation Manager Tab. Identify the important setup and solver outputs files
Model Setup Tab PART 2 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

모델 설정 탭

  • Introduction to the Model Setup TabIntroduction to the Model Setup Tab including an orientation to its layout and how to access model inputs though the dock widgets on the process toolbar. Options for customizing the layout of the process toolbar are also reviewed.
  • Navigating the 3D ViewportLearn the basic controls for navigating the 3D viewport. This includes mouse controls, toolbar shortcuts, saving views, and moving the pivot point.
  • Other Menu/Toolbar Navigation Options
  • Working with Dock Widget Inputs
  • Model DependenciesRecognize and understand dock widget input dependencies.
Global Settings PART 3 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

전역 설정

  • Global Dock Widget Overview
  • Pressure Type
  • Finish Time
  • Finish Options: Additional Finish Condition
  • Finish Options: Active Simulation ControlDefine a logical condition to stop the simulation using active simulation control.
  • Restart OptionsHow to manually define the Restart options to continue running a previously completed simulation.
  • Version OptionsDefine the Version options to specify the solver version and the number of processors used when starting a new simulation run.
Physics Models PART 4 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

물리 모델

  • Physics Dock Widget OverviewDescription of the available options in the Physics dock widget
  • Interface Tracking, Number of Fluids and Flow ModeBackground information on interface tracking methods and defining the number of fluids. Description of the Volume of Fluid (VOF) method for simulation of complex free surfaces, and how this affects the selection of the number of fluids. Examples are presented for one fluid and two fluid simulations.
  • Activating Physics ModelsDemonstration for how to activate physics models and how to limit the display of inactive physics models using the physics model filter.
Fluid Properties PART 5 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

유체 속성

  • Fluids Dock Widget OverviewIntroduction to the Fluids dock widget and how to define properties for fluids in the simulation.
  • Defining Fluid Properties ManuallyExample for how to manually define fluid properties.
  • Defining Fluid Properties from the Materials DatabaseExample for how to load fluid properties from the fluids database.
  • Managing the Materials Database
    How to add and edit entries in the materials database.
Geometry PART 6 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

지오메트리

  • Introduction
  • Component and Subcomponent Overview
  • Creating Subcomponents: Overview
  • Creating Subcomponents: STL
  • Creating Subcomponents: Primitives Manually
  • Creating Subcomponents: Primitives Interactively
  • Creating Subcomponents: Raster
  • Subcomponent Types
  • Subcomponent Order
  • Component Order
  • Component and Subcomponent Properties
  • Transformations
Meshing PART 7 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Meshing

  • Meshing Introduction
  • Coordinate Systems
  • FAVOR™
  • Meshing Basics: Meshing Overview
  • Meshing Basics: Creating Mesh Blocks
  • Meshing Basics: Domain Extents
  • Meshing Basics: Global Controls
  • Meshing Basics: Local Controls
  • Reviewing Mesh Quality: FAVORize
  • Reviewing Mesh Quality: Preprocessing
  • Multi-block Meshing
  • Conforming Mesh Blocks
  • Meshing Best Practices
Boundary Conditions PART 8 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Boundary Conditions

  • Introduction
    Introductory comments regarding how boundary conditions are applied and other considerations when defining BCs.
  • Boundaries Dock Widget Overview
  • Velocity
  • Volume Flow Rate
  • Wall
  • Symmetry
  • Grid Overlay
  • Pressure
  • Continuative
  • Outflow
    Description and example setup of the Outflow BC type.
Initial Conditions PART 9 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Initial Conditions

  • Introduction
    Discussion of how the initial conditions and can affect simulation results and run times.
  • Options for Defining ICs
    Example: Global Settings
    Example: Fluid Regions
  • Example: Function Coefficients
    Description and example for defining spatially varying fluid properties with user defined functions.
  • Example: Pointers
    Description and example for defining an initial condition by filling contiguous cells with the Pointer object.
Output Options PART 10 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Output Options

  • Output Dock Widget Overview
  • Spatial Data
  • Spatial Data: Restart Data
  • Spatial Data: Selected Data
  • History Data
  • Diagnostics: Short Print Data
  • Diagnostics: Long Print Data
  • Example Setup
  • Batch Post-processing
  • Batch Mode: Context File
  • Batch Mode: Manual
  • Batch Mode: Generate Reports
Baffles PART 11 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Baffles

Introduction
An introduction to the available options for creating and defining baffle objects.
Creating Baffle Objects
Limitations
Force Outputs
Porosity
Scalar Reset Options
Summary
A summary of the important options for creating baffles and defining properties.

Measurement Devices PART 12 OF THE FLOW-3D V12.0 TRAINING SERIES

Measurement Devices

  • History Probes 
    History probes are point measurement devices and are used to record solver output at a specific location. Examples are provided for how to create these objects interactively and by defining a coordinate value.
  • Flux Surfaces 
    Flux surfaces are a special type of baffle object with a fixed porosity of 1, and are used to calculate flux quantities. Examples are provided for how to create flux surfaces and the types of data available from their output.
  • Sampling volumes 
    Sampling volumes are are three-dimensional data collection regions. Examples are provided for how to create sampling volumes and the types of data available from their output.
W&E Exercise: Ogee Weir

W&E Exercise: Ogee Weir

  • This exercise demonstrates the steps to setup a basic free surface or open channel flow simulation in FLOW-3D. It is intended to be a simple and fast running simulation that demonstrates the key setup steps that can be applied to a wide range of other common open channel flow applications. In this exercise, we will simulate flow over an ogee weir to predict the discharge capacity. Simulation results can be validated against discharge rating curves obtained from physical model measurements (USBR, 1996).  Special attention is given to the common types of boundary conditions used in open channel flow simulations and how to select them during the model setup. We also provide examples for common post-processing tasks using both FLOW-3D and FlowSight.
유압 헤드 계산에서는 유선이 평행하다고 가정

FLOW-3D Output variables(출력 변수)

Output variables(출력 변수)

FLOW-3D에서 주어진 시뮬레이션의 정확한 출력은 어떤 물리적 모델, 출력 위젯에 정의된 추가 출력 및 특정 구성 요소별 출력에 따라 달라집니다. 이 문서는 FLOW-3D의 출력에 대해 좀 더 복잡한 출력 변수 중 일부를 참조하는 역할을 합니다.

FLOW-3D Additional output
FLOW-3D Additional output

Distance Traveled by Fluid(유체로 이동 한 거리)

때로는 유체 입자가 이동한 거리가 중요한 경우도 있습니다. FLOW-3D에서 사용자는 모델 설정 ‣ 출력 위젯에서 유체가 이동한 거리에 대한 출력을 요청할 수 있습니다. 이 기능은 유체가 흐름 영역(경계 또는 질량 소스를 통해)에 들어간 시간 또는 유체가 도메인을 통해 이동한 거리를 계산합니다. 이 기능은 모든 시뮬레이션에도 사용할 수 있으며, 특별한 모델을 사용할 필요가 없으며, 흐름에도 영향을 미치지 않습니다. 이 모델을 사용하려면 출력 위젯으로 이동하고 추가 출력 섹션에서 “Distance traveled by fluid” 옆의 체크상자를 선택하십시오.

 노트

추가 출력 섹션은 출력 위젯의 모든 탭에서 사용할 수 있습니다.

유체 도착 시간

유체 도착 시간을 아는 것은 종종 유용합니다. 예를 들어 주조 시뮬레이션에서 주입 시간을 결정하는 데 사용할 수 있습니다. 제어 볼륨은 충전 프로세스 동안 여러 번 채워지고 비워지기 때문에 계산 셀이 채워지는 처음과 마지막 시간 모두 기록되고, 후 처리를 위해 저장될 수 있습니다. 이 작업은 출력 위젯과 추가 출력 섹션 내에서 유체 도착 시간 확인란을 선택하여 수행됩니다.

 노트

이 출력 옵션은 1 유체 자유 표면 흐름에만 사용할 수 있습니다.

유체 체류 시간

때로는 유체가 계산 영역 내에서 보내는 시간인 체류시간을 아는 것이 유용합니다. 이는 출력 ‣ Output ‣ Additional Output ‣ Fluid residence time 확인란을 선택하여 수행합니다. 여기서 S로 지정된 이 변수에 대한 전송 방정식은 단위 소스 항과 함께 Solve됩니다.

유체 체류 시간(Fluid residence time)
유체 체류 시간(Fluid residence time)

여기에서 t는 시간이며 u는 유체 속도입니다.

S의 단위는 시간이다. 계산 도메인에 들어가는 모든 유체에 대한 S의 초기값은 0입니다.

의 값은 항상 second order체계를 가진 데이터로부터 근사치를 구합니다.

이 출력 옵션은 1 유체 및 2 유체 유량 모두에 사용할 수 있습니다.

 노트

경계 조건 또는 소스에서 도메인으로 유입되는 유체가 이미 도메인에 있는 유체와 혼합될 때 체류가 감소하는 것처럼 보일 수 있습니다.

Wall Contact Time

벽면 접촉 시간 출력은 (1)개별 유체 요소가 특정 구성 요소와 접촉하는 시간 및 (2)특정 구성 요소가 유체와 접촉하는 시간을 추적합니다. 이 모델은 액체 금속이 모래 오염물과 접촉했을 때 오염과 상관 관계가 있는 proxy 변수를 제공하기 위한 것입니다. 이 출력은 최종 주조물에서 오염된 유체가 어디에 있는지 확인하는 데 사용될 수 있습니다. 접촉 시간 모델의 또 다른 해석은, 예를 들어, 용해를 통해 다소 일정한 비율로 화학물질을 방출하는 물에 잠긴 물체에 의한 강의 물의 오염입니다.

모델은 Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Wall contact time 박스를 확인하여 활성화됩니다. 또한 Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Geometry Data section의 각 구성요소에 대해 해당 구성요소를 계산에 포함하기 위해 반드시 설정해야 하는 Contact time flag가 있습니다.

 추가 정보

Wall Contact Time with Fluid and Component Properties: Contact Time with Fluid for more information on the input variables를 참조하십시오.

 노트

이 모델은 실제 구성 요소, 즉 고체, 다공성 매체, 코어 가스 및 충전 퇴적물 구성 요소로 제한됩니다. 접촉 시간은 유체 # 1과 관련해서만 계산됩니다.

2. 형상 데이터
2. 형상 데이터

Component wetted are

Fluid 1과 접촉하는 구성 요소의 표면 영역은 관심 구성 요소에 대한 Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Geometry Data ‣ Wetted area 옵션을 활성화하여 History Data로 출력 될 수 있습니다.

구성 요소의 힘과 토크

Forces

Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Geometry Data ‣ Forces 옵션을 활성화하면 부품에 대한 압력, 전단력, 탄성 및 벽 접착력을 History Data에 출력할 수 있습니다.

압력을 가지지 않은 셀(즉, 도메인 외부에 있거나 다른 구성 요소 안에 있는 셀)이 구성 요소 주변의 각 셀에 대한 압력 영역 제품을 합산하는 동안 어떻게 처리되는지를 제어하는 압력 계산에 대한 몇 가지 추가 옵션이 있습니다. 기본 동작은 이러한 셀에서 사용자 정의 기준 압력을 사용하는 것입니다. 지정되지 않은 경우 기준 압력은 초기 무효 압력인 PVOID로 기본 설정됩니다. 또는, 코드는 Reference pressure is code calculated 옵션을 선택하여 구성요소의 노출된 표면에 대한 평균 압력을 사용할 수 있습니다.

마지막으로, 일반 이동 물체의 경우, 규정된/제약을 받는 대로 물체를 이동시키는 힘을 나타내는 잔류 힘의 추가 출력이 있습니다.

Torques

Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Force 옵션이 활성화되면 구성 요소의 토크가 계산되고 History Data에 출력됩니다. 토크는 힘-모멘트에 대한 기준점 X, 힘-모멘트에 대한 기준점 Y, 정지 구성 요소에 대한 힘-모멘트 입력에 대한 기준점 Z에 의해 지정된 지점에 대해 보고됩니다. 참조점의 기본 위치는 원점입니다.

General Moving Objects에는 몇 가지 추가 참고 사항이 있습니다. 첫째, 토크는 (1) 6-DOF 동작의 질량 위치 중심 또는 (2)고정축 및 고정점 회전의 회전 축/점에 대해 보고됩니다. 힘에서 행해지는 것과 마찬가지로, 규정된/제한된 바와 같이 물체를 이동시키는 토크를 나타내는 잔류 토크의 출력도 있습니다.

 노트

힘 및 토크 출력은 각 지오메트리 구성 요소의 일반 히스토리 데이터에 기록됩니다. 출력은 개별 힘/토크 기여 (예: 압력, 전단, 탄성, 벽 접착) 및 개별 기여도의 합으로 계산된 총 결합력/토크로 제공됩니다.

Buoyancy center and metacentric height (부력 중심 및 메타 중심 높이)

일반 이동 객체의 부력과 안정성에 대한 정보는 각 구성 요소에 대해 모델 설정 Setup 출력 ‣ 기하학적 데이터 ‣ 부력 중심 및 도량형 높이 옵션을 활성화하여 History Data에서 출력할 수 있습니다. 이렇게 하면 구성 요소의 중심 위치와 중심 높이가 출력됩니다.

  1. Advanced

FLOW-3D Advanced Output Option
FLOW-3D Advanced Output Option

Fluid vorticity & Q-criterion(유체 와동 및 Q 기준)

와동구성 요소뿐만 아니라 와동 구조를 위한 Q-criterion을 계산하고 내보내려면 Model Setup ‣ Output ‣ Advanced 탭에서 해당 확인란을 클릭하여 유체 와동 & Q-criterion을 활성화하십시오.

여기에서:

:  소용돌이 벡터의 다른 구성 요소

 Q-criterion은 속도 구배 텐서의 2차 불변성을 갖는 연결된 유체 영역으로 소용돌이를 정의합니다. 이는 전단 변형률과 와류 크기 사이의 국부적 균형을 나타내며, 와류 크기가 변형률의 크기보다 큰 영역으로 와류를 정의합니다.

Hydraulic Data and Total Hydraulic Head 3D

Hydraulic Data

깊이 기준 유압 데이터를 요청하려면 출력 ‣ 고급으로 이동한 후 유압 데이터 옆의 확인란을 선택하십시오(심층 평균 값과 중력을 -Z 방향으로 가정).

이 옵션은 FLOW-3D가 유압 시뮬레이션에 유용할 수 있는 추가 깊이 평균 데이터를 출력하도록 합니다.

  • Flow depth
  • Maximum flow depth
  • Free surface elevation
  • Velocity
  • Offset velocity
  • Froude number
  • Specific hydraulic head
  • Total hydraulic head

이 수량 각각에 대해 하나의 값 이 메쉬의 모든 (x, y) 위치에서 계산되고 수직 열의 모든 셀에 저장됩니다 (이 수량이 깊이 평균이기 때문에 z 방향으로 데이터의 변화가 없습니다). 변수는 정확도를 보장하기 위해주기마다 계산됩니다. 모든 경우에,  깊이 평균 속도, z- 방향  의 중력 가속도, 유체 깊이, 및 컬럼 내 유체의 최소 z- 좌표입니다.

  • 자유 표면 고도는 수직 기둥의 맨 위 유체 요소에 있는 자유 표면의 z-좌표로 계산됩니다.
  • The Froude number 은   

식으로 계산됩니다.

  • 유체 깊이는 깊이 평균 메쉬 열의 모든 유체의 합으로 계산됩니다.

특정 유압 헤드 

및 총 유압 헤드

변수는 다음에서 계산됩니다.  

 노트

  • 깊이 기준 유압 출력 옵션은 예리한 인터페이스가 있고 중력이 음의 z 방향으로 향할 때에만 유체 1에 유효합니다.
  • 유압 헤드 계산은 스트림 라인이 평행하다고 가정한다는 점을 유념해야 합니다. 예를 들어 플럭스 표면이 재순환 흐름 영역에 배치되는 경우 이 문제가 발생할 수 있습니다. 이 경우, 유량 표면에서 보고된 유량 평균 유압 헤드는 헤드의 계산에서 흐름 방향이 무시되기 때문에 예상보다 클 수 있습니다.

Total Hydraulic Head 3D(총 유압 헤드 3D)

또한 총 유압 헤드 3D 옵션을 확인하여 국부적(3D) 속도 필드, 플럭스 표면에서의 유압 에너지(배플 참조) 및 플럭스 기반 유압 헤드를 사용하여 유체 1의 총 헤드를 계산할 수 있다. 3D 계산은 국부 압력을 사용하여 수행되며(즉, 압력이 유체 깊이와 관련이 있다고 가정하지 않음) 원통 좌표와 호환됩니다.

 노트

  • 유압 헤드 계산은 스트림 라인이 평행하다고 가정한다는 점을 유념해야 한다. 예를 들어 플럭스 표면이 재순환 흐름 영역에 배치되는 경우 문제가 발생할 수 있습니다. 이 경우, 플럭스 표면에서 보고된 유량 평균 유압 헤드는 헤드의 계산 시 흐름 방향이 무시되기 때문에 예상보다 클 수 있습니다.
  • 3D 유압 헤드 계산은 입력 파일에 중력이 정의되지 않은 경우 중력 벡터의 크기를 1로 가정합니다.

Flux-averaged hydraulic head

특정 위치 (즉, 배플)의 플럭스 평균 유압 헤드는 다음과 같이 계산됩니다.

Flux-averaged hydraulic head
Flux-averaged hydraulic head

유압 헤드 계산에서는 유선이 평행하다고 가정합니다. 예를 들어 플럭스 표면이 재순환 흐름 영역에 배치된 경우 (예: 아래에 표시된 것과 같이) 문제가 될 수 있습니다.

유압 헤드 계산에서는 유선이 평행하다고 가정




유압 헤드 계산에서는 유선이 평행하다고 가정

이 경우 플럭스 표면에 보고된 플럭스 평균 유압 헤드는 헤드 계산 시 흐름 방향이 무시되므로 예상보다 클 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D에는 History Probes, Flux surface, Sampling Volumes의 세 가지 주요 측정 장치가 있습니다. 이러한 장치를 시뮬레이션에 추가하는 방법은 모델 설정 섹션에 설명되어 있습니다(측정 장치 참조). 이들의 출력은 기록 데이터 편집 시간 간격으로 flsgrf 파일의 일반 기록 데이터 카탈로그에 저장됩니다. 이러한 결과는 Analyze ‣ Probe 탭에서 Probe Plots을 생성하여 액세스할 수 있습니다.

히스토리 프로브 출력

히스토리 프로브를 생성하는 단계는 모델 설정 섹션에 설명되어 있습니다(기록 프로브 참조). 시뮬레이션에 사용된 물리 모델에 따라 각각의 History Probe에서 서로 다른 출력을 사용할 수 있습니다. 프로브를 FSI/TSE로 지정하면 유한 요소 메시 안에 들어가야 하는 위치에서 응력/스트레인 데이터만 제공한다. 유체 프로브가 솔리드 형상 구성 요소에 의해 차단된 영역 내에 위치하는 경우, 기하학적 구조와 관련된 수량(예: 벽 온도)만 계산된다. 일반적으로 프로브 좌표에 의해 정의된 위치에서 이러한 양을 계산하려면 보간이 필요하다.

플럭스 표면 출력

플럭스 표면은 이를 통과하는 수량의 흐름을 측정하는데 사용되는 특별한 물체입니다. 플럭스 표면을 만드는 단계는 모델 설정 섹션에 설명되어 있습니다(플럭스 표면 참조). 각 플럭스 표면에 대해 계산된 수량은 다음과 같습니다.

  • Volume flow rate for fluid #1
  • Volume flow rate for fluid #2 (for two-fluid problems only)
  • Combined volume flow rate (for two-fluid problems only)
  • Total mass flow rate
  • Flux surface area wetted by fluid #1
  • Flux-averaged hydraulic head when 3D Hydraulic Head is requested from additional output options
  • Hydraulic energy flow when hydraulic data output is requested
  • Total number of particles of each defined species in each particle class crossing flux surface when the particle model is active
  • Flow rate for all active and passive scalars this includes scalar quantities associated with active physical models (eg. suspended sediment, air entrainment, ect.)

 노트

  • 유속과 입자수의 기호는 유동 표면을 설명하는 함수의 기호에 의해 정의된 대로 흐름이나 입자가 플럭스 표면의 음에서 양으로 교차할 때 양의 부호가 됩니다.
  • 플럭스 표면은 각 표면의 유량과 입자 수가 정확하도록 그들 사이에 적어도 두 개의 메쉬 셀이 있어야 합니다.
  • 유압 데이터 및 총 유압 헤드 3D 옵션을 사용할 때는 유압 헤드 계산이 스트림 라인이 평행하다고 가정한다는 점을 유념해야 한다. 예를 들어 플럭스 표면이 재순환 흐름 영역에 배치되는 경우 이 문제가 발생할 수 있습니다. 이 경우, 유량 표면에서 보고된 유량 평균 유압 헤드는 헤드의 계산에서 흐름 방향이 무시되기 때문에 예상보다 클 수 있습니다.

샘플링 볼륨 출력

샘플링 볼륨은 해당 범위 내에서 볼륨을 측정하는 3 차원 데이터 수집 영역입니다. 샘플링 볼륨을 만드는 단계는 모델 설정 섹션에 설명되어 있습니다(샘플링 볼륨 참조). 각 샘플링 볼륨의 계산 수량은 다음과 같습니다.

  • 시료채취량 내에서 #1 유체 총량
  • 시료채취량 내 #1 유체질량 중심
  • 샘플링 용적 가장자리에 위치한 솔리드 표면을 포함하여 샘플링 용적 내의 모든 벽 경계에 작용하는 좌표계의 원점에 상대적인 유압력 및 모멘트.
  • 샘플링 용적 내 총 스칼라 종량: 이것은 부피 적분으로 계산되므로 스칼라 양이 질량 농도를 나타내면 샘플링 용적 내의 총 질량이 계산된다. 거주 시간과 같은 일부 종의 경우, 평균 값이 대신 계산됩니다.
  • 샘플링 볼륨 내의 입자 수: 각 샘플링 볼륨 내에 있는 각 입자 등급의 정의된 각 종별 입자 수(입자 모델이 활성화된 경우)
  • 운동 에너지, 난류 에너지, 난류 소실율 및 와류에 대한 질량 평균
  • 표본 체적의 6개 경계 각각에서 열 유속: 유체 대류, 유체 및 고체 성분의 전도 및 유체/구성 요소 열 전달이 포함됩니다. 각 플럭스의 기호는 좌표 방향에 의해 결정되는데, 예를 들어, 양방향의 열 플럭스도 양수입니다. 출력에서 확장 또는 최대 디버그 수준을 선택하지 않는 한 이러한 디버그 수준은 fsplt에 자동으로 표시되지 않습니다.

FLOW-3D 및TruVOF는 미국 및 기타 국가에서 등록 상표입니다.

Immersed Boundary Method

Immersed Boundary Method

이 기사에서 개발자인 Zongxian Liane박사는 곧 출시될 FLOW-3D v11.3에서 사용할 수 있는 새로운 Immersed Boundary Method에 대해 설명합니다.

힘과 에너지 손실에 대한 정확한 예측은 오리피스 판에서의 배출, 장애물을 지나가는 흐름 및 갑작스런 수축 관에서의 흐름과 같은 많은 엔지니어링 문제를 분석하는데 중요합니다. 셀 면적 및 부피 Method인 FAVORTM은 30년 전에 도입된 이래로 FLOW-3D의 표준 솔버로 적용되었으며 벽 근처의 운동량 fluxes를 근사화하는 간단한 방법을 사용했습니다 (Hirt and Sicilian 1985). 벽이나 자유 표면 근처에서 운동 이류항을 계산할 때 솔리드 또는 보이드 영역 내에 위치한 속도 값은  경계층의 모양을 제거하기 위해 0으로 설정됩니다. 물리적 관점에서 이 방법은 벽의 돌출부에 자유 미끄러짐(비침투)경계 조건을 적용하여 인공 경계층(Hirt1993)을 억제한다.

운동량 방정식에서 플럭스의 손실은 압력에 의해 보상됩니다. 특정 상황에서는 플럭스손실을 보상하는 압력의 비율이 시간에 따라 증가하며, 단일 유전물질로 표현되는 “세속적 불안정성”이라고 하는 수치적 불안정성을 야기할 수 있습니다. 속도의 증가 이러한 불안정성의 전개를 방지하기 위해, 경험적 기법을 사용하여 불안정성이 발생할 수 있는 위치에서 플럭스를 “보정” 했습니다. 그러나 이 방법은 선원으로부터의 플럭스 손실을 해결하지 못하며, 때때로 압력 변동과 같은 용액의 비정치적인 동작을 초래할 수 있습니다.

ghost – 내접 경계법 (Mittal et al., 2008)에 기초한 이류 항을 근사화하는 기법은 FLOW-3D v11.3을 위해 개발되었다. 이 내접 경계 방법 기술은 근본적으로이 문제를 해결하고보다 정확한 압력과 힘 예측을 제공합니다. ghost – 내접 경계법은 복잡한 형상을 포함하는 문제에서 전통적인 데카르트 그리드 근사법에서 강화 된 경계 처리로서 최근에 출현했다. 이 방법은 경계를 처리하는 수단 일 뿐이므로 기존의 해석기 구조가 비교적 적게 변경되어 기존의 FLOW-3D 해석기에 모델로 쉽게 추가 될 수 있으며 FLOW-3D의 다른 물리적 모델과 호환됩니다. 다양한 보간 방법과 함께 가중치 평균 프로브 기술을 사용하여 다른 지오메트리 구성을 처리합니다. 새 모델은 3D 메쉬 블록 또는 하이브리드 3D / 얕은 워터 메쉬 블록이있는 플로우에는 작동하지만 얕은 워터 메쉬에는 적합하지 않습니다.

Immersed Boundary Method Results

새로 도입된 경계 방법 모델의 간단한 예는 직경 1m의 원형 오리피스에서 물이 방출되는 것입니다. 물 용기의 길이는 10m, 폭은 10m, 오리피스 중앙부까지의 수위는 6m이다. 애니메이션에 표시된 것처럼 오리피스 Q에서 표고, h및 볼륨 유량의 강하는 각각 2차 곡선과 선형 곡선을 따릅니다. 

시뮬레이션에서 배출 Cd의 평균 계수는 0.660으로, 비대칭 값 0.611보다 약 8% 큽니다(SwameeandSwamee, 2010). immersed boundary solver 을 사용한 시뮬레이션은 이중 인터페이스(Xeon E5-2623 v3)에서 약 19시간이 소요된다. 반면에 the standard solver의 방전 계수와 벽-블록은 각각 0.800과 39시간이 소요된다.

또 다른 예는 NAVY 선박 모델 선체에 대한 총 저항력의 계산입니다. 이 경우, 선체 길이는 5.72m이고, 드래프트는 0.248m이다. 평균유속은 2.10m/s이고, 레이놀즈 수는 약 12 × 106입니다. 이 해석은 대칭이므로 선체의 절반만 모델링됩니다. 계산 영역은 길이 30m, 너비 8m, 깊이 5.5m입니다. 선체 절반에 대해 실험적으로 얻어진 총 저항력의 평균은 22.62N이다 (Larsson et al., 2003). the standard solver의 총 저항력의 평균은 24.41N이었으며 실험 결과보다 7.9 % 차이가 있으며 immersed boundary solver 경우 총 저항력의 평균은 22.43N이었고 0.8 % 더 낮았습니다 (오류가 8 개 줄었습니다. 또한 immersed 경계 솔버는 약 40 시간 만에 완성되었으며 표준 솔버보다 8 시간 빠릅니다).

References

Hirt, C., & Sicilian, J. (1985). A porosity technique for the definition of obstacles in rectangular cell meshes. International Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, 4th. Washington, D.C.

Hirt, C. (1993). Volume-fraction techniques: powerful tools for wind engineering. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 46 & 47, 327-338.

Mittal, R., Dong, H., Bozkurttas, M., Najjar, F., Vargas, A., & von Loebbecke, A. (2008). A versatile sharp interface immersed boundary method for incompressible flows with complex boundaries. Journal of computational physics, 227(10), 4825-4852.

Swamee, P., & Swamee , N., (2010). Discharge equation of a circular sharp-crested orifice. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 48(1), 106-107.

[FLOW-3D 물리모델] Mass Sources / 질량소스

Mass Sources / 질량소스

질량소스는 형상요소와 연관되어 있다. 요소가 질량소스로 정의될 때 유체는 사용자가 지정한 체적이나 질량 유량으로 오픈된 표면(다른요소 또는 계산영역의 경계에 의해 막혀있지 않은 표면)을 통해 계산영역으로 들어온다. 음의 유량을 갖는 질량소스는 유체를 계산영역에서 제거하며 싱크(이 이후로 소스는 단지 양의 유량을 갖는 질량소스를 뜻한다)라고 불린다. 정지 및 이동요소 모두 질량 또는 체적유량소스로 정의될 수 있다. 이 모델에서는 각기 질량 또는 체적 유량, 유체형태(유체 1, 2 또는 이들의 혼합물), 유체밀도 그리고 온도 같은 고유한 물성 그룹으로 특화되는 다수의 소스 및 싱크를 사용할 수 있다.

정리하면

  • 질량/체적 유량은 시간에 따라 변할 수 있다. 결과적으로 모사(simulate)동안에 소스는 싱크로 변할 수 있고 반대도 마찬가지이다.
  • 두 유체문제에서 하나의 유체는 소스/싱크에서 추가/제거될 수 있다. 추가로 두 유체 혼합물은 싱크에서 제거될 수 있다.
  • 1-유체문제에서 유체가아닌 공간이 소스/싱크에서 추가/제거되면 추가되거나 제거된 공간체적은 소스/싱크에 인접한 공간에서의 상응하는 압력변화로 변환될 수 있다.
  • 유체1 과 2(또는 공간)이 싱크에서 제거될 때 제거된 각 유체의 양은 자동적으로 싱크에 인접한 인근 체적율에 비례하여 결정된다. 예를들면, 인근 체적율이1이면 체적으로 유체1의 10% 와 유체2의90%가 싱크에서 제거된다. 인근 체적율이 1.0이면 단지 유체1만이 제거된다. 유체분율은 시간에 따라 변하므로 각 유체의 제거율 또한 시간에 따라 변할 것이다.
  • 열전달을 갖는 모사(simulate)에서 싱크에서의 온도는 자동적으로 싱크에 인접한 셀 내의 평균온도로 계산되므로 사용자가 지정할 필요가 없다.

밑의 예제는 다른 모사(simulate)의 경우에 대한 질량 소스/싱크 모델의 사용을 기술한다.

경우1, 일정한 밀도를가지며 자유표면 이있으나 열전달이 없는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체(액체)또는기공(가스)를 방출할 수 있지만 둘 다 동시에 방출할 수 는 없다. 유체1이 방출되면 소스 유체밀도는 유체1의 밀도가되며 사용자가 지정할 수 없다. 기공이 방출되고 질량 유량이 정의되면 소스/싱크에서의 기공에 대한 가스밀도가 지정되어야 한다. 기공이 방출되고 체적유량이 정의되면 소스에서의 기공의 가스밀도는 필요하지 않다.
  • 싱크는 유체1(액체)기공 또는 이들의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 질량 유량이 정의되고 기공 또는 유체1과 기공의 혼합물이 제거되면 이때 싱크에서 기공을 위한 기체 밀도는 정의되어야 한다. 모든 다른 경우에 싱크에서의 기공의 기체밀도는 필요하지 않다.
  • 기공이 소스에서 방출되거나 기공 또는 이와 유체1의 혼합물이 싱크에서 제거되면 기포 모델이 Physics Bubbles and phase change 에서 활성화되어야 한다.

경우2, 변동밀도(밀도전달방정식이 해석된다)와 자유표면이 있으나 열전달이 없는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체(액체) 또는기공(가스)를 방출할 수 있지만 둘 다 동시에 방출할 수는 없다. 유체1이 방출되면 소스 유체밀도가 정의되어야 한다. 기공이 방출되고 질량 유량이 정의되면 소스에서의 기공에 대한 가스밀도가 지정되어야 한다. 기공이 방출되고 체적유량이 정의되면 소스에서의 기공의 가스밀도는 필요하지 않다.
  • 싱크는 유체1(액체)기공 또는 이들의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 질량 유량이 정의되고 기공 또는 유체1과 기공의 혼합물이 제거되면 이때 싱크에서 기공을 위한 기체 밀도가 정의되어야 한다. 모든 다른 경우에 싱크에서의 기공의 기체밀도는 필요하지 않다.
  • 기공이 소스에서 방출되거나 기공 또는 이와 유체1의 혼합물이 싱크에서 제거되면 기포 모델이 Physics Bubbles and phase change 에서 활성화되어야 한다.

경우3, 일정 또는 변동 밀도(온도의 함수), 자유표면 그리고 열전달이 있는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체(액체) 또는 기공(가스)를 방출할 수 있지만 둘 다 동시에 방출할 수는 없다. 유체1이 방출되면 소스 유체밀도는 상수(유체밀도와 같은)이거나 온도에 의존하기 때문에 사용자가 정의할 수 없다. 기공이 방출되고 질량 유량이 정의되면 소스에서의 기공에 대한 가스밀도가 지정되어야 한다.
  • 싱크는 유체1(액체)기공 또는 이 둘의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 질량 유량이 정의되고 기공이 제거되면 이때 싱크에서 기공을 위한 기체 밀도가 정의되어야 한다. 모든 다른 경우에 싱크에서의 기공의 기체 밀도는 필요하지 않다.
  • 기공이 소스에서 방출되거나 기공 또는 이와 유체1의 혼합물이 싱크에서 제거되면 기포 모델이 Physics Bubbles and phase change 에서 활성화되어야 한다.
  • 유체의 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하나 싱크에서는 필요하지 않다.

경우4, 일정한 밀도를 가지나  자유표면과 열전달이 없는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체 #1만 방출할 수 있다. 소스유체밀도는 디폴트로 유체 #1의 밀도이며 사용자가 변경할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 지 유체#1 만 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 밀도는 유체#1의 밀도이며 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.

경우5, 일정한밀도와 열전달이 있으나 자유표면이 없는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체#1만 방출할 수 있다. 소스 유체 밀도는 디폴트로 유체#1의 밀도이며 사용자가 변경할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 단지 유체#1 만 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 유체#1의 밀도이며 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하나 싱크에서는 필요하지 않다.

경우6, 변동밀도(밀도전달방정식이 해석된다)를가지나, 자유표면 과 열전달이 없는 1-유체유동

  • 소스는 유체#1만 방출할 수 있다. 소스 유체 밀도는 사용자가 정의해야 한다.
  • 소스는 유체#1만 방출할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 디폴트로 그 지역의 값을 가지며 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.

경우7, 변동밀도 (온도의 함수)와 열전달이있으나 자유표면이 없는 1-유체유동,

  • 소스는 유체#1만 방출할 수 있다. 소스 유체 밀도는 온도에 의존하므로 정의될 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 단지 유체#1 만 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 지역의 값을 가지므로 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하며 싱크에서는 정의될 수 없다.

경우8, 열전달이 없고 현저한 경계면을 갖는2 -압축성유체

  • 소스는 유체#1 이나 유체#2를 방출할 수 있으나 둘 다는 못한다. 소스에서의 유체밀도는 소스 유체의 값으로 정해지고 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 지역에서의 값을 가지므로 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.

경우9, 열전달과 현저한 경계면을 갖는2-압축성유체

  • 소스는 유체#1 이나 유체#2를 방출할 수 있으나 둘 다는 못한다. 소스에서의 유체밀도는 소스 유체의 값으로 정해지고 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 사용자가 정의할 수 없다
  • 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하며 싱크에서는 정의될 수 없다.

경우10, 열전달과 현저한 경계면이 없는 2-압축성유체

  • 소스는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 방출할 수 있다. 소스에서의 유체 밀도는 소스 유체의 값으로 정해지고 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 지역에서의 값을 가지므로 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.

경우11, 열전달은 있으나 현저한 경계면이 없는 2-압축성유체

  • 소스는 유체#1 이나 유체#2를 방출할 수 있으나 둘 다는 못한다. 소스에서의 유체밀도는 소스 유체의 값으로 정해지고 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 싱크는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 지역에서의 값을 가지므로 사용자가 정의할 수 없다.
  • 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하며 싱크에서는 정의될 수 없다.

경우12, 현저한 경계면을 갖는 두 유체이며 유체#2 는 압축성

  • 소스는 유체#1 이나 유체#2를 방출할 수 있으나 둘 다는 못한다. 유체#1이 방출되면 소스 유체밀도는 유체#1의 값이 되며 사용자가 변경할 수 없다. 유체#2가 방출되면 소스 유체밀도는 정의되어야 한다.
  • 싱크는 유체#1, 유체#2 또는 이의 혼합물을 제거할 수 있다. 싱크에서의 유체 밀도는 지역에서의 값을 가지므로 사용자가 정의할 수 없다
  • 온도는 소스에서 정의되어야 하며 싱크에서는 정의될 수 없다.

Activate Mass Source / 질량소스 활성화

질량소스모델은 Activate fluid source model. 을 체크함으로써 in Model Setup Physics Fluid sources 에서 활성화된다.

질량소스/싱크를 정의하기 위해 Meshing & Geometry Geometry Component (원하는 요소). 로간다. Component properties 창에서 Mass Source Properties 로 간다. Mass Source 체크상자를 체크한다. 질량소스 정의를 위한 변수들은 아래 그림에서 보여지는 것 같이 펄쳐질 수 있다.

Define Source Properties / 소스물성정의

사용자는 문제 정의에 따라 소스에서 유체 유형(유체 1,2 또는 이의 혼합물), 압력유형 밀도 및 온도, 그리고 싱크에서 유체유형과 밀도를 지정할 수 있다.

압력유형은 Stagnation pressure Static pressure 를 포함하고 단지소스에만 적용된다(즉 질량유량이 양의 수 일 경우에). 정체 압력소스(디폴트)일 경우, 유체는 0의 속도로 들어온다고 가정된다. 결과적으로 압력은 소스로부터 유체를 밀어내기 위해 소스에서 증가되어야 한다. 이러한 소스는 로켓 끝이나 수축하는 풍선에서 나오는 유체 모델을 목적으로 한다.

정압소스에서 유체속도는 질량유량과 소스의 표면적으로부터 계산된다. 이 경우 소스에서 유체를 밀어내기 위한 추가압력이 필요 없다. 이런 소스 예제는 긴 직선의 파이프로부터 나오는 유체의 경우이다.

일반적으로 질량소스의 두 유형의 차이는 결합운동을 하는 GMO 요소와 관련된 소스에서만 중요한데 이는 소스에서 유체압력, 즉 움직이는 물체에 작용하는 수압에 영향을 미치기 때문이다.

Define Flow Rate / 질량유동정의

유량 밑에 펼쳐지는 상자에서 소스/싱크를 위해 Mass flow rate Volume flow rate 를 정의하기 위해 선택할 수 있다. 두 유량은 모두 소스 요소의 전체유량 또는 단위면적당 유량으로 선택할 수 있다.

전체 유량은 소스 요소의 개표면상에 균일하게 분포될 수 있다. 단위 면적당 유량이 사용되면 전체유량은 단위 면적당 지정된 유량에 소스요소의 개방된 표면 면적을 곱한 양이다. 개방된 표면 면적이 시간에 따라 변하면 전체 유량도 변한다. 예를 들면 이동체의 개방된 표면 면적은 격자 크기와 분포에 달려있고 각 시간마다 새롭게 되므로 시간에 따라 변하며 전체 유량 역시 시간에 따라 변하게 된다.

전체 유량이 이동체에서 지정되면 개방된 표면을 통한 유속은 정의된 전체 질량 유량을 유지하기 위해 매시간 단계에 조절된다.

유량이 일정하면 그 때는 단순히 그 값을 Total flow rate 또는 Per unit area flow rate 밑에 상응하는 편집상자에 넣는다. 그렇지 않으면 데이터 표를 불러오기 위해 Tabular 를 클릭하고 일련의 시간대 유량의 데이터를 입력한다. 유량은 소스에서는 양이고 싱크에서는 음이며 시간에 따라 변할 수 있다. 다른 방법으로는 사용자가 Import Values 버튼을 사용하여 기존의 데이터 파일을 읽어 들임으로써 유량 대 시간을 정의할 수 있다. 파일은 두열의 데이터를 갖는데 좌에서 우로 각기 시간과 유량을 나타낸다. 파일은 csv 확장자를 필요로 한다. FLOW-3D 데이터에서의 다른 시간변동 입력과 같이 데이터는 시간 점들 사이에서는 구간별 선형형태를 이용하여 보간 된다.

유량은 능동모사(simulate) 조절을 이용해 모사(simulate) 동안에 변경될 수 있다, 또 더 상세한 내용은 Active Simulation Control 를 참조하라.

Define Scalars at Source / 소스에서의 스칼라정의

스칼라는 우선 Physics 탭 밑 Scalars 에서 활성화되어야 한다. 질량소스에서 유체에 있는 스칼라 량은 소스에서의 스칼라농도로 정의될 수 있는데 이는 계산영역 내로 들어오는 유체체적당 스칼라질량이다. 영역내로 들어오는 한 스칼라의 질량유량은 지정된 스칼라농도에 소스에서의 소스유체 체적유량을 곱한 값이다. Mass Source Properties Source Scalars User defined scalar 에서 스칼라 농도를 넣는다.

Coating Bibliography

아래는 코팅 참고 문헌의 기술 문서 모음입니다. 
이 모든 논문은 FLOW-3D  결과를 포함하고 있습니다. FLOW-3D를 사용하여 코팅 공정을 성공적으로 시뮬레이션  하는 방법에 대해 자세히 알아보십시오.

Coating Bibliography

2021년 8월 26일 Update

Below is a collection of technical papers in our Coating Bibliography. All of these papers feature FLOW-3D results. Learn more about how FLOW-3D can be used to successfully simulate coating processes.

03-21   Delong Jia, Peng Yi, Yancong Liu, Jiawei Sun, Shengbo Yue, Qi Zhao, Effect of laser­ textured groove wall interface on molybdenum coating diffusion and metallurgical bonding, Surface and Coatings Technology, 405; 126561, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.126561

50-19     Peng Yi, Delong Jia, Xianghua Zhan, Pengun Xu, and Javad Mostaghimi, Coating solidification mechanism during plasma-sprayed filling the laser textured grooves, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 142, 2019. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118451

01-19   Jelena Dinic and Vivek Sharma, Computational analysis of self-similar capillary-driven thinning and pinch-off dynamics during dripping using the volume-of-fluid method, Physics of Fluids, Vol. 31, 2019. doi: 10.1063/1.5061715

85-18   Zia Jang, Oliver Litfin and Antonio Delgado, A semi-analytical approach for prediction of volume flow rate in nip-fed reverse roll coating process, Proceedings in Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, Vol. 18, no. 1, Special Issue: 89th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2018. doi: 10.1002/pamm.201800317

80-14   Hiroaki Koyama, Kazuhiro Fukada, Yoshitaka Murakami, Satoshi Inoue, and Tatsuya Shimoda, Investigation of Roll-to-Sheet Imprinting for the Fabrication of Thin-film Transistor Electrodes, IEICE TRAN, ELECTRON, VOL.E97-C, NO.11, November 2014

46-14   Isabell Vogeler, Andreas Olbers, Bettina Willinger and Antonio Delgado, Numerical investigation of the onset of air entrainment in forward roll coating, 17th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium September 7-10, 2014 San Diego, CA, USA

17-12  Chi-Feng Lin, Bo-Kai Wang, Carlos Tiu and Ta-Jo Liu, On the Pinning of Downstream Meniscus for Slot Die Coating, Advances in Polymer Technology, Vol. 00, No. 0, 1-9 (2012) © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Available online at Wiley.

01-11  Reid Chesterfield, Andrew Johnson, Charlie Lang, Matthew Stainer, and Jonathan Ziebarth, Solution-Coating Technology for AMOLED Displays, Information Display Magazine, 1/11 0362-0972/01/2011-024 © SID 2011.

61-09 Yi-Rong Chang, Chi-Feng Lin and Ta-Jo Liu, Start-up of slot die coating, Polymer Engineering and Science, Vol. 49, pp. 1158-1167, 2009. doi:10.1002/pen.21360

26-06  James M. Brethour, 3-D transient simulation of viscoelastic coating flows, 13th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, September 2006, Denver, Colorado

19-06  Ivosevic, M., Cairncross, R. A., and Knight, R., 3D Predictions of Thermally Sprayed Polymer Splats Modeling Particle Acceleration, Heating and Deformation on Impact with a Flat Substrate, Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, 49, pp. 3285 – 3297, 2006

9-06  M. Ivosevic, R. A. Cairncross, R. Knight, T. E. Twardowski, V. Gupta, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA; J. A. Baldoni, Duke University, Durham, NC, Effect of Substrate Roughness on Splatting Behavior of HVOF Sprayed Polymer Particles Modeling and Experiments, International Thermal Spray Conference, Seattle, WA, May 2006.

26-05  Ivosevic, M., Cairncross, R. A., Knight, R., Impact Modeling of Thermally Sprayed Polymer Particles, Proc. International Thermal Spray Conference [ITSC-2005], Eds., DVS/IIW/ASM-TSS, Basel, Switzerland, May 2005.

11-05  Brethour, J., Simulation of Viscoelastic Coating Flows with a Volume-of-fluid Technique, in Proceedings of the 6th European Coating Symposium, Bradford, UK, 2005

1-05 C.W. Hirt, Electro-Hydrodynamics of Semi-Conductive Fluids: With Application to Electro-Spraying, Flow Science Technical Note #70, FSI-05-TN70

38-04 K.H. Ho and Y.Y. Zhao, Modelling thermal development of liquid metal flow on rotating disc in centrifugal atomisation, Materials Science and Engineering, A365, pp. 336-340, 2004. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2003.09.044

30-04  M. Ivosevic, R.A. Cairncross, and R. Knight, Impact Modeling of HVOF Sprayed Polymer Particles, Presented at the 12th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, Rochester, New York, September 23-25, 2004

29-04  J.M. Brethour and C.W. Hirt, Stains Arising from Dried Liquid Drops, Presented at the 12th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, Rochester, New York, September 23-25, 2004

20-03  James Brethour, Filling and Emptying of Gravure Cells–A CFD Analysis, Convertech Pacific October 2002, Vol. 10, No 4, p 34-37

4-03   M. Toivakka, Numerical Investigation of Droplet Impact Spreading in Spray Coating of Paper, In Proceedings of 2003 TAPPI 8th Advanced Coating Fundamentals Symposium, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, 2003

28-02  J.M. Brethour and H. Benkreira, Filling and Emptying of Gravure Cells—Experiment and CFD Comparison, 11th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, September 23-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota

22-02  Hirt, C.W., and Brethour, J.M., Contact Line on Rough Surfaces with Application to Air Entrainment, Presented at the 11th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, September 23-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Unpublished.

17-01  J. M. Brethour, C. W. Hirt, Moving Contact Lines on Rough Surfaces, 4th European Coating Symposium, 2001, Belgium

16-01  J. M. Brethour, Filling and Emptying of Gravure Cells–-A CFD Analysis, proceedings of the 4th European Coating Symposium 2001, October 1-4, 2001, Brussels, Belgium

26-00 Ronald H. Miller and Gary S. Strumolo, A Self-Consistent Transient Paint Simulation, Proceedings of IMEC2000: 2000 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, November 2000, Orlando, Florida

6-99  C. W. Hirt, Direct Computation of Dynamic Contact Angles and Contact Lines, ECC99 Coating Conference, Erlangen, Germany (FSI-99-00-2), Sept. 1999

7-98 J. E. Richardson and Y. Becker, Three-Dimensional Simulation of Slot Coating Edge Effects, Flow Science Inc, and Polaroid Corporation, presented at the 9th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, Newark, DE, May 18-20, 1998

6-98  C. W. Hirt and E. Choinski, Simulation of the Wet-Start Process in Slot Coating, Flow Science Inc, and Polaroid Corporation, presented at the 9th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, Newark, DE, May 18-20, 1998

3-97  C. W. Hirt and J. E. Richardson of Flow Science Inc, and K.S. Chen, Sandia National Laboratory, Simulation of Transient and Three-Dimensional Coating Flows Using a Volume-of-Fluid Technique, presented at the 50th Annual Conference of the Society for Imaging and Science Technology, Boston, MA 18-23 May 1997

2-96 C. W. Hirt, K. S. Chen, Simulation of Slide-Coating Flows Using a Fixed Grid and a Volume-of-Fluid Front-Tracking Technique, presented a the 8th International Coating Process Science & Technology Symposium, February 25-29, 1996, New Orleans, LA

FLOW-3D/MP Features List

FLOW-3D/MP Features

FLOW-3D/MP v6.1 은 FLOW-3D v11.1 솔버에 기초하여 물리 모델, 특징 및 그래픽 사용자 인터페이스가 동일합니다. FLOW-3D v11.1의 새로운 기능은 아래 파란색으로 표시되어 있으며 FLOW-3D/MP v6.1 에서 사용할 수 있습니다. 새로운 개발 기능에 대한 자세한 설명은 FLOW-3D v11.1에서 새로운 기능을 참조하십시오.

Meshing & Geometry

  • Structured finite difference/control volume meshes for fluid and thermal solutions
  • Finite element meshes in Cartesian and cylindrical coordinates for structural analysis
  • Multi-Block gridding with nested, linked, partially overlapping and conforming mesh blocks
  • Fractional areas/volumes (FAVOR™) for efficient & accurate geometry definition
  • Mesh quality checking
  • Basic Solids Modeler
  • Import CAD data
  • Import/export finite element meshes via Exodus-II file format
  • Grid & geometry independence
  • Cartesian or cylindrical coordinates
Flow Type Options
  • Internal, external & free-surface flows
  • 3D, 2D & 1D problems
  • Transient flows
  • Inviscid, viscous laminar & turbulent flows
  • Hybrid shallow water/3D flows
  • Non-inertial reference frame motion
  • Multiple scalar species
  • Two-phase flows
  • Heat transfer with phase change
  • Saturated & unsaturated porous media
Physical Modeling Options
  • Fluid structure interaction
  • Thermally-induced stresses
  • Plastic deformation of solids
  • Granular flow
  • Moisture drying
  • Solid solute dissolution
  • Sediment transport and scour
  • Cavitation (potential, passive tracking, active tracking)
  • Phase change (liquid-vapor, liquid-solid)
  • Surface tension
  • Thermocapillary effects
  • Wall adhesion
  • Wall roughness
  • Vapor & gas bubbles
  • Solidification & melting
  • Mass/momentum/energy sources
  • Shear, density & temperature-dependent viscosity
  • Thixotropic viscosity
  • Visco-elastic-plastic fluids
  • Elastic membranes & walls
  • Evaporation residue
  • Electro-mechanical effects
  • Dielectric phenomena
  • Electro-osmosis
  • Electrostatic particles
  • Joule heating
  • Air entrainment
  • Molecular & turbulent diffusion
  • Temperature-dependent material properties
  • Spray cooling
Flow Definition Options
  • General boundary conditions
    • Symmetry
    • Rigid and flexible walls
    • Continuative
    • Periodic
    • Specified pressure
    • Specified velocity
    • Outflow
    • Grid overlay
    • Hydrostatic pressure
    • Volume flow rate
    • Non-linear periodic and solitary surface waves
    • Rating curve and natural hydraulics
    • Wave absorbing layer
  • Restart from previous simulation
  • Continuation of a simulation
  • Overlay boundary conditions
  • Change mesh and modeling options
  • Change model parameters
Thermal Modeling Options
  • Natural convection
  • Forced convection
  • Conduction in fluid & solid
  • Fluid-solid heat transfer
  • Distributed energy sources/sinks in fluids and solids
  • Radiation
  • Viscous heating
  • Orthotropic thermal conductivity
  • Thermally-induced stresses
Turbulence Models
  • RNG model
  • Two-equation k-epsilon model
  • Two-equation k-omega model
  • Large eddy simulation
Metal Casting Models
  • Thermal stress & deformations
  • Iron solidification
  • Sand core blowing
  • Sand core drying
  • Permeable molds
  • Solidification & melting
  • Solidification shrinkage with interdendritic feeding
  • Micro & macro porosity
  • Binary alloy segregation
  • Thermal die cycling
  • Surface oxide defects
  • Cavitation potential
  • Lost-foam casting
  • Semi-solid material
  • Core gas generation
  • Back pressure & vents
  • Shot sleeves
  • PQ2 diagram
  • Squeeze pins
  • Filters
  • Air entrainment
  • Temperature-dependent material properties
  • Cooling channels
  • Fluid/wall contact time
Numerical Modeling Options
  • TruVOF Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) method for fluid interfaces
  • First and second order advection
  • Sharp and diffuse interface tracking
  • Implicit & explicit numerical methods
  • GMRES, point and line relaxation pressure solvers
  • User-defined variables, subroutines & output
  • Utilities for runtime interaction during execution
Fluid Modeling Options
  • One incompressible fluid – confined or with free surfaces
  • Two incompressible fluids – miscible or with sharp interfaces
  • Compressible fluid – subsonic, transonic, supersonic
  • Stratified fluid
  • Acoustic phenomena
  • Mass particles with variable density or diameter
Shallow Flow Models
  • General topography
  • Raster data interface
  • Subcomponent-specific surface roughness
  • Wind shear
  • Ground roughness effects
  • Laminar & turbulent flow
  • Sediment transport and scour
  • Surface tension
  • Heat transfer
  • Wetting & drying
Advanced Physical Models
  • General Moving Object model with 6 DOF–prescribed and fully-coupled motion
  • Rotating/spinning objects
  • Collision model
  • Tethered moving objects (springs, ropes, mooring lines)
  • Flexing membranes and walls
  • Porosity
  • Finite element based elastic-plastic deformation
  • Finite element based thermal stress evolution due to thermal changes in a solidifying fluid
  • Combusting solid components
Chemistry Models
  • Stiff equation solver for chemical rate equations
  • Stationary or advected species
Porous Media Models
  • Saturated and unsaturated flow
  • Variable porosity
  • Directional porosity
  • General flow losses (linear & quadratic)
  • Capillary pressure
  • Heat transfer in porous media
  • Van Genunchten model for unsaturated flow
Discrete Particle Models
  • Massless marker particles
  • Mass particles of variable size/mass
  • Linear & quadratic fluid-dynamic drag
  • Monte-Carlo diffusion
  • Particle-Fluid momentum coupling
  • Coefficient of restitution or sticky particles
  • Point or volumetric particle sources
  • Charged particles
  • Probe particles
Two-Phase & Two-Component Models
  • Liquid/liquid & gas/liquid interfaces
  • Variable density mixtures
  • Compressible fluid with a dispersed incompressible component
  • Drift flux
  • Two-component, vapor/non-condensable gases
  • Phase transformations for gas-liquid & liquid-solid
  • Adiabatic bubbles
  • Bubbles with phase change
  • Continuum fluid with discrete particles
  • Scalar transport
  • Homogeneous bubbles
  • Super-cooling
Coupling with Other Programs
  • Geometry input from Stereolithography (STL) files – binary or ASCII
  • Direct interfaces with EnSight®, FieldView® & Tecplot® visualization software
  • Finite element solution import/export via Exodus-II file format
  • PLOT3D output
  • Neutral file output
  • Extensive customization possibilities
  • Solid Properties Materials Database
Data Processing Options
  • State-of-the-art post-processing tool, FlowSight™
  • Batch post-processing
  • Report generation
  • Automatic or custom results analysis
  • High-quality OpenGL-based graphics
  • Color or B/W vector, contour, 3D surface & particle plots
  • Moving and stationary probes
  • Measurement baffles
  • Arbitrary sampling volumes
  • Force & moment output
  • Animation output
  • PostScript, JPEG & Bitmap output
  • Streamlines
  • Flow tracers
User Conveniences
  • Active simulation control (based on measurement of probes)
  • Mesh generators
  • Mesh quality checking
  • Tabular time-dependent input using external files
  • Automatic time-step control for accuracy & stability
  • Automatic convergence control
  • Mentor help to optimize efficiency
  • Change simulation parameters while solver runs
  • Launch and manage multiple simulations
  • Automatic simulation termination based on user-defined criteria
  • Run simulation on remote servers using remote solving
Multi-Processor Computing

FLOW-3D Features

The features in blue are newly-released in FLOW-3D v12.0.

Meshing & Geometry

  • Structured finite difference/control volume meshes for fluid and thermal solutions
  • Finite element meshes in Cartesian and cylindrical coordinates for structural analysis
  • Multi-Block gridding with nested, linked, partially overlapping and conforming mesh blocks
  • Conforming meshes extended to arbitrary shapes
  • Fractional areas/volumes (FAVOR™) for efficient & accurate geometry definition
  • Closing gaps in geometry
  • Mesh quality checking
  • Basic Solids Modeler
  • Import CAD data
  • Import/export finite element meshes via Exodus-II file format
  • Grid & geometry independence
  • Cartesian or cylindrical coordinates

Flow Type Options

  • Internal, external & free-surface flows
  • 3D, 2D & 1D problems
  • Transient flows
  • Inviscid, viscous laminar & turbulent flows
  • Hybrid shallow water/3D flows
  • Non-inertial reference frame motion
  • Multiple scalar species
  • Two-phase flows
  • Heat transfer with phase change
  • Saturated & unsaturated porous media

Physical Modeling Options

  • Fluid structure interaction
  • Thermally-induced stresses
  • Plastic deformation of solids
  • Granular flow
  • Moisture drying
  • Solid solute dissolution
  • Sediment transport and scour
  • Sludge settling
  • Cavitation (potential, passive tracking, active tracking)
  • Phase change (liquid-vapor, liquid-solid)
  • Surface tension
  • Thermocapillary effects
  • Wall adhesion
  • Wall roughness
  • Vapor & gas bubbles
  • Solidification & melting
  • Mass/momentum/energy sources
  • Shear, density & temperature-dependent viscosity
  • Thixotropic viscosity
  • Visco-elastic-plastic fluids
  • Elastic membranes & walls
  • Evaporation residue
  • Electro-mechanical effects
  • Dielectric phenomena
  • Electro-osmosis
  • Electrostatic particles
  • Joule heating
  • Air entrainment
  • Molecular & turbulent diffusion
  • Temperature-dependent material properties
  • Spray cooling

Flow Definition Options

  • General boundary conditions
    • Symmetry
    • Rigid and flexible walls
    • Continuative
    • Periodic
    • Specified pressure
    • Specified velocity
    • Outflow
    • Outflow pressure
    • Outflow boundaries with wave absorbing layers
    • Grid overlay
    • Hydrostatic pressure
    • Volume flow rate
    • Non-linear periodic and solitary surface waves
    • Rating curve and natural hydraulics
    • Wave absorbing layer
  • Restart from previous simulation
  • Continuation of a simulation
  • Overlay boundary conditions
  • Change mesh and modeling options
  • Change model parameters

Thermal Modeling Options

  • Natural convection
  • Forced convection
  • Conduction in fluid & solid
  • Fluid-solid heat transfer
  • Distributed energy sources/sinks in fluids and solids
  • Radiation
  • Viscous heating
  • Orthotropic thermal conductivity
  • Thermally-induced stresses

Numerical Modeling Options

  • TruVOF Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) method for fluid interfaces
  • Steady state accelerator for free-surface flows
  • First and second order advection
  • Sharp and diffuse interface tracking
  • Implicit & explicit numerical methods
  • Immersed boundary method
  • GMRES, point and line relaxation pressure solvers
  • User-defined variables, subroutines & output
  • Utilities for runtime interaction during execution

Fluid Modeling Options

  • One incompressible fluid – confined or with free surfaces
  • Two incompressible fluids – miscible or with sharp interfaces
  • Compressible fluid – subsonic, transonic, supersonic
  • Stratified fluid
  • Acoustic phenomena
  • Mass particles with variable density or diameter

Shallow Flow Models

  • General topography
  • Raster data interface
  • Subcomponent-specific surface roughness
  • Wind shear
  • Ground roughness effects
  • Manning’s roughness
  • Laminar & turbulent flow
  • Sediment transport and scour
  • Surface tension
  • Heat transfer
  • Wetting & drying

Turbulence Models

  • RNG model
  • Two-equation k-epsilon model
  • Two-equation k-omega model
  • Large eddy simulation

Advanced Physical Models

  • General Moving Object model with 6 DOF–prescribed and fully-coupled motion
  • Rotating/spinning objects
  • Collision model
  • Tethered moving objects (springs, ropes, breaking mooring lines)
  • Flexing membranes and walls
  • Porosity
  • Finite element based elastic-plastic deformation
  • Finite element based thermal stress evolution due to thermal changes in a solidifying fluid
  • Combusting solid components

Chemistry Models

  • Stiff equation solver for chemical rate equations
  • Stationary or advected species

Porous Media Models

  • Saturated and unsaturated flow
  • Variable porosity
  • Directional porosity
  • General flow losses (linear & quadratic)
  • Capillary pressure
  • Heat transfer in porous media
  • Van Genunchten model for unsaturated flow

Discrete Particle Models

  • Massless marker particles
  • Multi-species material particles of variable size and mass
  • Solid, fluid, gas particles
  • Void particles tracking collapsed void regions
  • Non-linear fluid-dynamic drag
  • Added mass effects
  • Monte-Carlo diffusion
  • Particle-fluid momentum coupling
  • Coefficient of restitution or sticky particles
  • Point or volumetric particle sources
  • Initial particle blocks
  • Heat transfer with fluid
  • Evaporation and condensation
  • Solidification and melting
  • Coulomb and dielectric forces
  • Probe particles

Two-Phase & Two-Component Models

  • Liquid/liquid & gas/liquid interfaces
  • Variable density mixtures
  • Compressible fluid with a dispersed incompressible component
  • Drift flux with dynamic droplet size
  • Two-component, vapor/non-condensable gases
  • Phase transformations for gas-liquid & liquid-solid
  • Adiabatic bubbles
  • Bubbles with phase change
  • Continuum fluid with discrete particles
  • Scalar transport
  • Homogeneous bubbles
  • Super-cooling
  • Two-field temperature

Coupling with Other Programs

  • Geometry input from Stereolithography (STL) files – binary or ASCII
  • Direct interfaces with EnSight®, FieldView® & Tecplot® visualization software
  • Finite element solution import/export via Exodus-II file format
  • PLOT3D output
  • Neutral file output
  • Extensive customization possibilities
  • Solid Properties Materials Database

Data Processing Options

  • State-of-the-art post-processing tool, FlowSight™
  • Batch post-processing
  • Report generation
  • Automatic or custom results analysis
  • High-quality OpenGL-based graphics
  • Color or B/W vector, contour, 3D surface & particle plots
  • Moving and stationary probes
  • Visualization of non-inertial reference frame motion
  • Measurement baffles
  • Arbitrary sampling volumes
  • Force & moment output
  • Animation output
  • PostScript, JPEG & Bitmap output
  • Streamlines
  • Flow tracers

User Conveniences

  • Active simulation control (based on measurement of probes)
  • Mesh generators
  • Mesh quality checking
  • Tabular time-dependent input using external files
  • Automatic time-step control for accuracy & stability
  • Automatic convergence control
  • Mentor help to optimize efficiency
  • Units on all variables
  • Custom units
  • Component transformations
  • Moving particle sources
  • Change simulation parameters while solver runs
  • Launch and manage multiple simulations
  • Automatic simulation termination based on user-defined criteria
  • Run simulation on remote servers using remote solving
  • Copy boundary conditions to other mesh blocks

Multi-Processor Computing

  • Shared memory computers
  • Distributed memory clusters

FlowSight

  • Particle visualization
  • Velocity vector fields
  • Streamlines & pathlines
  • Iso-surfaces
  • 2D, 3D and arbitrary clips
  • Volume render
  • Probe data
  • History data
  • Vortex cores
  • Link multiple results
  • Multiple data views
  • Non-inertial reference frame
  • Spline clip