Figure 5. Flow pattern of operating condition 1: (a) Physical model flow diagram; (b) Simulation model flow.

Numerical Study of Fluctuating Pressure on Stilling Basin Slab with Sudden Lateral Enlargement and Bottom Drop

급격한 측면 확대 및 바닥 낙하에 따른 정류지(stilling basin) 슬래브의 변동 압력에 대한 수치 연구

by Yangliang Lu,Jinbu Yin *OrcID,Zhou Yang,Kebang Wei andZhiming Liu
College of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, Northwest A&F University, Weihui Road, Yangling 712100, China*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2021, 13(2), 238; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13020238
Received: 6 November 2020 / Revised: 7 January 2021 / Accepted: 11 January 2021 / Published: 19 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Physical Modelling in Hydraulics Engineering)

Abstract

갑작스런 확장 및 바닥 낙하가 있는 고요한 정류지(stilling basin) 유역은 복잡한 수력 특성, 특히 3D 공간 수력 점프 아래에서 변동하는 압력 분포로 이어집니다.

이 논문은 FLOW-3D 소프트웨어를 기반으로 한 LES (Large Eddy Simulation) 모델과 TruVOF 방법을 사용하여 시간 평균 압력, 변동 압력의 RMS (Root Mean Square), 정물(stilling basin) 조 슬래브의 최대 및 최소 압력을 시뮬레이션했습니다.

실제 모델 결과와 비교하여 시뮬레이션 결과는 LES 모델이 정물 유역의 변동하는 수류 압력을 안정적으로 시뮬레이션 할 수 있음을 보여줍니다. 변동 압력의 RMS의 최대 값은 정수조 전면과 측벽의 연장선 부근에 나타납니다.

이 논문은 변동 압력의 생성 메커니즘과 Navier-Stokes 방정식에서 파생된 Poisson 방정식을 기반으로 영향 요인 (변동 속도, 속도 구배, 변동 와도)의 정량 분석과 특성의 정성 분석을 결합하는 연구 방법을 제공합니다.

변동하는 압력의. 정류 지의 소용돌이 영역과 벽에 부착 된 제트 영역의 변동 압력 분포는 주로 각각 와류 및 변동 유속의 영향을 받으며 충돌 영역의 분포는 변동 속도, 속도 구배 및 변동에 의해 발생합니다.

A stilling basin with sudden enlargement and bottom drop leads to complicated hydraulic characteristics, especially a fluctuating pressure distribution beneath 3D spatial hydraulic jumps. This paper used the large eddy simulation (LES) model and the TruVOF method based on FLOW-3D software to simulate the time-average pressure, root mean square (RMS) of fluctuating pressure, maximum and minimum pressure of a stilling basin slab. Compared with physical model results, the simulation results show that the LES model can simulate the fluctuating water flow pressure in a stilling basin reliably. The maximum value of RMS of fluctuating pressure appears in the vicinity of the front of the stilling basin and the extension line of the side wall. Based on the generating mechanism of fluctuating pressure and the Poisson Equation derived from the Navier–Stokes Equation, this paper provides a research method of combining quantitative analysis of influencing factors (fluctuating velocity, velocity gradient, and fluctuating vorticity) and qualitative analysis of the characteristics of fluctuating pressure. The distribution of fluctuating pressure in the swirling zone of the stilling basin and the wall-attached jet zone is mainly affected by the vortex and fluctuating flow velocity, respectively, and the distribution in the impinging zone is caused by fluctuating velocity, velocity gradient and fluctuating vorticity. 

Keywords: submerged jump; sudden lateral enlargement and bottom drop; large eddy simulation; vortex; fluctuating pressure

Figure 1. Schematic design of model test: (a) Sectional view; (b) Plan view.
Figure 1. Schematic design of model test: (a) Sectional view; (b) Plan view.
Figure 2. Model layout in laboratory: (a) Discharge chute; (b) The stilling basin.
Figure 2. Model layout in laboratory: (a) Discharge chute; (b) The stilling basin.

Table 1. Operating conditions.

ConditionFlow Discharge
(m3/s)		Inflow Froude NumberInflow Velocity (m/s)Inflow Water Depth (m)
10.9425.2955.6110.114
20.6434.5454.4890.097
30.2324.2273.0180.052
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of fluctuating pressure data-processing process.
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of fluctuating pressure data-processing process.
Figure 4. 3D simulation model: (a) Boundary conditions; (b) Grid mesh.
Figure 4. 3D simulation model: (a) Boundary conditions; (b) Grid mesh.

Table 2. Grid independence test.

GridContaining Block Cell Size (m)Nested Block Cell Size (m)Discharge
(m3/s)		Relative Error (%)
10.0500.0250.9905.10
20.0400.0200.9692.70
30.0300.0150.9561.49
40.0200.0100.9521.06
Figure 5. Flow pattern of operating condition 1: (a) Physical model flow diagram; (b) Simulation model flow.
Figure 5. Flow pattern of operating condition 1: (a) Physical model flow diagram; (b) Simulation model flow.
Figure 6. Numerical simulation of water surface profile and x-z plane flow rate vector.
Figure 6. Numerical simulation of water surface profile and x-z plane flow rate vector.
Figure 7. Comparison of bottom velocity.
Figure 7. Comparison of bottom velocity.
Figure 8. Comparison of pressure at 10 pressure measurement points: (a) Comparison of root mean square (RMS) of fluctuating and time-average pressure; (b) Comparison of maximum and minimum pressure.
Figure 8. Comparison of pressure at 10 pressure measurement points: (a) Comparison of root mean square (RMS) of fluctuating and time-average pressure; (b) Comparison of maximum and minimum pressure.
Figure 9. The distribution diagram of time-average pressure and RMS of fluctuating pressure of bottom of stilling basin under three cases.
Figure 9. The distribution diagram of time-average pressure and RMS of fluctuating pressure of bottom of stilling basin under three cases.
Figure 10. Speed vector in stilling basin at z = 40 cm horizontal plane and bottom plate plane in three cases.
Figure 10. Speed vector in stilling basin at z = 40 cm horizontal plane and bottom plate plane in three cases.
Figure 11. Distribution of fluctuating velocity and vorticity in the horizontal section of the stilling basin slab: (a) Distribution of fluctuating velocity; (b) Distribution of fluctuating vorticity.
Figure 11. Distribution of fluctuating velocity and vorticity in the horizontal section of the stilling basin slab: (a) Distribution of fluctuating velocity; (b) Distribution of fluctuating vorticity.
Figure 12. Distribution of root time-average square fluctuating pressure of x = 50 cm cross-section of bottom plate: (a) Distributions of fluctuating velocity and fluctuating pressure; (b) Distributions of fluctuating vorticity and fluctuating pressure.
Figure 12. Distribution of root time-average square fluctuating pressure of x = 50 cm cross-section of bottom plate: (a) Distributions of fluctuating velocity and fluctuating pressure; (b) Distributions of fluctuating vorticity and fluctuating pressure.
Figure 13. Variance of fluctuating pressure coefficient (Cp′).
Figure 13. Variance of fluctuating pressure coefficient (Cp′).

References

  1. Liu, P.Q.; Dong, J.R.; Yu, C. Experimental investigation of fluctuation uplift on rock blocks at the bottom of the scour pool downstream of Three-Gorges spillway. J. Hydraul. Res. 1998, 36, 55–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liu, P.Q.; Li, A.H. Model discussion of pressure fluctuations propagation within lining slab joints in stilling basins. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2007, 133, 618–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mousavi, S.N.; Júnior, R.S.; Teixeira, E.D.; Bocchiola, D.; Nabipour, N.; Mosavi, A.; Shamshirband, S. Predictive Modeling the Free Hydraulic Jumps Pressure through Advanced Statistical Methods. Mathematics 2020, 8, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sun, S.-K.; Liu, H.-T.; Xia, Q.-F.; Wang, X.-S. Study on stilling basin with step down floor for energy dissipation of hydraulic jump in high dams. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2005, 36, 1188–1193. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  5. Li, Q.; Li, L.; Liao, H. Study on the Best Depth of Stilling Basin with Shallow-Water Cushion. Water 2018, 10, 1801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Luo, Y.-Q.; He, D.-M.; Zhang, S.-C.; Bai, S. Experimental Study on Stilling Basin with Step-down for Floor Slab Stability Characteristics. J. Basic Sci. Eng. 2012, 20, 228–236. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  7. Zhang, J.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, T.; Li, S.; Diao, Y.; Cheng, M.; Baruch, J. Experimental Study on the Effect of an Expanding Conjunction Between a Spilling Basin and the Downstream Channel on the Height After Jump. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2017, 42, 4069–4078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ram, K.V.S.; Prasad, R. Spatial B-jump at sudden channel enlargements with abrupt drop. J. Hydraul. Eng. -Asce 1998, 124, 643–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hassanpour, N.; Hosseinzadeh Dalir, A.; Farsadizadeh, D.; Gualtieri, C. An Experimental Study of Hydraulic Jump in a Gradually Expanding Rectangular Stilling Basin with Roughened Bed. Water 2017, 9, 945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Siuta, T. The impact of deepening the stilling basin on the characteristics of hydraulic jump. Czas. Tech. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Babaali, H.; Shamsai, A.; Vosoughifar, H. Computational Modeling of the Hydraulic Jump in the Stilling Basin with Convergence Walls Using CFD Codes. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2014, 40, 381–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dehdar-behbahani, S.; Parsaie, A. Numerical modeling of flow pattern in dam spillway’s guide wall. Case study: Balaroud dam, Iran. Alex. Eng. J. 2016, 55, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Macián-Pérez, J.F.; García-Bartual, R.; Huber, B.; Bayon, A.; Vallés-Morán, F.J. Analysis of the Flow in a Typified USBR II Stilling Basin through a Numerical and Physical Modeling Approach. Water 2020, 12, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Tajabadi, F.; Jabbari, E.; Sarkardeh, H. Effect of the end sill angle on the hydrodynamic parameters of a stilling basin. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2018, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Valero, D.; Bung, D.B.; Crookston, B.M. Energy Dissipation of a Type III Basin under Design and Adverse Conditions for Stepped and Smooth Spillways. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2018, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Liu, D.; Fei, W.; Wang, X.; Chen, H.; Qi, L. Establishment and application of three-dimensional realistic river terrain in the numerical modeling of flow over spillways. Water Supply 2018, 18, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Epely-Chauvin, G.; De Cesare, G.; Schwindt, S. Numerical Modelling of Plunge Pool Scour Evolution In Non-Cohesive Sediments. Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech. 2015, 8, 477–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhang, J.-M.; Chen, J.-G.; Xu, W.-L.; Peng, Y. Characteristics of vortex structure in multi-horizontal submerged jets stilling basin. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Water Manag. 2014, 167, 322–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, L.-X.; Liao, H.-S.; Liu, D.; Jiang, S.-Y. Experimental investigation of the optimization of stilling basin with shallow-water cushion used for low Froude number energy dissipation. J. Hydrodyn. 2015, 27, 522–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ferreri, G.B.; Nasello, C. Hydraulic jumps at drop and abrupt enlargement in rectangular channel. J. Hydraul. Res. 2010, 40, 491–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Naseri, F.; Sarkardeh, H.; Jabbari, E. Effect of inlet flow condition on hydrodynamic parameters of stilling basins. Acta Mech. 2017, 229, 1415–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhou, Z.; Wang, J.-X. Numerical Modeling of 3D Flow Field among a Compound Stilling Basin. Math. Probl. Eng. 2019, 5934274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Qian, Z.; Hu, X.; Huai, W.; Amador, A. Numerical simulation and analysis of water flow over stepped spillways. Sci. China Ser. E Technol. Sci. 2009, 52, 1958–1965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liu, F. Study on Characteristics of Fluctuating Wall-Pressure and Its Similarity Law. Ph.D. Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, May 2007. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  25. Yan, Z.-M.; Zhou, C.-T.; Lu, S.-Q. Pressure fluctuations beneath spatial hydraulic jumps. J. Hydrodyn. 2006, 18, 723–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Moin, P.; Kim, J. Numerical investigation of turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 2006, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Rezaeiravesh, S.; Liefvendahl, M. Effect of grid resolution on large eddy simulation of wall-bounded turbulence. Phys. Fluids 2018, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Stamou, A.I.; Chapsas, D.G.; Christodoulou, G.C. 3-D numerical modeling of supercritical flow in gradual expansions. J. Hydraul. Res. 2010, 46, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Savage, B.M.; Crookston, B.M.; Paxson, G.S. Physical and Numerical Modeling of Large Headwater Ratios for a 15 degrees Labyrinth Spillway. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2016, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Aydin, M.C.; Ozturk, M. Verification and validation of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model for air entrainment at spillway aerators. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2009, 36, 826–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ma, B.; Liang, S.; Liang, C.; Li, Y. Experimental Research on an Improved Slope Protection Structure in the Plunge Pool of a High Dam. Water 2017, 9, 671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bai, L.; Zhou, L.; Han, C.; Zhu, Y.; Shi, W.D. Numerical Study of Pressure Fluctuation and Unsteady Flow in a Centrifugal Pump. Processes 2019, 7, 354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Guven, A. A predictive model for pressure fluctuations on sloping channels using support vector machine. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 2011, 66, 1371–1382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
논문 원문 바로가기
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.