CFD Modeling of Rockery Walls in the River Environment

Similar documents
CFD Modeling for Structure Designs in Environmental Impacts Mitigation

Sediment transport and river bed evolution

Basic Concepts: Drag. Education Community

Model Studies on Slag-Metal Entrainment in Gas Stirred Ladles

Comparison of the Effects of k-ϵ, k-ω, and Zero Equation Models on Characterization of Turbulent Permeability of Porous Media

Fluid Structure Interaction Analysis of Two-Phase Flow in an M-shaped Jumper. Star Global Conference University of Houston

Computational Approach to Detect Instability and Incipient Motion of Large Riprap Rocks

Numerical Prediction Of Torque On Guide Vanes In A Reversible Pump-Turbine

Storm Water Best Management Practice: Development of Debris Filtering Structure for Supercritical Flow

FE Exam Fluids Review October 23, Important Concepts

Fluid Mechanics. Spring 2009

Open Channel Flow Part 2. Ch 10 Young, notes, handouts

HEAT TRANSFER CAPABILITY OF A THERMOSYPHON HEAT TRANSPORT DEVICE WITH EXPERIMENTAL AND CFD STUDIES

ONE ROCK DAM ORD. capture more sediment. The original ORD becomes the splash apron for the new layer. STEP 4: When ORD fills in, add a new layer

Project #1 Internal flow with thermal convection

FE Fluids Review March 23, 2012 Steve Burian (Civil & Environmental Engineering)

Analysis of Flow over a Convertible

Hydrology and Hydraulics Design Report. Background Summary

Investigation of Flow Profile in Open Channels using CFD

DEM 6 6 th International Conference on Discrete Element Methods and Related Techniques

FLOW VELOCITIES IN AN AXI-SYMMETRICAL ROTATING CUTTER SUCTION HEAD

HYDRAULIC MODELLING OF NENJIANG RIVER FLOODPLAIN IN NORTHEAST CHINA

An uncoupled pavement-urban canyon model for heat islands

FLOW SIMULATION AND HEAT TRANSFER ANALYSIS USING COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS (CFD)

3D Numerical Simulation of Supercritical Flow in Bends of Channel

CHAPTER 7 NUMERICAL MODELLING OF A SPIRAL HEAT EXCHANGER USING CFD TECHNIQUE

Modelling of dispersed, multicomponent, multiphase flows in resource industries. Section 3: Examples of analyses conducted for Newtonian fluids

Air Drag on a Stratospheric Balloon in Tropical Regions. H.P. Lee, K.M. Lim, B.C. Khoo, Q. Sun

2 Navier-Stokes Equations

MODA. Modelling data documenting one simulation. NewSOL energy storage tank

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 5, May ISSN

OMAE FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION MODELING OF SUBSEA JUMPER PIPE

Instructor : Dr. Jehad Hamad. Chapter (7)

A combined application of the integral wall model and the rough wall rescaling-recycling method

Two-Dimensional Simulation of Truckee River Hydrodynamics

Investigation on Dynamics of Sediment and Water Flow in a Sand Trap

11/12/2014. Running Water. Introduction. Water on Earth. The Hydrologic Cycle. Fluid Flow

I. INTRODUCTION. JMESTN

CFD Time Evolution of Heat Transfer Around A Bundle of Tubes In Staggered Configuration. G.S.T.A. Bangga 1*, W.A. Widodo 2

Application of the immersed boundary method to simulate flows inside and outside the nozzles

The simulation of the Saint Petersburg flood defense system gate vibration under the loads from the moving water

Multiphase Flows. Mohammed Azhar Phil Stopford

150A Review Session 2/13/2014 Fluid Statics. Pressure acts in all directions, normal to the surrounding surfaces

Performance Prediction of the Francis-99 Hydroturbine with Comparison to Experiment. Chad Custer, PhD Yuvraj Dewan Artem Ivashchenko

The effect of geometric parameters on the head loss factor in headers

Modeling of dispersed phase by Lagrangian approach in Fluent

ECOHYDRAULICS. Introduction to 2D Modeling

Modeling of Humidification in Comsol Multiphysics 4.4

* Ho h h (3) D where H o is the water depth of undisturbed flow, D is the thickness of the bridge deck, and h is the distance from the channel floor t

Drag Coefficient of Tall Building by CFD Method using ANSYS

MODELING OF THE HYDROPLANING PHENOMENON. Ong G P and Fwa T F Department of Civil Engineering National University of Singapore INTRODUCTION

Open Channel Flow I - The Manning Equation and Uniform Flow COURSE CONTENT

Atrium assisted natural ventilation of multi storey buildings

CFD ANALYSIS OF A THERMAL MIXING IN A SUBCOOLED WATER POOL UNDER A HIGH STEAM MASS FLUX

Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory

Computational Modelling of the Surface Roughness Effects on the Thermal-elastohydrodynamic Lubrication Problem

THREE-DIMENSIONAL SCOURING ANALYSIS FOR OPEN CHANNEL PRESSURE FLOW SCOUR UNDER FLOODED BRIDGE DECKS

Water Pollution Control: Physical Methods. AWPPCE RPI Fall 2013

R09. d water surface. Prove that the depth of pressure is equal to p +.

Stone Outlet Sediment Trap

Thermal Dispersion and Convection Heat Transfer during Laminar Transient Flow in Porous Media

Basic Fluid Mechanics

COMSOL Multiphysics Simulation of 3D Single- hase Transport in a Random Packed Bed of Spheres

INSTRUCTIONS FOR LABORATORY EXPERIMENT IN FLUID MECHANICS

Modeling Complex Flows! Direct Numerical Simulations! Computational Fluid Dynamics!

R. SHAYMAA ABDUL MUTTALEB ALHASHIMI

A fundamental study of the flow past a circular cylinder using Abaqus/CFD

PRESSURE AND VELOCITY AMPLITUDES OF THE INCOMPRESSIBLE FLUID IN CONCENTRIC ANNULAR PASSAGE WITH OSCILLATORY BOUNDARY: TURBULENT FLOW

A Computational Study on the Thrust Performance of a Supersonic Pintle Nozzle

Numerical simulations of the edge tone

Slurry Pump Mixing Effectiveness in Tank 50H

NUMERICAL MODELING OF FLOW THROUGH DOMAINS WITH SIMPLE VEGETATION-LIKE OBSTACLES

Modelling of flow and sediment transport in rivers and freshwater deltas Peggy Zinke

Experimental Investigation on Density Currents Propagating over Smooth and Rough Beds

CFD STUDIES IN THE PREDICTION OF THERMAL STRIPING IN AN LMFBR

CFD and Thermal Stress Analysis of Helium-Cooled Divertor Concepts

Turbulent flow over anisotropic porous media

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF A WESTFALL 2800 MIXER, BETA = 0.8 GFS R1. By Kimbal A. Hall, PE. Submitted to: WESTFALL MANUFACTURING COMPANY

CFD in COMSOL Multiphysics

EFFECT OF DISTRIBUTION OF VOLUMETRIC HEAT GENERATION ON MODERATOR TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION

Stratified scavenging in two-stroke engines using OpenFOAM

Double-diffusive lock-exchange gravity currents

A numerical simulation of train-induced unsteady airflow in a tunnel of Seoul subway

PRELIMINARY STUDY OF COMPUTATIONAL SETUP FOR URBAN STREET CANYONS. by MUHAMMAD NOOR AFIQ WITRI, M.Eng

Increase Productivity Using CFD Analysis

Analysis of oil displacement by water in oil reservoirs with horizontal wells

Piping Systems and Flow Analysis (Chapter 3)

Applied CFD Project 1. Christopher Light MAE 598

Hydrodynamic Forces due to Orbital Stokes 5 th Order Waves on Subsea Pipelines Resting on Porous Seabed

STAR-CCM+: NACA0012 Flow and Aero-Acoustics Analysis James Ruiz Application Engineer January 26, 2011

Jumper Analysis with Interacting Internal Two-phase Flow

7. TURBULENCE SPRING 2019

Tutorial for the heated pipe with constant fluid properties in STAR-CCM+

Which map shows the stream drainage pattern that most likely formed on the surface of this volcano? A) B)

Th P06 05 Permeability Estimation Using CFD Modeling in Tight Carboniferous Sandstone

Pipe Flow. Lecture 17

August 2006 El Paso. Policy Factors

Experimental Study for Investigating the Impact Force on a Wooden House by Driftwood in Steady and Unsteady Surge-type Flow

WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR PAGE ESTATES

Fluid-soil multiphase flow simulation by an SPH-DEM coupled method

Transcription:

CFD Modeling of Rockery Walls in the River Environment 2014 National Hydraulic Engineering Conference August 22, 2014 Iowa City, IA Dr. Cezary Bojanowski Dr. Steven Lottes Bart Bergendahl

Part I: Introduction Bart Bergendahl

US Hwy 36 Flood Damage Lyons to Estes Park, CO

Preliminary Rainfall / Runoff Data Rainfall (Sept 9-18, 2013) Location Duration Measured Return Int. (NOAA) Button Rock Dam 6 hour 4.37 inches 1000 year Peak Discharges 10 day 16.13 inches >1000 year Location Q100 (FEMA) Measured Return Int. (FEMA) North St. Vrain Crk. 4310 cfs 12,300 cfs >500 year Little Thompson R. 2585 cfs 7800 cfs >500 year

Question If large, loose rock riprap (e.g. D50 = 3 ; D100 = 5.5 ) is theoretically unstable when placed on a 1:1 slope of a river bank, can same rock be stable when stacked in a near-vertical orientation (i.e. a dry-stack rockery wall at the river bank)? Knowledge gap for hydraulics and geotech Design guidance needed for riverine and coastal applications Enter TRACC of Argonne National Laboratory and technical assistance thru CFD Modeling

Geosynthetics Granular backfill Part II: CFD modeling Cezary Bojanowski Steven Lottes Base rocks

Geometry of the base model Case 1 1.6 m 1.5 m Air Porous media 4 m 3.65 m (12 ft) Water 6.1 m (20 ft) 2.35 m (7.3 ft) 13

Geometry of the model without filler Case 2, 3 1.5 m Air No porous media + More space for the flow 3.65 m (12 ft) Water 6.1 m (20 ft) 2.35 m (7.3 ft) 14

Geometry of the base model Case 4 1.6 m 1.5 m Air Porous media 4 m 2.1 m (7 ft) Water 6.1 m (20 ft) 2.35 m (7.3 ft) 15

Analyzed cases Analyzed basic cases: Case No. Water height Inlet velocity Angle at inlet Filler model 1 12 ft 4.25 m/s 14 ft/s 2 12 ft 4.25 m/s 14 ft/s 3 12 ft 4.25 m/s 14 ft/s 4 7 ft 3.5 m/s 11.5 ft/s 5 7 ft 3.5 m/s 11.5 ft/s 0 deg Porous media 0 deg Void + Wall 20 deg Void + Wall 0 deg Porous media 0 deg Void + Wall Additionally, following cases were run: Curved wall model Rocks protruding into the flow Scaled rocks 16

Volume mesh on the base model 1.5 M - 5.2 M polyhedral cells (denser mesh around the rocks) Length of the model 50 m Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes model with k-epsilon turbulence and Volume of Fluid Pressure Outlet Interface Velocity Inlet Symmetry Wall 17

Volume fraction of water in computational cell The model for free surface flow tracking in CFD terminology is called volume of fluid (VOF). It may be sensitive to the time step of calculations and it requires careful initialization of the simulation. The time step of calculations was set to 0.1 s. The simulations were run for 100+ seconds (depending on the case) until stable results were obtained. Case 2 Case 3 x z x z y y 18

Velocity Porous media model averages the properties of the filler. Flow velocities in the porous media model are usually very low as compared to the main flow. More conservative results can be obtained if there is a narrow void behind the rocks ending at a rough continuous wall that allows for some flow. Low velocity in the porous media 19

Location of rocks of interest The rocks of interest have the same frontal area i.e. projection on XZ plane Having the same XZ projection allows for comparison of the forces normal to the flow (Y force). Their projection in YZ plane is different due to the slope of the wall. Forces on the rocks at two locations are compared. Rock 4b Outlet z x Rock 3b Rock 4a Rock 2b Rock 1b Rock 3a Inlet Rock 2a Rock 1a y Positive X force means along the flow Positive Y force means a force pulling the rock into the flow Positive Z force means an upward force 20

Dry weight of rocks of interest Weight = V * rho * g = Vol * 2,500 kg/m^3 * 9.81 m/s2 Submerged Weight = V * (rho s - rho w ) * g = Vol * 1,500 kg/m^3 * 9.81 m/s 2 Weight of rock 4 = 45,000 N Volume of rock 4 = 1.83 m 3 Weight of rock 3 = 54,900 N Volume of rock 3 = 2.24 m 3 Weight of rock 2 = 62,600 N Volume of rock 2 = 2.55 m 3 Weight of rock 1 = 71,800 N Volume of rock 1 = 2.92 m 3 Rock 4 Rock 3 Rock 2 Rock 1 21

Hydrodynamic forces on a single rock in the flow y x z Overall Z force consists of the following components: Weight Buoyancy Drag Contact forces Z force from CFD consists of TWO only: Buoyancy Drag Presented graphs show only the drag component (the hydrodynamic components only) Force to submerged weight ratio 0.150 0.100 0.050 0.000-0.050-0.100-0.150 X Y Z Force component 22

Forces on Rock 1a and 1b Ratio of force to submerged weight Rock 1 is partially buried so the Z force is not included because pressure integration over bottom surface can t be done. Dry weight of rock 1 = 71,800 N Rock 1 0.12 0.10 Case No. Water height Inlet velocity Filler model 0.08 1 12 ft 14 ft/s Porous 0.06 2 12 ft 14 ft/s Void 3 12 ft 14 ft/s @20 deg Void 4 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Porous 5 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Void X 0.04 Y 0.02 0.00 1-0.02 2 3 4 5 Case z x y 23

Forces on Rock 2a and 2b The simulations are transient causing the forces tend to fluctuate by a small amount as waves pass. Dry weight of rock 2 = 62,600 N Rock 2 Ratio of force to submerged weight 0.12 0.10 Case No. 0.08 Water height Inlet velocity Filler model 1 12 ft 14 ft/s Porous 0.06 X 2 12 ft 14 ft/s Void 0.04 Y 3 12 ft 14 ft/s @20 deg Void Z 4 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Porous 5 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Void 0.02 0.00 1-0.02 2 3 4 5 Case z x y 24

Forces on Rock 3a and 3b Rock 3 is only partially covered with water in cases 4 and 5, Rock 4 is dry in these cases Dry weight of rock 3 = 54,900 N Rock 3 Ratio of force to submerged weight 0.12 0.10 Case No. Water height Inlet velocity Filler model 0.08 1 12 ft 14 ft/s Porous 0.06 2 12 ft 14 ft/s Void 3 12 ft 14 ft/s @20 deg Void 4 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Porous 5 7 ft 11.5 ft/s Void X 0.04 Y 0.02 0.00 1-0.02 2 3 4 5 Case z x y 25

Simulations with curved wall model 20.5 m (67 ft) Rock 1c Rock 1b 38 m (125 ft) Rock 1a Rock 1 26

Curved wall model - velocity Inlet velocity is set to 2 m/s The velocity in the contracted zone increases to 6 m/s Increased velocity due to contraction y x z 27

Curved wall model - pressure Stagnation zone x y z Rock 2c Rock 2b Rock 2a Rock 2 Ratio of force to submerged weight 0.10 0.05 0.00-0.05-0.10 2 2a 2b 2c X Y -0.15 28

Simulations with rocks protruding into the flow 10, 20, and 30 % of depth (0.6 m =~2 ft) 29

Simulations with rocks protruding into the flow 0.12 0.150 Force ratio to submerged weight 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 X Y Force to submerged weight ratio 0.100 0.050 0.000-0.050-0.100 X Y Z 0.00 0% 10% 20% 30% Protrusion amount -0.150 Force component for the entire rock in the flow 30

Simulations with scaled geometry The rocks have been scaled down in size 2, 4, and 8 times in each direction The volume (and mass) decreased 8, 64, and 512 times Scale factor Volume factor Mass (kg) Characteristic size (m) 1.0 1.0 6400 2 x 2 x 1 0.5 0.125 800 1 x 1 x 0.5 0.25 0.015625 100 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.25 0.125 0.001953125 12.5 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.125 The rock size has changed but the domain size and conditions did not. Similar mesh settings were preserved to keep the Y+ at similar level. Initial runs were with Y+ = 150, new meshes have been built to lower it down to about 50 31

Results ratio of X and Y force to the weight The ratio was averaged over six rocks of the same size at the same height. There is no clear trend for X force. For the Y force an increasing ratio was expected. The ratio of the Y force to weight varies from 0.05 to 0.27 for the smallest rocks (12.5 kg or 25 lb) Ratio of force to submerged weight 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 X Y Expon. (Y) 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 Rocks scaling factor 32

Summary For the basic cases the lateral (Y) force ratio to the submerged weight of the rock varies from 0.05 to 0.11. The streamwise (X) component ratio has a lot more variation but is usually below 0.1. The depth at which the rock is placed influences slightly the lateral (Y) force ratio. If it is buried or partially submerged the ratio will vary. Curved wall setup didn t increase these forces. Protrusion of a rock into the flow will increase the ratios but even 30% of protrusion didn t cause the ratio to go significantly above 0.1. For the scaled rocks the Y force components grow with the decreasing size. For smaller rocks (1 ft x 1 ft x 0.5 ft) the ratio can be even up to 0.27. 33

Thank you!

Extra slides

Initial Conditions 36