1D Bridges: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Rohan.king (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 5:
=Introduction=
The following section looks at bridges using the 1D component of TUFLOW, for information on bridges in the 2D domain please see the following section on [[TUFLOW_2D_Hydraulic_Structures | 2D hydraulic Structures]] and [[Tutorial_Module06#Bridge_Modelling_Option_3:_2D_Layered_Flow_Constriction | Module 6]]. <br><br>
1D Bridge channels do not require length, Manning's n, divergence or bed slope (so they are effectively zero-length channels). Asand arely typicalon rule-of-thumb,a ifreasonable the channel up stream &/or downstreamestimate of theenergy bridgelosses isassociated modeledwith inre-expansion 1Dof thenwater the bridge should also be modeled in 1D. Ideally any change inafter the channelvena-contracta from(often ESTRY 1Dreferred to 2Das orentrance vice-versalosses), shouldexpansion alsoof occurwater at a structuredownstream (i.e.exit bridgelosses), culvertpier losses, etc)bridge todeck facilitateand theguard transitionrail inlosses. solutionOther schemes.factors Theinclude imagesaccounting belowfor displaysoccurrence aof typicalbridge preferreddeck setup,pressure howeverflow as isand the caseeffects withof hydraulicbridge modelingskew yourand particularmultiple modelbridges situation(shielding mayeffects beof differentan andupstream thereforebridge noton alwaysa conformdownstream to these idealsbridge).<br>
As a typical rule-of-thumb, if the channel upstream &/or downstream of the bridge is modelled in 1D then the bridge should also be modelled in 1D. Ideally any change in the channel from ESTRY 1D to 2D or vice-versa should also occur at a structure (i.e. bridge, culvert, etc) to facilitate the transition in solution schemes. The images below displays a typical preferred setup, however as is the case with hydraulic modeling your particular model situation may be different and therefore not always conform to these ideals.<br>
 
<div><ul>