TUFLOW Benchmarking: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Chris Huxley (talk | contribs) |
Chris Huxley (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 40:
== Leister (2010) ==
The author undertook research to ascertain the accuracy of
▲The author undertook research to ascertain the accuracy of a 2D hydraulic model, TUFLOW, in calculating the energy losses associated with the contraction and expansion of flow through a constriction and to ascertain the most appropriate method/s for reliably modelling the energy losses associated with bridge piers. To undertake the research 2D model results were compared to physical flume test undertaken by Liu et al (1957).
The research involved the development of a series of flumes within TUFLOW that were used to simulate a number of scenarios that were modelled in a physical flume by Liu et al (1957). These scenarios included constriction widths varying between 2 and 6 feet, as well as a number of pier combinations involving square shaft, single shaft, double shaft and round-ended narrow pier types. The TUFLOW flumes were of varying grid sizes to test the model’s ability to replicate the physical models results at varying grid resolutions. The afflux predicted by each of these scenarios within TUFLOW was compared to the results obtained from the physical flume tests.
| |||