Difference between revisions of "TUFLOW 2D Hydraulic Structures"

From Tuflow
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 5: Line 5:
 
The TUFLOW 2D solution automatically predicts the majority of “macro” losses due to the expansion and contraction of water through a constriction, or around a bend, provided the resolution of the grid is sufficiently fine ([http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/Flow%20Through%20an%20Abrupt%20Constriction%20-%202D%20Hydrodynamic%20Performance%20and%20Influence%20of%20Spatial%20Resolution,%20Barton,%202001.pdf Barton, 2001]; [http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/Modelling%20of%20Bends%20and%20Hydraulic%20Structures%20in%20a%202D%20Scheme,%20Syme,%202001.pdf Syme, 2001]; [http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Technical_Memos/Modelling%20Bridge%20Piers%20in%202D%20using%20TUFLOW.pdf Ryan, 2013]). Where the 2D model is not of fine enough resolution to simulate the “micro” losses (e.g. from bridge piers, vena contracta, losses in the vertical (3rd) dimension), additional form loss coefficients and/or modifications to the cells widths and flow height need to be added.  This can be done by using flow constrictions.   
 
The TUFLOW 2D solution automatically predicts the majority of “macro” losses due to the expansion and contraction of water through a constriction, or around a bend, provided the resolution of the grid is sufficiently fine ([http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/Flow%20Through%20an%20Abrupt%20Constriction%20-%202D%20Hydrodynamic%20Performance%20and%20Influence%20of%20Spatial%20Resolution,%20Barton,%202001.pdf Barton, 2001]; [http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/Modelling%20of%20Bends%20and%20Hydraulic%20Structures%20in%20a%202D%20Scheme,%20Syme,%202001.pdf Syme, 2001]; [http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Technical_Memos/Modelling%20Bridge%20Piers%20in%202D%20using%20TUFLOW.pdf Ryan, 2013]). Where the 2D model is not of fine enough resolution to simulate the “micro” losses (e.g. from bridge piers, vena contracta, losses in the vertical (3rd) dimension), additional form loss coefficients and/or modifications to the cells widths and flow height need to be added.  This can be done by using flow constrictions.   
  
−
The additional or “micro” losses, can be derived from information in publications such as ''Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways'' ([http://www.ciccp.es/ImgWeb/Castilla%20y%20Leon/Documentaci%C3%B3n%20T%C3%A9cnica/Hydraulics%20of%20Bridge%20Waterways%20(1978).pdf FHA, 1973]).
+
The TUFLOW form loss coefficients can be derived from information in publications such as ''Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways'' ([http://www.ciccp.es/ImgWeb/Castilla%20y%20Leon/Documentaci%C3%B3n%20T%C3%A9cnica/Hydraulics%20of%20Bridge%20Waterways%20(1978).pdf FHA, 1973]). For example, backwater caused by introduction of piers in a bridge constriction is dependent on the ratio that the area of the piers relative to the gross area of the bridge opening, the type of piers (or piling in the case of pile bents) and the angularity of the piers with the direction of flood flow.  
  
−
 
+
<li> Calculate the ratio of the water area occupied by piers to the gross water area of the constriction (both based on the)normal water surface. This value is assigned the letter J in the FHA documentation.</li>
−
, need to be either:
+
<li> Use the FHA (1978)Incremental backwater coefficient for piers" data to calculate Kp. This is the value which will be entered into TUFLOW as the form loss coefficients.</li>
−
o Distributed evenly over the FC cells across the waterway by dividing the overall additional loss coefficient by the number of cells (in the direction of flow); or
+
<li> Digitise 2d_lfcsh or 2d_fcsh_ inputs using either a line or polygon feature. When applying FCs the best approach is to view the structure as a collection of 2D cells representing the whole structure, rather than being too specific about the representation of each individual cell:
−
o Assigned unevenly (e.g. more at the cells with the bridge piers), however, the total of the loss coefficients should be equivalent to the required overall additional loss coefficient.
+
* Line features will apply the form loss value to a single row of cells across the waterway. The TUFLOW form loss input should be entered representing the total value (eg. FC = 0.2).
−
• The head loss across key structures should be reviewed, and if necessary, benchmarked against other methods (e.g. using HEC-RAS or Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways).  Note that a well-designed 2D model will be more accurate than a 1D model, provided that any “micro” losses are incorporated.
+
* Polygon features will distribute the form loss between multiple cells across the width of the bridge and across the waterway. Due to this the TUFLOW form loss input should be entered as the total value per unit width in the direction of flow (eg. FC = 0.2/20m = 0.01).</li>
−
• Ultimately the best approach is to calibrate the structure through adjustment of the additional “micro” losses – but this, of course, requires good calibration data!
+
<li> The head loss across key structures should be reviewed, and if necessary, benchmarked against other methods (Recorded calibration data, HEC-RAS).  Note that a well-designed 2D model will be more accurate than a 1D model, provided that any “micro” losses are incorporated.</li>
−
An example of how to apply 2D FCs and a 2D FCSH to a bridge structure is shown in Figure 6 8 and Figure 6 9.  The loss coefficient quoted in the figure is an example, and is not necessarily applicable to other structures.  Every structure is invariably different!
+
<li> TUFLOW check files should also be reviewed to confirm that the correct form losses are being applied.</li>
−
When applying FCs the best approach is to view the structure as a collection of 2D cells representing the whole structure, rather than being too specific about the representation of each individual cell.  A good approach is to use a 2d_po layer to extract time histories of the water levels upstream and downstream of the structure and of the flow and flow area upstream, downstream and through the structure (see Section 9.5).   
+
<li> The flow area through the structure should also be reviewed.   
−
Of particular importance is to check that the correct flow area through the structure is being modelled.  Digitise a 2d_po QA line through the structure from bank to bank, and use this output to cross-check the flow area of the 2D FC cells is appropriate (the QA line will take into account any adjustments to the 2D cells due to FC obverts and changes to the cell side flow widths).  If the overall structure flow area is not correct, then the velocities within the structure will not be correct and therefore the energy losses due to the changes in velocity direction and magnitude and additional form losses will not be well modelled.
+
* Digitise a 2d_po QA line through the structure from bank to bank, and use this output to cross-check the flow area of the 2D FC cells is appropriate (the QA line will take into account any adjustments to the 2D cells due to FC obverts and changes to the cell side flow widths).  If the overall structure flow area is not correct, then the velocities within the structure will not be correct and therefore the energy losses due to the changes in velocity direction and magnitude and additional form losses will not be well modelled.
 +
</ol>

Revision as of 05:18, 24 September 2015

2D flow constriction commands/layers are the recommended approach for modeling bridges:

  • Read GIS FC Shape == 2d_lfcsh... ;
  • Read GIS Layered FC Shape == 2d_fcsh_...

The TUFLOW 2D solution automatically predicts the majority of “macro” losses due to the expansion and contraction of water through a constriction, or around a bend, provided the resolution of the grid is sufficiently fine (Barton, 2001; Syme, 2001; Ryan, 2013). Where the 2D model is not of fine enough resolution to simulate the “micro” losses (e.g. from bridge piers, vena contracta, losses in the vertical (3rd) dimension), additional form loss coefficients and/or modifications to the cells widths and flow height need to be added. This can be done by using flow constrictions.

The TUFLOW form loss coefficients can be derived from information in publications such as Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways (FHA, 1973). For example, backwater caused by introduction of piers in a bridge constriction is dependent on the ratio that the area of the piers relative to the gross area of the bridge opening, the type of piers (or piling in the case of pile bents) and the angularity of the piers with the direction of flood flow.

  • Calculate the ratio of the water area occupied by piers to the gross water area of the constriction (both based on the)normal water surface. This value is assigned the letter J in the FHA documentation.
  • Use the FHA (1978)Incremental backwater coefficient for piers" data to calculate Kp. This is the value which will be entered into TUFLOW as the form loss coefficients.
  • Digitise 2d_lfcsh or 2d_fcsh_ inputs using either a line or polygon feature. When applying FCs the best approach is to view the structure as a collection of 2D cells representing the whole structure, rather than being too specific about the representation of each individual cell:
    • Line features will apply the form loss value to a single row of cells across the waterway. The TUFLOW form loss input should be entered representing the total value (eg. FC = 0.2).
    • Polygon features will distribute the form loss between multiple cells across the width of the bridge and across the waterway. Due to this the TUFLOW form loss input should be entered as the total value per unit width in the direction of flow (eg. FC = 0.2/20m = 0.01).
  • The head loss across key structures should be reviewed, and if necessary, benchmarked against other methods (Recorded calibration data, HEC-RAS). Note that a well-designed 2D model will be more accurate than a 1D model, provided that any “micro” losses are incorporated.
  • TUFLOW check files should also be reviewed to confirm that the correct form losses are being applied.
  • The flow area through the structure should also be reviewed.
    • Digitise a 2d_po QA line through the structure from bank to bank, and use this output to cross-check the flow area of the 2D FC cells is appropriate (the QA line will take into account any adjustments to the 2D cells due to FC obverts and changes to the cell side flow widths). If the overall structure flow area is not correct, then the velocities within the structure will not be correct and therefore the energy losses due to the changes in velocity direction and magnitude and additional form losses will not be well modelled.
    • Retrieved from "https://wiki.tuflow.com/w/index.php?title=TUFLOW_2D_Hydraulic_Structures&oldid=8772"