CFD Modelling of a Physical Scale Model: assessing model skill. Kristof Verelst FHR, Antwerp

Transcription

1 CFD Modelling of a Physical Scale Model: assessing model skill Kristof Verelst FHR, Antwerp

2 Introduction Introduction WL_13_61 CFD simulations of hydrodynamics for hydraulic structures (00_085) Aim: compare results of CFD simulations with scale model measurements for hydraulic structures Simulations with OpenFoam and Fine Marine 3 hydraulic structures Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT (*) Mud capturing device for lock Outlet of fish passage in river CFD model of the scale model Execution: S. Olivetti (Antea) *Flood Control Area with Controlled Reduced Tide

3 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT FCA-CRT Bergenmeersen FCA-CRT Bergenmeersen

4 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT Physical scale model Scale 1:8 5 different FCA-CRT Scale model research for various geometry stilling basin Measure relation Q h (Scheldt level) Visualisation flow pattern location of hydraulic jump Measurement of near bottom velocity

5 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT CFD model CFD model of scale model Simulations with OpenFoam and Fine Marine Mesh generated with Hexpress 2DV simulations; k-e turbulence model Boundary conditions: discharges from scale model No calibration carried out Figures: prototype dimensions Scheldt Inlet (V) Polder Outlet (Outflow)

6 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT 1 Comparison flow pattern Scheldt level: TAW m Qualitative comparison Physical model OpenFoam Fine Marine ! Scale figures 3 3

7 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT Comparison velocity profiles Grid sensitivity test 10 m 20 m 30 m 30 m 20 m 10 m Grid 0 ( cells) Grid 1 ( cells) Grid 2 ( cells) Grid 3 ( cells) No velocity profiles measured in physical model

8 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT Comparison near bottom velocity OpenFoam Fine Marine Polder Level 3.60 m 4.70 m 5.45 m Physical model CFD OpenFoam CFD Fine Marine Location Velocity Velocity Rel. Error Velocity Rel. Error [m/s] [m/s] [%] [m/s] [%] X=10 m X=20 m X=30 m X=10 m X=20 m X=30 m X=10 m X=20 m X=30 m m 20 m 10 m

9 Inlet and outlet structure for FCA-CRT Comparison discharge Previous simulations: Discharge from scale model as boundary condition Simulation to define (iteratively) discharge through construction Scheldt level: TAW m polder level: TAW +4.7 m Physical model OpenFoam Relative Error m³/s m³/s -7.6 % Scheldt Outlet (Ouflow) Fixed wall Inlet (V)

10 Mud capturing device Deurganckdok Lock DGD Mud capturing device Deurganckdok Lock Waasland harbour Bron:

11 Mud capturing device Deurganckdok Lock Physical model Scale 1:25 Aim: Equal distribution discharge over 12 openings Measure velocity of jet in Deurganckdok and Waasland harbour Tests for 2 flow directions (DGD to WLH and WLH to DGD) Deurganckdok Waasland harbour

12 Mud capturing device Deurganckdok Lock CFD model Simulations with OpenFoam Mesh generated with Hexpress Numerical model of scale model; k-e turbulence model Boundary conditions: discharge from scale model No calibration carried out Waasland harbour Deurganckdok

13 Mud capturing device Deurganckdok Lock Grid sensivity analysis Flow from Waasland harbour to Deurganckdok 3 meshes Mesh 1 ( Mesh 2 ( Mesh 3 ( ): 1.0 x 10 6 cells ): 3.0 x 10 6 cells ): 3.5 x 10 6 cells 3 4 Flow Direction 1 2! Velocity profile physical model ( )

14 Mud capturing Device Deurganckdok Lock [%] Comparison of discharge distribution Flow from Deurganckdok to Waasland harbour! Underestimation of total discharge Flow Direction

15 Mud capturing Device Deurganckdok Lock Comparison of flow patterns Flow from Waasland harbour to Deurganckdok Waasland harbour Flow Direction

16 Mud capturing Device Deurganckdok Lock Comparison of flow pattern surface velocity Flow from Deurganckdok to Waasland harbour Waasland harbour CFD Exp Flow Direction

17 Conclusion Conclusion Comparison between results CFD model and physical model for two hydraulic structures Show good agreement Methods for assessing model skill Qualitative comparison of flow pattern Comparison of vector fields, flow profiles Comparison of discharge Availability of physical model measurements

18 Thank you for your attention Questions?