DSpace Repository

Do the Volume-of-Fluid and the Two-Phase Euler Compete for Modeling a Spillway Aerator?

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Mendes, L. S. pt_BR
dc.contributor.author Lara, J. L. pt_BR
dc.contributor.author Viseu, T. pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor Jorge Matos pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor Sebastien Erpicum pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor Anton J. Schleiss pt_BR
dc.date.accessioned 2021-11-18T16:21:16Z pt_BR
dc.date.accessioned 2021-12-10T11:52:23Z
dc.date.available 2021-11-18T16:21:16Z pt_BR
dc.date.available 2021-12-10T11:52:23Z
dc.date.issued 2021-11-03 pt_BR
dc.identifier.citation https://doi.org/10.3390/w13213092 pt_BR
dc.identifier.uri https://repositorio.lnec.pt/jspui/handle/123456789/1014203
dc.description.abstract Spillway design is key to the effective and safe operation of dams. Typically, the flow is characterized by high velocity, high levels of turbulence, and aeration. In the last two decades, advances in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) made available several numerical tools to aid hydraulic structures engineers. The most frequent approach is to solve the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations using an Euler type model combined with the volume-of-fluid (VoF) method. Regardless of a few applications, the complete two-phase Euler is still considered to demand exorbitant computational resources. An assessment is performed in a spillway offset aerator, comparing the two-phase volume-of-fluid (TPVoF) with the complete two-phase Euler (CTPE). Both models are included in the OpenFOAM® toolbox. As expected, the TPVoF results depend highly on the mesh, not showing convergence in the maximum chute bottom pressure and the lower-nappe aeration, tending to null aeration as resolution increases. The CTPE combined with the k–ω SST Sato turbulence model exhibits the most accurate results and mesh convergence in the lower-nappe aeration. Surprisingly, intermediate mesh resolutions are sufficient to surpass the TPVoF performance with reasonable calculation efforts. Moreover, compressibility, flow bulking, and several entrained air effects in the flow are comprehended. Despite not reproducing all aspects of the flow with acceptable accuracy, the complete two-phase Euler demonstrated an efficient cost-benefit performance and high value in spillway aerated flows. Nonetheless, further developments are expected to enhance the efficiency and stability of this model. pt_BR
dc.language.iso eng pt_BR
dc.publisher MDPI pt_BR
dc.rights openAccess pt_BR
dc.subject Spillway aerator pt_BR
dc.subject Aeration pt_BR
dc.subject CFD pt_BR
dc.subject Two-phase Euler pt_BR
dc.subject Volume-of-fluid pt_BR
dc.subject Hydraulic structures pt_BR
dc.title Do the Volume-of-Fluid and the Two-Phase Euler Compete for Modeling a Spillway Aerator? pt_BR
dc.type article pt_BR
dc.description.pages 23p pt_BR
dc.description.comments Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). pt_BR
dc.description.volume 13, 3092 pt_BR
dc.description.sector DHA/NRE pt_BR
dc.description.magazine water pt_BR
dc.contributor.peer-reviewed SIM pt_BR
dc.contributor.academicresearchers SIM pt_BR
dc.contributor.arquivo SIM pt_BR


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account