Advertisement

Environmental Fluid Mechanics

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 695–738 | Cite as

Simulation-based optimization of in-stream structures design: rock vanes

  • A. Khosronejad
  • J. L. Kozarek
  • P. Diplas
  • C. Hill
  • R. Jha
  • P. Chatanantavet
  • N. Heydari
  • F. Sotiropoulos
Original Article
  • 286 Downloads

Abstract

We employ a three-dimensional coupled hydro-morphodynamic model, the Virtual Flow Simulator (VFS-Geophysics) in its Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes mode closed with \(k-\omega\) model, to simulate the turbulent flow and sediment transport in large-scale sand and gravel bed waterways under prototype and live-bed conditions. The simulation results are used to carry out systematic numerical experiments to develop design guidelines for rock vane structures. The numerical model is based on the Curvilinear Immersed Boundary approach to simulate flow and sediment transport processes in arbitrarily complex rivers with embedded rock structures. Three validation test cases are conducted to examine the capability of the model in capturing turbulent flow and sediment transport in channels with mobile-bed. Transport of sediment materials is handled using the Exner equation coupled with a transport equation for suspended load. Two representative meandering rivers, with gravel and sand beds, respectively, are selected to serve as the virtual test-bed for developing design guidelines for rock vane structures. The characteristics of these rivers are selected based on available field data. Initially guided by existing design guidelines, we consider numerous arrangements of rock vane structures computationally to identify optimal structure design and placement characteristics for a given river system.

Keywords

Bed-morphodynamics Computational fluid dynamics Rock vane URANS 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Cooperative Highway Research Program Grants NCHRP-HR 2433 and 2436. The computational resources were partly provided by the Center for Excellence in Wireless and Information Technology (CEWIT) of the College of Engineering and Applied Science at the Stony Brook University.

References

  1. 1.
    Abad J, Rhoads B, Guneralp I, Garcia M (2008) Flow structure at different stages in a meander-bend with bendway weirs. J Hydraul Eng 134(8):1052–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashley G (1990) Classification of large-scale subaqueous bedforms: a new look at an old problem. J Sediment Petrol 60:160–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhuiyan F, Hey R, Wormleaton P (2009) Effects of vanes and w-weir on sediment transport in meandering channels. J Hydraul Eng 135(5):339–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blanckaert K (2009) Saturation of curvature-induced secondary flow, energy losses, and turbulence in sharp open-channel bends: laboratory experiments, analysis, and modeling. J Geophys Res 114:F03015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blanckaert K (2010) Topographic steering, flow recirculation, velocity redistribution, and bed topography in sharp meander bends. Water Resour Res 46:W09506Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Borazjani I, Ge L, Sotiropoulos F (2008) Curvilinear immersed boundary method for simulating fluid structure interaction with complex 3D rigid bodies. J Comput Phys 227:7587–7620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chou YJ, Fringer OB (2008) Modeling dilute sediment suspension using large-eddy simulation with a dynamic mixed model. Phys Fluids 20:115103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Church M, Rood K (1983) Catalogue of alluvial river regime data. Technical report on University of British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crispell JK, Endreny T (2009) Hyporheic exchange flow around constructed in-channel structures and implications for restoration design. Hydrol Process 23(8):1158–1168.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crowley KD (1983) Large-scale bed configurations (macroforms), platte river basin, colorado and nebraska: primary structures and formative processes. Geol Soc Am Bull 94(1):117–133.  https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1983)94<117:LBCMPR>2.0.CO;2
  11. 11.
    Dietrich W, Day G, Parker G (1999) The fly river, papua new guinea: inferences about river dynamics, floodplain sedimentation and fate of sediment. In: Varieties of fluvial form, chap. WileyGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doll B, Grabow G, Hall K, Halley J, Harman W, Jennings G, Wise D (2003) Stream restoration: a natural channel design handbook. Technical reports on NC State University, Raleigh, NCGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Endreny TA, Soulman M (2011) Hydraulic analysis of river taining cross-vanes as part of post-restoration monitoring. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15:2119.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-2119-2011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Engelund F, Fredsoe J (1982) Sediment ripples and dunes. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 14:13–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ge L, Sotiropoulos F (2007) A numerical method for solving the 3D unsteady incompressible Navier–Stokes equations in curvilinear domains with complex immersed boundaries. J Comput Phys 225:1782–1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Han B, Chu H, Endreny T (2015) Streambed and water profile response to in-channel restoration structures in a laboratory meandering stream. Water Resour Res 51(11):9312–9324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Holmes RR, Garcia M (2008) Flow over bedforms in a large sand-bed river: a field investigation. J Hydraul Res 46(3):322–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jamieson E, Ruta M, Rennie C, Townsend R (2013) Monitoring stream barb performance in a semi-alluvial meandering channel: flow field dynamics and morphology. Ecohydrology 6(4):611–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jia Y, Xu Y, Wang S (2002) Numerical simulation of local scouring around a cylindrical pier. In: Proceedings of ICSF-1, 1st international conference on scour of foundations. Texas A&M University, TexasGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johannesson H, Parker G (1988) Proceedings: flow field and bed topography in river meanders. In: National conference on hydraulic engineering. ASCEGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnson PA, Hey RD, Brown ER, Rosgen DL (2002) Stream restoration in the vicinity of bridges. J Am Water Resour Assoc 38:55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Johnson PA, Hey RD, Rosgen DL (2001) Use of vanes for control of scour at vertical wall abutments. J Hydraul Eng 127(9):772–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kang S, Lightbody A, Hill C, Sotiropoulos F (2011) High-resolution numerical simulation of turbulence in natural waterways. Adv Water Resour 34(1):98–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kang S, Sotiropoulos F (2011) Flow phenomena and mechanisms in a field-scale experimental meandering channel with a pool-riffle sequence: insights gained via numerical simulation. J Geophys Res 116:F0301Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Khosronejad A, Diplas P, Sotiropoulos F (2017) Simulation-based approach for in-stream structures design: bendway weirs. J Environ Fluid Mech 17(1):1–31.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-016-9452-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khosronejad A, Hill C, Kang S, Sotiropoulos F (2013) Computational and experimental investigation of scour past laboratory models of stream restoration rock structures. Adv Water Resour 54:191–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Khosronejad A, Kang S, Borazjani I, Sotiropoulos F (2011) Curvilinear immersed boundary method for simulating coupled flow and bed morphodynamic interactions due to sediment transport phenomena. Adv Water Resour 34(7):829–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Khosronejad A, Kang S, Sotiropoulos F (2012) Experimental and computational investigation of local scour around bridge piers. Adv Water Resour 37:73–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Khosronejad A, Kozarek J, Diplas P, Sotiropoulos F (2015) Simulation-based approach for in-stream structure design: J-hook vane structures. J Hydraul Res 53(5):588–608.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2015.1093037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Khosronejad A, Kozarek J, Palmsted M, Sotiropoulos F (2015) Numerical simulation of large dunes in meandering streams and rivers with in-stream rock structures. Adv Water Resour 81:45–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Khosronejad A, Kozarek JL, Sotiropoulos F (2014) Simulation-based approach for stream restoration structure design: model development and validation. J Hydraul Eng 140(7):1–16Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Khosronejad A, Sotiropoulos F (2014) Numerical simulation of sand waves in a turbulent open channel flow. J Fluid Mech 753:150–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Khosronejad A, Sotiropoulos F (2017) On the genesis and evolution of barchan dunes: morphodynamics. J Fluid Mech 815:117–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kostaschuk R, Villard P (1996) Flow and sediment transport over large subaqueous dunes: Fraser River, Canada. Sedimentology 43:849–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kuhnle RA, Alonso VC, Shields DF (1999) Geometry of scour holes associated with \(90^{\circ }\) spur dikes. J Hydraul Eng 125(9):972–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lee HJ, Syvitski JP, Parker G, Orange d, Locat J, Hutton E, Imran J (2002) Distinguishing sediment waves from slope failure deposits: field examples, including the ’Humboldt slide’, and modelling results. Mar Geol 192:79–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Marelius F, Sinha SK (1998) Experimental investigation of flow past submerged vanes. J Hydraul Eng 124(5):542–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McCullah J, Gray D (2005) Environmentally sensitive channel and bank-protection measures. Technicla reports on National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    MWCG: Maryland waterway construction guidelines (2000) Techical reports, Water Management Administration, Maryland Department of the EnvironmentGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nittrouer J, Allison M, Campanella R (2008) Bedload transport rates for the lowermost Mississippi River. J Geophys Res.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JF000795 Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nittrouer JA, Mohrig D, Allison MA (2011) Punctuated sand transport in the lowermost Mississippi River. J Geophys Res 116:F04025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    NRCS: Stream restoration design, NEH 654. Technical reports on United States Department of Agriculture. National Resource Conservation Service, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Paola C, Voller VR (2005) A generalized exner equation for sediment mass balance. J Geophys Res 110:F04014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Parker G, Wilcock PR, Paola C, Dietrich WE, Pitlick J (2007) Physical basis for quasi-universal relations describing bankfull hydraulic geometry of single-thread gravel bed rivers. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 112:F04005Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Radspinner RR, Diplas P, Lightbody AF, Sotiropoulos F (2010) River training and ecological enhancement potential using in-stream structures. J Hydraul Eng 136:967–980.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)hy.1943-7900.0000260 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Raudkivi AJ (1967) Loose boundary hydraulics. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rosgen DL (2006) Cross vane, w-weir, and J-hook vane structures. Technical reports, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, COGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sotiropoulos F, Diplas P (2014) Design methods for in-stream flow control structures. In: Technical reports, transportation research board. National Academies of Science, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sotiropoulos F, Khosronejad A (2016) Multi-scale sand waves in environmental flows: insights gained by coupling large-eddy simulation with morphodynamics. Phys Fluids 28:021301.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4939987 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tang X, Knight D (2006) Sediment transport in river models with overbank flows. J Hydraul Eng 132(1):77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Van Rijn LC (1984c) Sediment transport, part iii: bed forms and alluvial roughness. J Hydraul Eng 110(12):1733–1754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Van Rijn LC (1993) Principles of sediment transport in rivers, estuaries, and coastal seas. Aqua Publications, BlokzijlGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wilcox DC (1994) Simulation of transition with two-equation trurbulence model. Am Inst Aeronaut Astronaut J 42(2):247–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wilkerson GV, Parker G (2011) Physical basis for quasi-universal relations describing bankfull hydraulic geometry for single-thread sand-bed rivers. J Hydraul Eng 137(7):739–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wu W, Rodi W, Wenka T (2000) 3D numerical modeling of flow and sediment transport in open channels. J Hydraul Eng 126(1):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Zedler EA, Street RL (2001) Large-eddy simulation of sediment transport: currents over ripples. J Hydraul Eng 127(6):444–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zhou T, Endreny TA (2012) Meander hydrodynamics initiated by river restoration deflectors. Hydrol Process 26(22):3378–3392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Zhou T, Endreny TA (2013) Reshaping of the hyporheic zone beneath river restoration structures: flume and hydrodynamic experiments. Water Resour Res 49(8):5009–5020.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20384 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Khosronejad
    • 1
  • J. L. Kozarek
    • 2
  • P. Diplas
    • 3
  • C. Hill
    • 4
  • R. Jha
    • 5
  • P. Chatanantavet
    • 6
  • N. Heydari
    • 3
  • F. Sotiropoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Civil Engineering DepartmentStony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.St. Anthony Falls LaboratoryUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.Civil and Environmental Engineering DepartmentLehigh UniversityBethlehemUSA
  4. 4.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  5. 5.Water Wastewater Consultant, EMA Inc.St. PaulUSA
  6. 6.University of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations