Drag coefficient of vegetation in flow modeling Z. HU*, M.J.F. STIVE, T.J.ZITMAN - Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Delft University of Technology,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Turbulent flow over groups of urban-like obstacles
Advertisements

1 WATER WAVE TRANSFORMATION DUE TO BOTTOM OBSTACLES I. Selezov, V. Tkachenko, G. Fratamico Institute of Hydromechanics, NASU, Kiev, Ukrain The University.
Giorgio Crasto University of Cagliari - ITALY Forest Modelling A canopy model for WindSim 4.5.
Development of an In-Situ Test for Direct Evaluation of the Liquefaction Resistance of Soils K. H. Stokoe, II, E. M. Rathje and B.R. Cox University of.
Experiment #5 Momentum Deficit Behind a Cylinder
Ch 24 pages Lecture 8 – Viscosity of Macromolecular Solutions.
..perhaps the hardest place to use Bernoulli’s equation (so don’t)
Reading: Text, (p40-42, p49-60) Foken 2006 Key questions:
Horizontal Convective Rolls Asai papers & Simulations w/ ARPS.
Sensible heat flux Latent heat flux Radiation Ground heat flux Surface Energy Budget The exchanges of heat, moisture and momentum between the air and the.
0.1m 10 m 1 km Roughness Layer Surface Layer Planetary Boundary Layer Troposphere Stratosphere height The Atmospheric (or Planetary) Boundary Layer is.
Chapter 9 Solids and Fluids (c).
Engineering H191 - Drafting / CAD The Ohio State University Gateway Engineering Education Coalition Lab 4P. 1Autumn Quarter Transport Phenomena Lab 4.
MECH 221 FLUID MECHANICS (Fall 06/07) Chapter 9: FLOWS IN PIPE
DETAILED TURBULENCE CALCULATIONS FOR OPEN CHANNEL FLOW
Presenter:Shuai Zhang Institute of Aerospace and Material Engineering
Chapter 4 Fluid Flow, Heat Transfer, and Mass Transfer:
Metago Environmental Engineers PREDICTION OF THE BEACH PROFILE OF HIGH DENSITY THICKENED TAILINGS FROM RHEOLOGICAL AND SMALL SCALE TRIAL DEPOSITION DATA.
Fluid mechanics 3.1 – key points
HYDRAULICS AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT: RIVERS AND TURBIDITY CURRENTS
Fixed and Fluidized Beds
Advisor Martin Wosnik Graduate Co-Advisor Kyle Charmanski Characterize blade design/turbine performance in free stream in student wind tunnel (and validate.
Numerical study of wave and submerged breakwater interaction (Data-driven and Physical-based Model for characterization of Hydrology, Hydraulics, Oceanography.
Reynolds Number (Re) Re = R = A/P V = mean velocity  /  =  (which is kinematic viscosity) Re = VR(  /  ), where Driving Forces Resisting Force Re.
Numerical modelling of scour around complex 3D structures Greg Melling 1, Justin Dix 1, Stephen Turnock 2 and Richard Whitehouse 3 1 Ocean and Earth Science,
Outlook Results (Model Modification) Results (Model Parameters and Performance) Application and Improvement of Raupach’s Shear Stress Partitioning Model.
Observation and simulation of flow in vegetation canopies Roger H. Shaw University of California, Davis.
Kemerovo State University(Russia) Mathematical Modeling of Large Forest Fires Valeriy A. Perminov
LL-III physics-based distributed hydrologic model in Blue River Basin and Baron Fork Basin Li Lan (State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower.
Ch 24 pages Lecture 7 – Diffusion and Molecular Shape and Size.
LECTURE 8 LAYER-AVERAGED GOVERNING EQUATIONS FOR TURBIDITY CURRENTS
A particle-gridless hybrid methods for incompressible flows
Flow Energy PE + KE = constant between any two points  PE (loss) =  KE (gain) Rivers are non-conservative; some energy is lost from the system and can.
The Governing Equations The hydrodynamic model adopted here is the one based on the hydrostatic pressure approximation and the boussinesq approximation,
A canopy model of mean winds through urban areas O. COCEAL and S. E. BELCHER University of Reading, UK.
Rick Saylor 1, Barry Baker 1, Pius Lee 2, Daniel Tong 2,3, Li Pan 2 and Youhua Tang 2 1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Air Resources Laboratory.
Lecture Objectives Unsteady State Simulation Example Modeling of PM.
MIKE 11 IntroductionNovember 2002Part 1 Introduction to MIKE 11 Part 1 General Hydrodynamics within MIKE 11 –Basic Equations –Flow Types Numerical Scheme.
TEMPLATE DESIGN ©  Convection-dispersion equations coupled with deposition kinetics.  deposition rate coefficient (k.
Velasco, D., Bateman, A., DeMedina,V. Hydraulic and Hydrology Dept. Universidad Politécnica de Catalunya (UPC). Barcelona. España. RCEM th IAHR Symposium.
Fluid Dynamics Stream Ecosystems. Fluid Dynamics Lecture Plan First consider fluids, stress relationships and fluid types Then consider factors affecting.
General Description of coastal hydrodynamic model.
Lecture Outline Chapter 9 College Physics, 7 th Edition Wilson / Buffa / Lou © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc.
NATO ASI Conference, Kyiv MODELING AND SIMULATION OF TURBULENT PENETRATIVE CONVECTION AND POLLUTANT DISPERSION ABOVE THE URBAN HEAT ISLAND IN STABLY.
ONE-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS ON BEDEVOLUTION ACCOMPANING BANK EROSION Satoru Nakanishi Hokkaido University Graduate School Kazuyoshi Hasegawa Hokkaido University.
Nira L. Salant, Marwan A. Hassan Department of Geography, University of British Columbia Physical effects of streambed periphyton on particle deposition.

Environmental Hydrodynamics Lab. Yonsei University, KOREA RCEM D finite element modeling of bed elevation change in a curved channel S.-U. Choi,
BOUNDARY LAYERS Zone of flow immediately in vicinity of boundary Motion of fluid is retarded by frictional resistance Boundary layer extends away from.
Sediment Transport Modelling Lab. The Law of the Wall The law of the wall states that the average velocity of a turbulent flow at a certain point is proportional.
Pipe flow analysis.
Fluid Mechanics-I Spring 2010 Lecture # Course Outline  Introduction to Fluids and Fluid Properties  Fluid Statics  Integral Relations for fluid.
Internal Flow: General Considerations. Entrance Conditions Must distinguish between entrance and fully developed regions. Hydrodynamic Effects: Assume.
Modeling of heat and mass transfer during gas adsorption by aerosol particles in air pollution plumes T. Elperin1, A. Fominykh1, I. Katra2, and B. Krasovitov1.
FISHERIES POSTER SESSION
TUTORIAL 3.
Enhancement of Wind Stress and Hurricane Waves Simulation
Particle (s) motion.
Subject Name: FLUID MECHANICS
M. Anderson1, J. Irish1, J. Smith2, & M. Mousavi1
Mechanical Separation
Fluid properties 1.
FLUID MECHANICS REVIEW
Internal Flow: General Considerations
Mesoscale Simulation of Blood Flow in Small Vessels
Tuesday, March 21, :00-12:00 Noon 129 Hayes/Healey Hall
Convective Heat Transfer
Nature’s drag queens: how vegetation impacts aquatic flows† Marco Ghisalberti Centre for Water Research, University of Western Australia DIALOG VII.
Fundamentals of TRANSPORT MECHANISMs
Presentation transcript:

Drag coefficient of vegetation in flow modeling Z. HU*, M.J.F. STIVE, T.J.ZITMAN - Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands T. SUZUKI - Flanders Hydraulics Research/ Ghent University, Belgium Delft University of Technology Department of Hydraulic Engineering *Contact: METHODS INTRODUCTION Cheng [2011] proposed a special-defined Reynolds number R v by using a vegetation-related hydraulic radius r v as its length scales. This Reynolds number is modified to count the flow and canopy that vary vertically: RESULTS The results of C D value and the velocity profiles are shown in Fig 3. and 4. The vertical axis is scaled by the vegetation height h. Overall, Equation (6) gives a fairly good prediction and the results of velocity fit the measured data well. Fig 3. shows when R v is in the range of 1   10 5 where C D is 1-1.2, the prediction of fits well with the experiment data from Patil [2009]. But when R v is small (1   10 4 ), the relation underpredicts the C D value, resulting in higher velocity in the canopy (z/h ≤ 1) than the experiment data from Ghisalberti and Nepf [2004] (see Fig 4). Figure 3. The left plate is the model results of C D value; The right plate is the comparison of velocity profile u Figure 4. Same as above REFERENCE Bouma, T. J., M. B. De Vries, and P. M. J. Herman (2010), Comparing ecosystem engineering efficiency of two plant species with contrasting growth strategies, Ecology, 91(9), 2696–2704. Cheng, Nguyen (2011): Hydraulic radius for evaluating resistance induced by simulated emergent vegetation in open-channel flows, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 137(9), 995–1004 Fagherazzi, S. et al. (2012), Numerical models of salt marsh evolution: Ecological, geomorphic, and climatic factors, Reviews of Geophysics, Ghisalberti, M., and H. M. Nepf (2004), The limited growth of vegetated shear layers, Water Resources Research, 40(7), Morison, J. R., O’Brien, M. P., Johnson, J. W. and Schaaf, S. A. (1950), The Force Exerted by Surface Waves on Piles, Pertoleum transactions, Vol. 189,1950 Nepf, H. M. (1999), Drag, turbulence, and diffusion in flow through emergent Water Resources Research, 35(2), 479–489. Patil, S., X. Li, C. Li, B. Y. F. Tam, C. Y. Song, Y. P. Chen, and Q. Zhang (2009), Longitudinal dispersion in wave-current-vegetation flow, Physical Oceanography, 19(1), 45–61. Tanino, Nepf (2008): Laboratory investigation of mean drag in a random array of rigid, emergent cylinders, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 134(1), 34–41. Uittenbogaard, (2003): Modelling turbulence in vegetated aquatic flows, paper presented at International Workshop on Riparian Forest Vegetated Channels, Trento, Italy. The interaction between aquatic plants and hydrodynamic force and its implication on the long-term landscape development have received intention from ecology, geology and hydraulic engineering. Many numerical models have been developed to quantify the vegetation effect on the hydrodynamics (Uittenbogaard [2003], Nepf [1999]) and sediment transport (Fagherazzi [2012] for a review). The vegetation resists flow, damps waves and alters the turbulent intensity predominantly though exerting additional drag force on the water particles passing it. In these models, the drag force is quantified by the quadratic law (Equation 1.) originated from Morison [1950], which uses a drag coefficient to characterize the average drag force provided by one stem: Where  0 is the water density, u(z) is the horizontal flow velocity at height z. a (z) is defined as: Where n (z) and d (z) are the number of stems per unit area [m-2] and average stem diameter [m] respectively. The drag coefficient C D is the measure of the ability of the plants to reduce the hydrodynamic force and engineering its own environment (Bouma [2010]) and the key to the success of these models. The C D for an isolated cylinder is well established (Sumer and FredsØe [2006]). But C D value for multi- plant structures is difficult to determine, because it is closely related to both the plants property and the local hydrodynamic conditions. But many experiment studies have showed that the C D for vegetation varies greatly according the vegetation density, diameter, stiffness as well as the hydrodynamic conditions. (Cheng [2011], Tanino [2008]) But in all these studies, the C D value is derived from one-dimensional momentum equation under uniform flow. In nature, the vegetation structures vary greatly in verticals in terms of a (z) (see Figure 1. and 2), which implies that the C D value should be a function of depth as well. In this study, the hypothesis is made that the C D relation proposed by Cheng [2011] can be modified into depth-variable relation. The modified relation depends on the local flow conditions and canopy properties in the vertical. This relation is implemented in an iterative scheme of a 1DV flow model. The modeling results are compared with experiment data of flow through rigid vegetation. Figure 1. Spartina Spp. (salt marsh grass), from Tracey Saxby (2004) Figure 2. Spartina alterniflora meadow, from z/h v is the Kinematic viscosity, r v (z) is defined as the ratio of the volume occupied by water per unit area in a certain depth (  h) to the total front area of vegetation per unit area.  (z) is the solid area of vegetation per unit area. Since the vegetation Reynolds number R v (z) varies with flow velocity u (z) and plant characters r (z) in depth, the C D is modified to be a function of z as well. The original formulation (Cheng, [2011]) is modified (which is the new aspect of this paper): Hence, C D in Equation (1) is substituted by Equation (6) by an iterative scheme in the 1 DV model (Uittenbogaard, [2003]). The vegetation is schematized as rigid cylinders and the following vegetation-related drag force has been included explicitly. The model is used to revisit previous flume experiments. The predicted mean velocity profile and C D are compared with the experiment data in previous studies. z/h C D value [-] U (z) [cm/s] C D value [-] U (z) [cm/s]