Numerical Simulation of Benchmark Problem 2

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PARMA UNIVERSITY SIMULATIONS OF THE ISOLATED BUILDING TEST CASE F. AURELI, A. MARANZONI & P. MIGNOSA DICATeA, Parma University Parco Area delle Scienze.
Advertisements

Fluent Overview Ahmadi/Nazridoust ME 437/537/637.
Outline Overview of Pipe Flow CFD Process ANSYS Workbench
Reinaldo Garcia, PhD A proposal for testing two-dimensional models to use in the National Flood Insurance Program.
RAMS/BRAMS Basic equations and some numerical issues.
Two-dimensional dam break flooding simulation: a GIS embedded approach. Massimiliano Cannata and Roberto Marzocchi IST-SUPSI, Institute of Earth Sciences.
Construction of 3D Active Region Fields and Plasma Properties using Measurements (Magnetic Fields & Others) S. T. Wu, A. H. Wang & Yang Liu 1 Center for.
A nearfield Tsunami warning system in Taiwan by unit tsunami method Po-Fei Chen 1, Yun-Ru Chen 2, Bor-Yaw Lin 1,3, Wu-Ting Tsai 2 1. Institute of Geophysics,
Multi-scale Simulation of tsunami from Tohoku Earthquake and Diffracted Tsunami Waves in Hokkaido ZHU AIYU, Zhang Dongning Institute of Geophysics, China.
Accurate Numerical Treatment of the Source Terms in the Non-linear Shallow Water Equations J.G. Zhou, C.G. Mingham, D.M. Causon and D.M. Ingram Centre.
Shallow water equations in 1D: Method of characteristics
Use of satellite altimeter data for validating large scale hydraulic models Matt Wilson, University of Exeter Doug Alsdorf, Ohio State University Paul.
HEC-RAS.
Modeling Fluid Phenomena -Vinay Bondhugula (25 th & 27 th April 2006)
Temperature Gradient Limits for Liquid-Protected Divertors S. I. Abdel-Khalik, S. Shin, and M. Yoda ARIES Meeting (June 2004) G. W. Woodruff School of.
Chapter 5 Solutions for Interacting Waves Using A MCM 5.1 Governing Equations and Hierarchy Eq.s 5.2 An Example of Applying A Mode Coupling Method (MCM)
Model Simulation Studies of Hurricane Isabel in Chesapeake Bay Jian Shen Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences College of William and Mary.
A TWO-FLUID NUMERICAL MODEL OF THE LIMPET OWC CG Mingham, L Qian, DM Causon and DM Ingram Centre for Mathematical Modelling and Flow Analysis Manchester.
Juan Carlos Ortiz Royero Ph.D.
© 2011 Autodesk Freely licensed for use by educational institutions. Reuse and changes require a note indicating that content has been modified from the.
WP3 : Flood Propagation Computation On The ‘Isolated Building Test Case’ And The ‘Model City Flooding Experiment ’ B. Noël, Soares S., Y. Zech Université.
FUNDAMENTAL EQUATIONS, CONCEPTS AND IMPLEMENTATION
The University of MississippiNational Center for Computational Hydroscience and Engineering Rainfall runoff modeling in agricultural watershed using 2D.
© Arturo S. Leon, BSU, Spring 2010
Numerical study of wave and submerged breakwater interaction (Data-driven and Physical-based Model for characterization of Hydrology, Hydraulics, Oceanography.
Hybrid WENO-FD and RKDG Method for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws
Fritz R. Fiedler University of Idaho Department of Civil Engineering Simulation of Shallow Discontinuous Flow over Complex Infiltrating Terrain.
Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(11): , 2011 ISSN Monte Carlo Optimization to Solve a Two-Dimensional Inverse Heat.
Solution of the St Venant Equations / Shallow-Water equations of open channel flow Dr Andrew Sleigh School of Civil Engineering University of Leeds, UK.
Partial Differential Equations Finite Difference Approximation.
Global models with 1 km resolution possible in near future Followed in Projects outside COSMO: ICON; NCAR- NOAA-Fort Collins; Earth simulator quasi regular.
Environmental and Water Resources Engineering Division Civil Engineering Dr. Soumendra Nath Kuiry Assistant Professor Hurricane Gustav (2008) Simulation.
Numerical Schemes for Streamer Discharges at Atmospheric Pressure
Modelling Tsunami Waves using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) R.A. DALRYMPLE and B.D. ROGERS Department of Civil Engineering, Johns Hopkins University.
The Governing Equations The hydrodynamic model adopted here is the one based on the hydrostatic pressure approximation and the boussinesq approximation,
COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL APPROACHES FOR LONG WAVE RUNUP by ERTAN DEMİRBAŞ MAY, 2002.
WORKSHOP ON LONG-WAVE RUNUP MODELS Khairil Irfan Sitanggang and Patrick Lynett Dept of Civil & Ocean Engineering, Texas A&M University.
1 Modeling of Nonlinear Active Circuits Using FDTD Approach Iman Farghadan & Ahmad Fayaz Department of Electrical Engineering K.N.Toosi.
Xiaoming Wang and Philip L.-F. Liu Cornell University
Numerical Evaluation of Tsunami Wave Hazards in Harbors along the South China Sea Huimin H. Jing 1, Huai Zhang 1, David A. Yuen 1, 2, 3 and Yaolin Shi.
Two Dimensional simulation of a Dam Break wave propagation for the isolated building test case University of Pavia Gabriella Petaccia Impact Workshop...
Darryl Michael/GE CRD Fields and Waves Lesson 3.6 ELECTROSTATICS - Numerical Simulation.
CEE 262A H YDRODYNAMICS Lecture 13 Wind-driven flow in a lake.
International Workshop on Long-Wave Runup Models 2-Dimensional Model with Boundary-Fitting Cell System Benchmark #2:Tsunami Runup onto a Complex 3Dimensional.
Account of the paper, “Stability of the (Western) Sargasso Sea Subtropical Frontal Zone (SFZ),” by Halliwell, Peng, and Olson (1994). LT Keir D. Stahlhut,
CHANGSHENG CHEN, HEDONG LIU, And ROBERT C. BEARDSLEY
SPH weekly meeting Free surface flows in Code Saturne Results 23/11/2009 Olivier Cozzi.
School of Aerospace Engineering MITE Numerical Simulation of Centrifugal Compressor Stall and Surge Saeid NiaziAlex SteinLakshmi N. Sankar School of Aerospace.
HydroEurope Final Presentation Pranav DHAWAN, Wooseok JANG, Kalpesh MALANI, Pablo SANCHEZ HERNANDEZ Clément LUCAS, Anna MSIGWA, Hakim OUERTANI, Malo LAMBERT.
HEAT TRANSFER Problems with FEM solution
A probabilistic approach for the waves generated by a submarine landslide Patrick J. Lynett Civil Engineering, University of Southern California Arturo.
FLOOTSI Development of GIS-GPU-based flood-simulation model and its application to flood-risk assessment Examples of applications Augusto Maidana,
National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Date of download: 10/16/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Enhancement of Wind Stress and Hurricane Waves Simulation
A TWO-FLUID NUMERICAL MODEL OF THE LIMPET OWC
Date of download: 11/5/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Christopher R. McGann, Ph.D. Student University of Washington
Fluent Overview Ahmadi/Nazridoust ME 437/537/637.
The application of an atmospheric boundary layer to evaluate truck aerodynamics in CFD “A solution for a real-world engineering problem” Ir. Niek van.
Discontinuous Shallow Flow
Modelling tools - MIKE11 Part1-Introduction
Chapter 27.
OPTIMAL INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR SIMULATION OF SEISMOTECTONIC TSUNAMIS
topic13_grid_generation
Numerical Simulation of East China Sea Tsunami by Boussinesq Equation
High Accuracy Schemes for Inviscid Traffic Models
Wei Choon Tay and Eng Leong Tan
Modeling Debye Dispersive Media Using Efficient ADI-FDTD Method
Abnormal Amplification of Long Waves in the Coastal Zone
Presentation transcript:

Numerical Simulation of Benchmark Problem 2 Xiaoming Wang Philip L.-F. Liu and Alejandro Orfila Dept. of Civil Engineering, Cornell University The 3rd Intl. Workshop on long wave propagations Catalina Island, June 17-19, 2004

Numerical Method - SWE Program: COMCOT COMCOT is a tsunami simulation program. It adopts finite difference scheme to solve the depth-averaged Shallow Water Equations. Multiple nested grids can be employed simultaneously to save CPU time as well as obtain enough resolution at target region.

Governing Equations COMCOT solves the depth-averaged Shallow Water Equations. Linear equations:

Governing Equations Nonlinear equations: For both linear and nonlinear equations, P=Hux and Q=Huy. H=+h.  is the free surface displacement; h is the still water depth; and H is the total water depth.

Governing Equations The bottom friction is expressed as which come from Manning’s formula. n is roughness coefficient. In this simulation, n takes 0.01.

Finite difference scheme COMCOT uses an explicit leap-frog scheme : The free surface elevation is evaluated at the center of a grid cell on the (n+1/2)-th time step; The volume flux components, P and Q, are evaluated at the center of four sides of the grid cell on the n-th time step. The differencing schemes are shown in the right figure.

Moving boundary scheme The following figure shows a 1-D example of the moving boundary scheme used in COMCOT. Moving boundary applies When Hi>0 and Hi+1<=0: 1. If hi+1 + i<0, shoreline at i+1/2 and Pi+1/2=0. Total water depth is 0 at cell i+1. 2. If hi+1 + i>0, shoreline moves between i+1 and i+2. Pi+1/2 may have a none-zero value. Total water depth is H=hi+1 + i at cell i+1. Where, h - takes positive values for water regions (wet cells) and negative values for land region (dry cells). Initially =-h at dry cell at t=0.

Computational domain Left boundary : input wave boundary, Shut down at t = 30s Right boundary : solid wall Top boundary : solid wall Bottom boundary: solid wall Bilinear interpolation is used to get a higher resolution (for dx<0.01435m)

Initial water surface profile The given initial surface profile has been modified to smooth the sudden change at the tail. Linear interpolation is adopted to get a higher resolution.

Numerical Simulations Coarse grid simulations: 1. Using linear Shallow Water Equations (without bottom friction) 2. Using nonlinear Shallow Water Equations (w/o bottom friction) configurations for both cases: dx=0.01435m, dimension: 393*244 dt=0.001s, Courant No. = 0.08 Roughness coeff. = 0.01 (Manning’s formula, if using bottom friction) Finer grid simulation Using nonlinear Shallow Water Equations. Configuration: dx=0.005m, dimension: 1098*681 dt=0.0002s, Courant No. = 0.05 without bottom friction

Numerical characteristics Platform - IBM compatible PC OS : Windows 2000 Professional CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2600+ (2.13 GHz) RAM: 1.0 GB DDR400 Dual Channel CPU Time 1. For coarse grid simulation (nonlinear): 0.074s per step (total steps: 150000) Total CPU time: 3.08hrs (for 150s physical simulation) 2. 1.193s per step For finer grid simulation (nonlinear eq.): 1.193s per step (total steps: 200000) Total CPU time: 2days+18hrs (for 40s physical simulation)

Comparison between numerical simulations - Linear LSWE vs Comparison between numerical simulations - Linear LSWE vs. Nonlinear NLSWE (without bottom friction)

Comparison between numerical simulations – bottom friction vs Comparison between numerical simulations – bottom friction vs. no bottom friction (nonlinear eq.)

Comparison between numerical simulations - Coarse grid vs. Finer grid

Comparison with gage data – Coarse grid simulation

Comparison with gage data – Finer grid simulation

Runup – Coarse grid, nonlinear SWE Maximum runup - with bottom friction : 9.1 cm - without bottom friction: 10.2 cm

Animation – Runup Lab movie Entire region movie

Conclusions The numerical results show that the problem can be well simulated as a first attempt with the linear system without including bottom friction. An agreement between grid size and time consumptions has to be considered since the reduction of the grid does not lead to a much accurate results. COMCOT results match the records very good for both the arrival time and amplitude of leading waves. In the near shore region, the waves becomes very nonlinear and will break. COMCOT is no longer capable to deal with it. The wave amplitude may be exaggerated.