Project name:-

Hydrodynamic simulation unsteady dam break flows

Literature review:-
1.1 Introduction:-
Over the recent decades, there have been continuing efforts to enhance the understanding of dam
break hydraulics. A brief review of the previous works found in literature on different situation
of dam- break problem is presented here with the aim to focus the following main points:
1. Governing equations i.e., mathematical formulation of the unsteady free surface flow
2. Analytical solution in the dam-break solution
3. Numerical simulation of unsteady flow with special emphasis on dam break flood
4. Simulation of dam break flow considering real field problems
5. Dam breach modelling technique


The three basic fundamental laws of conservation of mass, momentum and energy can
represent the free surface unsteady flow. As two equations are sufficient to represent the
unsteady flow, either mass momentum couple or mass energy couple of conservation law is used
depending on the physical situation. For discontinuous flow like the Dam-break problem, mass-
momentum couple is generally used. The continuity and momentum equation derived on the
basis of Saint-Venant hypothesis (1871) can be regarded as the first valid step towards the
mathematical representation of unsteady gradually varied flow. During the last decade another
shock-capturing scheme, the so-called total variation diminishing (TVD) scheme, which was put
forward by Harten (1983) and developed by Sweby (1984), Yee (1987) and others, was applied
widely in gas dynamics. The main property of this kind of scheme is that it has second-order
accuracy, is oscillation-free across discontinuities, and does not require additional artificial
viscosity. It began to be applied in hydrodynamics for free-surface flow, in particular, for recent
complex dam-break flow. Garcia-Navarro et al. (1992) used TVD MacCormack scheme to
compute open-channel flows, particularly those involving hydraulic jumps and bores. Yang et al.
(1993a, b) solved numerically 1D and 2D free-surface flows by using second-order TVD and
essentially non oscillatory schemes. Delis and Skeels (1998) made a comparison with several
different TVD schemes (i.e., symmetric upwind, the TVD-MacCormack and MUSCL scheme) to
predict 1D dam-break flows. However, the TVD schemes with different limiters have different
features. Some are more dissipative, such as the minmod limiter, which tends to smear
discontinuities, and some are more compressive, such as the superbee limiter.
1.2 Previous works on analytical and graphical solution of
dam break problem
Ritter (1892) made the first attempt on this problem analytically. Starting from the
characteristics equations, he solved the one dimensional St Venant equation for a frictionless
horizontal channel.
Depth of flow h and velocity of flow v at time t at a distance x form dam site are
represented by Ritter equation as:

)
Where h
0
is depth at dam site.
But this classical solution of ritter fails to describe accurately the physical flow as the friction at
the wave tip is not negligible.

Carya (1946) developed a graphical approach based on characteristics to solve the Saint-Venant
equations. His method was later modified by Re (1946) and Levin (1952) in their study of dam
break analysis.
An attempt had been made by Dressler (1952, 1954) to solve the non-dimensional equation for
rectangular channel the considering resistance term.
The non-dimensional form of the equation

Where

Whitham (1955): in his paper suggested that in solution of dam break problem the resistance
effect must be considered at the wave front where frictional reistance and resulting turbulence
dominate the flow. So the tip region was treated as a definite boundary layer, in which St. Venant
equation ceases to be applied because the resistance effect is no longer negligible there. He has
obtained from experiment that the velocity at wave front varies very little with distance hence at
the tip region. Thus, he proposed it as the function of time only, approximate velocity is given as:

Where
a = position of wave front and k = constant of proportionality

Hunt (1982, 1984) obtained relatively simple closed form of solutions of the dam break
problem. The reservoir outflow was calculated by using a quasi steady flow approximation and
the downstream flood depths are calculated by using the kinematics wave initiations to obtain
closed form solution for failure of dam upon dry, sloping channel and results were compared
with previously calculated numerical solutions and experimental results. However investigation
has shown that constraints much be placed for the application of the models, such as for the
outflow of the reservoir model the ratio of the breach width to reservoir width should be less than
0.37 and for downstream flood the ratio of downstream flow depth to the channel width should
be small enough to allow the approximation of hydraulic radius to the flow depth.
Sarma and Das (2003) have developed a new characteristics-based analytical solution of flood
for the situation where flood water, being released through an opening in the river dike, moves
over a valley.
The flow depth h and flow velocity v at time t at a distance x form the dike, are
represented as:

)

1.3 Previous Works on Numerical Simulation of Unsteady
Flow
Numerical simulations of dam break flood started with simple cases such as rectangular
frictionless channels and remain a topic of interest till date for mathematical simulation of dam
break flood with complex channels and floodplains. Some examples of 1D models are: Sakkas-
Streloff (1973, 1976), Das (1978), Barr and Das (1980, 1981). Garcia R, kahawita R.A. (1986) ,
Bellos and Stakkas (1987), Fennema and Choudhury (1989), Fennema and Choudhuary (1990),
Bellos, Soulis and Sakkas(1992), Garcia et al(1992), Rahman and Choudhuary(1998), Tseng and
Chu(2000), Zoppou and Roberts(2000), Aureli(2001), Sanders(2001), Macchione and
Morelli(2003), Zoppu, Roberts(2003),Zhou et al (2004),Macchione,Viggiani(2004), Saikia and
Sarma(2006).

Pranab K. Mohapatra and M. Hanif Chaudhury, uses fourth order explicit numerical procedure to
solve Boussinesq equations for simulating dam-break flows, including the non-hydrostatic
pressure distribution. The results for the surface profile show that the undulations are present
near the bore front only for the depth ratios (higher than 0.4) only. Also compare the results
obtained by using the Saint Venant equations and the Boussinesq equation and found that only
the first Boussinesq term significantly affects the computed results. For computing the important
parameters for typical engineering application, the Saint Venant equations yield satisfactory
results for dam-break flow studies.
Sakkas, Strelkoff(1973, 1976) used non dimensional form of the characteristic equations derived
from equation 2.1 and the generalized Ritter solution as the initial condition for starting the
computation. The characteristics equations were solved numerically on a characteristic grid using
Euler formula and the trapezoidal rule in a predictor corrector scheme. This method fails at the
tip region and therefore, the solution was extended to the wave tip by using simplified form of
momentum equation, derived from consideration of the physical situation.
Das (1978) studied the effect of resistance on dam break flow, through numerical solution. Barr
and Das(1980,1981) have presented the theoretical and experimental studies of the effect of
resistance on the unsteady free surface following the dam break situations in 1-D flow. Solution
was based on finite difference moving grid system in x-t plane where provisions were made to
calculate friction factor, at any position and at any time, by an approximate formula. The
experiment has been undertaken in the laboratory flumes and acceptable agreements with
theoretical data have been obtained. The effect of resistance in the free surface profile has been
found.
Yang et al(1993) presented various characteristics based on high-resolution non-oscillatory
shock capturing finite difference schemes and Petrov-Gelerkin finite element method for one
dimensional free surface flow resulting from a dam failure. One-dimensional FD schemes like
upwind scheme, second order TVD scheme, second order non-oscillatory scheme and third order
non-oscillatory scheme were presented in their works. Analytical solution for sudden formation
of bore wave was used for verification of the numerical results.
Saikia and Sarma developed the application of a numerical dam break model in real field
situation becomes complex when the analysis need to be carried out for a high dam situated in a
river where bed elevation, channel sections and the bed friction change significantly. In this
study an investigation carried out for comparing the solutions obtained by conservative and non-
conservative formulations of the unsteady flows in a real river channel.
F.F. Hicks and T.Peacock. Recently,the HEC-RAS model has been extended to facilitate
unsteady flow analyses, and while the numerical scheme is not robust enough to handle dynamic
events or supercritical flows, it does have the capability to route simple open water floods and
produce water level forecasts at the same time. Here, the viability of the HEC-RAS unsteady
flow routine for flood forecasting is examined through an application to the Peace River in
Alberta and it is shown that accuracy comparable to more sophisticated hydraulic models can be
achieved. Since many agencies already have HEC-RAS models established for flood plain
delineation purposes, it would be a simple matter to extend them to the flood forecasting
application.














Conclusion:-
From the review of the past works following observations have been made.
i. Dam break problem remains a topic of continued interest since 1892 which started with
simple case such as rectangular frictionless channels, till date for mathematical
simulation of a real dam break flood with natural complex channels and floodplains.
ii. Quite a number of investigators have worked on analytical, numerical and experimental
works on the problem
iii. It appears that large number of numerical solution both in 1-D and 2-D model have been
developed
iv. Most of the developed solution are compared mostly with simple laboratory data
v. Comparison of those developed model in real field data are relatively quite less
vi. Some of the developed models are quite complex although results are not very reliable
predicting underestimation of output.
vii. Some of the developed models are quite complex although results are not very reliable
predicting underestimation of output.
viii. Those developed complex models both in 1-D and 2-D have taken lot of computational
runtime and they are quite difficult for field engineers to handle.

Therefore in this proposed study efforts will be made to development simple numerical models
which may predict quite reasonable results to a safer prediction and at the same time, it will
aimed for field engineers to handle the models to predict dam break flood in any real field
problem.







STUDY AREA
Mangdechhu hydroelectric project (720MW) is one amongst the ten hydroelectric projects
planned under the 10,000MW hydropower development by the year 2020 program of Royal
Government of Bhutan supported by the Government of India. An agreement for execution of
Mangdechhu Hydroelectric Project was signed between the two governments on 30
th
april 2010
at the approved cost of Rs. 380-crore project is funded by the Government of India as 30 per cent
grant and 70 per cent loan at 10 per cent annual interest to be paid back in 30 equated
instalments.
PROJECT SAILENT FEATURES:-
The 720MW Mangdechhu Hydroelectric Project is located on river Mangdechhu in Trongsa
Dzongkhag(District) in central Bhutan. The project envisages construction of one concrete
gravity dam( height 56m above river bed, length at top141.28m, top width 10m); one diversion
tunnel (dia. 8.5m,length 670m); 4 nos. spillway (orifice type, 70m long, width of each bay 10m);
2 nos. intake tunnels(5m5m length 126 & 173m); 2 nos. desilting chamber(width 14m, height
17.7m and 340m long); one HRT(horse shoe type, dia. 6.5m,length 13561m); one surge shaft
(dia. 13.5m, height 152m); 2 nos. pressure shaft (steel lined, dia 3.5m, length 1856m each); 4
nos. penstock(dia. 2.5m, length 63m each); Underground power house size 155m23m41m,
and 135m 18m 23m,Pelton turbine, rated head 692m; TRT(horse shoe shape, dia. 8m, length
1295m).
Important features of the proposed project:-
Location
Country : Bhutan
District : Trongsa Dzongkhag
River : Mangdechhu
Nearest Village : Chunjapang
Dam site : Near Chunjapang village
Latitude : 27
0
2848 N
Longitude : 90
0
29 41 E
Nearest Rail head : New Bongaigaon, Assam
Nearest Airport : Paro(Bhutan), Guwahati(Assam)

Hydrology

Catchment Area at diversion site : 1,506.0 km
2

Average Annual rainfall : 1162 mm in lower part
Maximum Temperature : 36
0
C
Minimum Temperature : -7
0
C



Reservoir
Full Reservoir level (FRL) : 1747.0 m
Minimum Draw Down Level : (MDDL) 1730.5 m
Gross storage at FRL : 2.128 million m
3

Gross storage at MDDL : 0.957 million m
3
Live storage : 1.171 million m
3
Length of reservoir : 800 m (approx)


DAM

Type of dam : Concrete gravity dam
Dam top level : EL 1750.0 m
Riverbed Elevation at dam site : EL 1694.0
Dam height above river bed : 56.0 m
Deepest foundation level : EL 1648.5 m
Max. height above foundation : 101.5 m
Length of Dam at top : 141.0 m
Top width of dam : 10.0 m
Nos. and size of bays : 4 nos. / 10.0 m (W) 16.0 m (H)


SPILLWAY

Type of spillway : Orifice Type Spillway
Design Flood : 8500 cummec
Length of spillway : 70.0 m
No. of bays : 4.0 nos. (including one standby)
Crest of Spillway : EL 1702.0 m
Width of each bay : 10.0 m
Regulation gates : Hydraulically operated radial gates of size
10.0 m (W) 16.0 m(H)
Stop logs gate : 10.0 18.0
Energy Dissipation System : Ski jump bucket






HEC-RAS
Introduction:-
HEC-RAS executable code and documentation are public domain that was developed by
Hydrologic Engineering Centre-River Analysis system for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The software was developed at the expense of the United state federal Government, and is
therefore in the public domain. It is freely downloadable software from the internet website as
www.hec.usace.army.mil. This software is a product of the Corps Civil Works System Wide
Water Resources Research program (SWWRP). The one dimensional numerical analysis
software HEC-RAS version 4.0 is used in this study to calculate the water surface profiles. Some
of the reasons for choosing this software are the free accessibility of the software itself and its
calibration accuracy. The following description will give an insight about the capabilities of the
software used.
The basic computational procedure of HEC-RAS for steady flow is based on the solution
of the one-dimensional energy equation. Energy losses are evaluated by friction and
contraction/expansion. The momentum equation may be used in situations where the water
surface profile is rapidly varied. These situations include hydraulic jumps, hydraulics of bridges,
and evaluating profiles at river confluences. For unsteady flow, HEC-RAS solves the full,
dynamic, Saint-Venant equation using an implicit, finite difference method.
HEC-RAS is equipped to model a network of channels, a dendritic system or a single
river reach. Certain simplifications must be made in order to model some complex flow
situations using the HEC-RAS one-dimensional approach. It is capable of modeling subcritical,
and mixed flow regime flow along with the effects of bridges, culverts, weirs, and structures.

General philosophy of the modeling system:-
The system is comprised of a graphical user interface(GUI), separate hydraulic analysis
components, data storage and management capabilities, graphics and reporting facilities.
The HEC-RAS system contains four one-dimensional river analysis components for:-
i. Steady flow water surface profile computations
ii. Unsteady flow simulation
iii. Movable boundary sediment transport computation and
iv. Water quality analysis.

Governing equations:-
I. Continuity equation

II. Momentum equation

)




Numerical form of the equations













User interface:-
The user interacts with HEC-RAS through a graphical user interface(GUI). The interface
provides the following functions:-
i. File management
ii. Data entry and editing
iii. Hydraulic analysis
iv. Tabulation and graphical displays
v. Input and output data
vi. Reporting facilities
vii. Online help


River analysis component:-

1. Steady flow water surface profiles:
This component of the modeling system is intended for calculating water surface profiles
for steady gradually varied flow. The system can handle a full network of channels, or a
single river reach. The steady flow component is capable of modeling sub critical,
supercritical and mixed flow regime water surface profiles.
The basic computational procedure is based on the solution of the one-
dimensional energy equation. Energy losses are evaluated by friction (Manning
,
s
equation) and contraction/expansion (coefficient multiplied by the change in velocity
head). The momentum equation is utilized in situations where the water surface profile is
rapidly varied. These situations include mixed flow regime calculations ( i.e. hydraulic
jump), hydraulics of bridges, and evaluating profiles at river confluences (stream
junctions). The effects of various obstructions such as bridges, culverts, weirs, and
structures in the flood plain may be considered in the computations. The steady flow
system is designed for application in flood plain management and flood insurance studies
to evaluate floodway encroachments. Also, capabilities are available for assessing the
change in water surface profiles due to channel improvements, and levees. Special
features of the steady flow component include: multiple plan analyses; multiple profiles
computations; multiple bridge and/or culvert opening analysis.
2. Unsteady flow simulation:-
This component of the HEC-RAS modeling system is capable of simulating one-
dimensional unsteady flow through a full network of open channels. This unsteady flow
component was developed primarily for sub critical flow regime calculations. However,
with the release of version 3.1, the model can now performed mixed flow regime
calculations. However, with the release of version 3.1, the model can now performed
mixed flow regime (sub critical, supercritical, hydraulic jumps, and draw downs). The
hydraulic calculations for cross-sections, bridges, culverts, and other hydraulic structures
that were developed for the steady flow component were incorporated into the unsteady
flow module.
3. Sediment transport or movable boundary computations:-
This component of the modeling system is intended for the simulation of one-
dimensional sediment transport/movable boundary calculations resulting from scour and
deposition over moderate time periods(typically years, although applications to single
flood events are possible).The sediment transport potential is computed by grain size
fraction, thereby allowing the simulation hydraulic sorting and armoring. Major features
will include the ability to model a full network of streams, channel dredging, various
levee and encroachment alternatives, and the use of several different equations for the
computation of sediment transport. Modifying the frequency and duration of the water
discharge and stage, or modifying the channel geometry. This system can be used to
evaluate deposition in reservoirs, design channel contractions required to maintain
navigation depths, predict the influence of dredging on the rate of deposition, estimate
maximum possible scour during large flood events, and evaluate sediment in mixed
channels.
4. Data storage and management:-
Data storage is accomplished through the use of flat files (ASCII and binary), as well
as the HEC-DSS. User input data are stored in flat files under separate categories of
project, plan, geometry, steady flow, unsteady flow and sediment data. Output data is
predominantly stored in separate binary files. Data can be transferred between HEC-RAS
and other programs by utilizing the HEC-DAS. Data management is accomplished
through the user interface. The modeler is requested to enter a single filename for the
project being developed. Once the project filename is entered, all other files are
automatically created and named by the interface as needed. The interface provides for
remaining, moving, and deletion of files on a project-by-project basis.

5. Graphics and Reporting:-
Graphics include X-Y plots of the river system schematic, cross-section, profiles,
rating curves, hydrographs, and many other hydraulic variables. A three-dimensional plot
of multiple cross-sections is also provided. Tabular output is available. Users can select
from pre-defined tables or develop their own customized tables. All graphical and tabular
output can be displayed on the screen, sent directly to a printer (or plotter), or passed
through the Windows clipboard to other software, such as a word-processor or
spreadsheet. Reporting facilities allow for printed output of input data as well as output
data. Reports can be customized as to the amount and type of information desired.
6. Working with HEC-RAS-An Overview:-
HEC-RAS is an integrated package of hydraulic analysis programs, in which the
user interacts with the system through the use of a Graphical User Interface (GUI). The
system is capable of performing steady and unsteady flow water surface profile
calculations, and it will calculate sediment transport and several hydraulic design
computations in the current version of HEC-RAS4.0Beta. in HEC-RAS terminology, a
project is asset of data files associated with a particular river system. The modeler can
perform any or all of the various types of analyses, included in the HEC-RAS package, as
part of the project. The data files for a project are categorized as follows: plan data,
geometric data, steady flow data, unsteady flow data, sediment data and hydraulic design
data as shown in figure. During the course of a study, the modeler may want to formulate
several different plans. Each plan represents a specific set of geometric data and flow
data. Once the basic data are entered into the HEC-RAS the modeler can easily formulate
new plans. After simulations are made for the various plans, the results can be compared
simultaneously in both tabular form.
7. Steps in developing the model:-
i. Starting a new project
ii. Entering geometric data
iii. Entering flow data and boundary conditions
iv. Performing the hydraulic calculations
v. Viewing and printing results


Step: 1
The first step in developing a hydraulic model with HEC-RAS is to establish which directory
we wish to work in and to enter a title for the new project. To start a new project, go to file menu
on the main HEC-RAS window and select new project.
Step: 2
Geometric data consists of the following as:-
a) Cross sections
b) Detailed bridge analysis
c) Detailed culvert analysis
d) Multiple openings(culverts, bridge, conveyance)
e) Inline weirs/spillways, Gated structures
f) Lateral weirs/spillways, gated structures
g) Storage areas and hydraulic connections
The total no. of available cross section for the Mangdecchu dam project is 101 including
upstream and downstream side of total 22KM. The flow cross sections of the river Mangdecchu
at cross section 300m is as shown in the figures below.
Available Data:-
The data used in the HEC-RAS software is as follows:
i. Cross section of the river for every 1km intervals
ii. Left over and right over bank details
iii. Elevation of riverbed: varies from values 1755m-1012m
iv. Downstream boundary: 21 km
v. Extension of the reservoir (upstream boundary): 800m
vi. Channel roughness: (Manning
,
s coefficients) throughout the channel 0.035
The geometric data of cross section are shown in fig
Inline structure is shown in fig. and different failure condition of dam are shown in fig.

Step: 03
Once the geometric data are entered, the modeler can then enter either steady flow or unsteady
flow data. The type of data entered depends upon the type of analysis to be performed. Boundary
conditions are required in order to perform the calculations. If a sub critical flow analysis is
going to performed, then only the downstream boundary conditions are required. If a
supercritical flow analysis is going to be performed, then only the upstream boundary conditions
required.
Upstream boundary conditions:-
Three options are available for modeling the upstream boundary conditions:
Flow hydrograph-This is the most common choice and may be an observed flow at a gauging
station or a synthetic hydrograph calculated from rainfall-runoff modeling or another hydrologic
method.
Stage hydrograph- This is a time-series of water levels. It may be appropriate if the upstream
boundary is affected by the tide, or if a rating curve at a gauging station is not available or is
dubious. In the latter case, the observed stage record can be used and HEC-RAS will calculate
the flow required to maintain this stage.
A combination of stage and flow hydrograph- A combination can be used for real-time
modeling in which observed stages are used for as long as they are available, after which
predicted flow can be entered.

Downstream boundary conditions:-
Five options are available for modeling the downstream boundary conditions:
Flow hydrograph- This is only likely to be used for observed events when the downstream
boundary is at a flow gauging station. It can also be used to set a no-flow boundary.
Stage hydrograph- This is the common choice and may consist of observed levels at a gauging
station or a tidal-level hydrograph.
Stage and flow- This hydrograph combination can also be selected and is most likely to be
useful for real-time modeling applications.
Rating curve- This is the most common choice if the downstream boundary is located at a
gauging station with a rating curve.
Normal depth- This is the most common choice if the downstream boundary is at an open
channel section well upstream of any control section.
Initial conditions-
The modeler must define the initial flow in each reach in the initial conditions tab of the
boundary condition editor. This initial flow should be equal to the starting flow in the upstream
hydrograph, with flow-change locations where any lateral inflow hydrographs have been
specified to account for the addition of the initial flow at these locations. The discussion on
initial conditions and warm-up time earlier in this chapter explains why it is important that the
flows set in the initial conditions tab match the initial flows in the inflow hydrographs. If storage
areas have been designated in the Geometry Editor, the starting water level should be set within
the storage area. This may be the bed level if the storage are dry.
It is also possible to hot-star the simulation using the results of a previous unsteady
flow simulation. However, it is only possible to do this if a file, known as a restart file,
containing the results of the previous simulation, was requested during that simulation. This
feature may be particularly useful for long simulations. As discussed earlier, it may also be used
if there is poor convergence at low flows. A low-flow solution may be obtained by slowly
decreasing flows or by using a very small time step. The results of this can then be used to hot
start the main simulation with larger time step.
Step: 04
Once all the geometric data and flow data are entered, the modeler can begin to perform the
hydraulic calculations. The present model can perform only the unsteady flow analysis. Open the
unsteady flow analysis window and edit the simulation time window and computational time
settings. After finishing this and run the model by clicking the RUN options in the unsteady flow
analysis menu. It will take some time depending upon the data entered in the model.
Step: 05
In this step, we directly able to view the results and flow diagrams are shown below. The results