Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Past and Present of Discharge Capacity Modeling for Spillways-A Swedish Perspective
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Resources, Energy and Infrastructure.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Resources, Energy and Infrastructure.
2019 (English)In: FLUIDS, ISSN 2311-5521, Vol. 4, no 1, article id 10Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Most of the hydropower dams in Sweden were built before 1980. The present dam-safety guidelines have resulted in higher design floods than their spillway discharge capacity and the need for structural upgrades. This has led to renewed laboratory model tests. For some dams, even computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations are performed. This provides the possibility to compare the spillway discharge data between the model tests performed a few decades apart. The paper presents the hydropower development, the needs for the ongoing dam rehabilitations and the history of physical hydraulic modeling in Sweden. More than 20 spillways, both surface and bottom types, are analyzed to evaluate their discharge modeling accuracy. The past and present model tests are compared with each other and with the CFD results if available. Discrepancies do exist in the discharges between the model tests made a few decades apart. The differences fall within the range -8.3%-+11.2%. The reasons for the discrepancies are sought from several aspects. The primary source of the errors is seemingly the model construction quality and flow measurement method. The machine milling technique and 3D printing reduce the source of construction errors and improve the model quality. Results of the CFD simulations differ, at the maximum, by 3.8% from the physical tests. They are conducted without knowledge of the physical model results in advance. Following the best practice guidelines, CFD should generate results of decent accuracy for discharge prediction.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
MDPI , 2019. Vol. 4, no 1, article id 10
Keywords [en]
spillway, bottom outlet, design flood, discharge capacity, model tests, computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-251367DOI: 10.3390/fluids4010010ISI: 000464468000001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85063403125OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-251367DiVA, id: diva2:1315367
Conference
H, 1958, Report of Hydraulic Model Tests of Spillway and Log Flume at Holjes Dam,
Note

QC 20190513

Available from: 2019-05-13 Created: 2019-05-13 Last updated: 2019-05-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Yang, JamesTeng, Penghua

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Yang, JamesTeng, Penghua
By organisation
Resources, Energy and Infrastructure
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 72 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf