Geometrical changes and high flow velocity cause flow separation and cavitation in the transition regions of hydraulic structures. A few studies have been conducted on the flow pressure and cavitation index in these regions, and the results need to be still improved. The present study examined the flow pressure and cavitation index variations for expansion angles between 0° and 10° and Froude numbers up to 20.1. Several relevant equations were also suggested to predict permissible angles in the transition regions. The results showed that negative pressure occurred at all lateral expansion angles except 0° when the Froude number was equal to or greater than ≥6.5. The cavitation phenomenon did not occur on the side walls for Froude number up to 4.49. However, the values of the cavitation index were reduced to less than the critical value for the Froude number of 14 when expansion angle was greater than 6°. The results also revealed that the side walls should not be expanded when Froude number was equal to or greater than 17.5. The occurrence of the cavitation on these walls substantially increased for Froude number of 20.1 even as expansion angle equals 0°.

  • The relevance among the Fr number, expansion angle, and cavitation index in transition regions.

  • The allowable expansion angle for designing the transition regions in open channels.

  • Cavitation index and pressure distribution in transition regions.

Graphical Abstract

Graphical Abstract
Graphical Abstract
Fr

Froude number

lateral expansion angle

Re

Reynolds number

density of water

the dynamic viscosity of water

u

the average flow velocity in the conduit

g

the acceleration of gravity

d

flow depth

P

flow pressure

cavitation index

minimum cavitation index

the allowable size of the lateral expansion angle

A, B, C, D, H

constant factors

S1

section one

S2

section two

flow velocity at the entrance of the transition region

flow depth at the entrance of the transition region

Bottom outlets play a critical role in dam operation and safety. These outlets receive water from reservoirs and deliver it downstream of dams. According to the literature, bottom outlets may encounter undesirable phenomena, such as intensive pressure fluctuation, local vortices, the cavitation phenomenon, and gate vibration (Figure 1) (Mohagheg & Wu 2009; Bhosekar et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2017). To decrease discharge per-unit width and energy losses, the side walls of transition regions in bottom outlets should have the capacity for gradual expansion (Figure 2). When the flow velocity is accelerated, it cannot adapt itself to wall divergence. This process sets up an adverse pressure gradient, leading to the separation of the flow from the expanded sidewalls (Sreedhar et al. 2017; Sengupta et al. 2019; Ntintakis et al. 2020). Thus, it is more than likely that the local vortex and cavitation phenomenon occur in these regions (Zhang et al. 2010; Najafi Nejad Nasser 2011).
Figure 1

Cavitation occurence. (a) On side walls of Zipinpu project spillway tunnel. (b) In Glen Dam spillway tunnel. (c) Gate failer at the Folsom Dam in California (USA).

Figure 1

Cavitation occurence. (a) On side walls of Zipinpu project spillway tunnel. (b) In Glen Dam spillway tunnel. (c) Gate failer at the Folsom Dam in California (USA).

Close modal
Figure 2

(a) Plan of bottom outlet No. 1 in Seymareh Dam. (b) Longitudinal section of bottom outlet No. 1 in Seymareh Dam.

Figure 2

(a) Plan of bottom outlet No. 1 in Seymareh Dam. (b) Longitudinal section of bottom outlet No. 1 in Seymareh Dam.

Close modal
Cavitation is a highly complex phenomenon in supercritical flows with intensive turbulence, leading to failure in hydraulic structures. This damaging phenomenon occurs when the vapor pressure of water exceeds the pressure of flows (Liu et al. 2020). The potential occurrence of cavitation was measured by the cavitation dimensionless index (Equation (1)) introduced by Falvey (1990). In his study, Falvey (1990) observed that the bottom outlets with indices equal to or less than 0.2 held the highest risk of cavitation. However, there was no risk of cavitation for the bottom outlets with indices higher than 0.2.
(1)
where p and u are the pressure and average flow velocity of the fluid; is the vapor pressure of water; is the density of water.

The occurrence of cavitation erosion in transition regions is strongly determined by hydraulic and geometric characteristics. Hence, it is required to thoroughly examine flow properties and conduit geometry. The hydraulic characteristics of different flow rates and expansion angles are complicated in transition regions (Jablonská et al. 2016). Asnaashari et al. (2015) investigated the effect of Froude numbers on the flow pattern in channel-expansive transitions. The results of this study indicated that bed-shear stress increased at the end of the transition region due to flow separation. Furthermore, turbulent strength was raised owing to a boost in the Froude number. Yamini et al. (2021) numerically studied Sardab Dam’s bottom outlet and Howell Bunger valve's hydraulic performance under different opening conditions. The results demonstrated various velocity values, ranging from 2 to 5 m/s at the branch entrance of the bottom outlet. Neither flow separation nor adverse conditions were observed in this area. In their study, Li et al. (2017) observed that the conduit wall encountered the cavitation phenomenon at all the lateral expansion angles for the Froude numbers of 5.77 and 6.59 (at any percentage of gate openings). Li et al. (2016a) also found that the cavitation index (σ) on the sidewalls of the conduit was less than 0.2 for Fr ≥ 3.89 at all the lateral expansion angles, even at α = 0°, when the gate was partially open. To prevent cavitation occurrence in transition regions, Thompson & Kilgore (2006) introduced the relevance of as a maximum expansion angle. Using this equation, the lateral expansion angle reached 4.9°, 3.2°, and 3° for the Froude numbers of 3.89, 5.77, and 6.59, respectively. Therefore, the results of Li et al. (2016a) are not in good agreement with those of Thompson & Kilgore (2006).

The kε (RNG) turbulence model and the Volume-Of-Fluid (VOF) method have been used in numerous studies to quantitatively measure high-speed flows in hydraulic structures. Yamini et al. (2022) studied the flow patterns, stream flow, vortex severities, pre-swirl principles, and performance acceptability criteria for pump intakes in different conditions. Jamali et al. (2022) explored the effect of flow conditions and chute geometry on shock waves on chute spillways. The impact of different slope ratios on the hydrodynamic characteristics of lateral withdrawal of water supply was examined by Zhaoa et al. (2022). Ebrahimnezhadian et al. (2020) investigated the impact of the flip bucket edge angle on flow hydraulic characteristics. The effects of pressure ratio conditions and plate stages on the characteristics of cavitation, energy transfer, and loss of perforated plates were numerically studied by Xiaogang et al. (2020). Li et al. (2016b) simulated aerated flows in curve-connective tunnels. Li et al. (2011) identified the hydraulic characteristics of flow downstream in radial gates whose conduit had a sudden lateral enlargement and a vertical bottom drop. Dargahi (2010) assessed the flow characteristics of bottom outlets with moving gates. Stamou et al. (2008) studied supercritical flows in gradual expansions. Krüger & Rutschmann (2006) modeled supercritical flows via an extended shallow water approach. High-speed flow in a spillway tunnel was also analyzed by Sha et al. (2006).

Based on what was mentioned, the results of previous studies on the allowable expansion angle need to be still improved. To contribute to this strand of research, the present study numerically explored the flow pressure distribution and cavitation index for various Froude numbers (2.56 ≤ Fr ≤ 20.1) and lateral wall expansion angles (0 ≤ α ≤ 10) at 10% gate opening using the RNG(kε) turbulence model and the VOF method in Flow three-dimensional (3D) software. Practical relevance for predicting the cavitation index and allowable lateral expansion angle in these areas is also introduced.

The pressure and velocity of flows are two fundamental parameters to describe the flows of transition regions. Since water is an incompressible Newtonian fluid, these parameters are determined by the classical Navier–Stokes equations. These equations are developed based on the physical laws of conservation of mass and momentum. The 3D Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations in the Cartesian coordinate system for incompressible and turbulent fluid flows are presented below (Chen et al. 2021):

Navier–Stokes Equation:
(2)
Continuity equation:
(3)
where is one of the components of the Cartesian coordinate system (i = l, 2, 3); t, u, and are time, mean fluid velocity and deviatoric stress tensor respectively; p and represent flow pressure and molecular viscosity; and g are density and gravitational acceleration.
The most frequently used turbulence models are the RNG kε and Standard kε models. These models have similar basic structures. Nevertheless, the RNG kε model is a more appropriate model for simulating currents in this study because it has been modified several times and is computationally efficient and stable. It also yields more accurate results for swirling and rapidly strained flows compared to the Standard kε model. Since the renormalization group methods are utilized in the RNG kε model, the constants achieved from this model differ from those obtained from the Standard kε model. It also includes more factors, such as the interphase turbulent momentum transfer (Miidla 2012). The equations of k (Equation (4)) and ε (Equation (5)) are provided below:
(4)
(5)
where and are the turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and; Gk is turbulence kinetic energy generated by the mean velocity gradients; Gb is turbulence kinetic energy produced by buoyancy; is the user-defined source term; and C2 and are constants.
where is the turbulent Prandtl number for energy and is the gravitational vector component in the i direction.
where S is the modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor
where is the component of flow velocity parallel to the gravitational vector and u is the component of flow velocity perpendicular to the gravitational vector.

where is the mean rate-of-rotation tensor in a rotating reference frame with the angular velocity . In general, is determined by the mean strain and rotation rates, the angular velocity of the system, and the turbulence fields.

The flow water surface profile is measured using the VOF method. This method includes the function of F (x, y, z, t) that represents the volume of fluid #1 per-unit volume. This function satisfies the following equation:
(6)
(7)
where is the volume fraction of flow (u, v, w). The symbols of , , are the velocity components of the fractional area open to the flow along the coordinate directions of x, y, and z, respectively. When Cartesian coordinates are used, R and are set to 1 and 0, respectively. In Equation (6), is the time rate of change in the fluid volume fraction #1 related to the mass source for fluid #1. In Equation (6), corresponds to the density source .

The value of F is interpreted based on the type of problem. For a single fluid, F represents the fluid volume fraction. The F values of 1 and 0 show the presence or absence of the fluid, respectively. The locations in which F equals 0 are called voids; in other words, voids are regions without fluid mass. Therefore, a uniform pressure is assigned to these areas. In practice, these regions are filled with vapor or gas because the density of vapor or gas is insignificant compared to fluid density (Hirt & Nichols 1981; Zhang et al. 2011).

Seymareh Dam is a concrete double-arch dam located in Ilam Province, Iran, and is equipped with two bottom outlets. The entrances of the first and second bottom outlets are placed 620 and 640 m, respectively, above the sea level (20 and 40 m above the river bed). The plan and longitudinal parts of the first bottom outlet are depicted in Figure 2(a) and 2(b). This outlet is designed for a maximum discharge of 654/m3/s at 111.5 m upstream water head. With respect to flow conditions, it has two parts: the under-pressure part and the free-surface flow part with lengths of 36.5 and 8.9 m, respectively. As seen in Figure 2, a transition region with a length of 3.2 m is located at the end of the conduit.

Nowadays, numerical models are used frequently as they require less time and money compared to experimental ones. In this study, Flow 3D software was used to develop the 3D numerical model for the bottom outlet of Seymareh Dam. The 3D geometry of the bottom outlet was drawn in actual size by AutoCad 3D software. The boundary conditions of the numerical model are provided in Table 1. The fluid was considered an incompressible and single phase. The inlet head was equal to the reservoir head. The inlet boundary conditions were set to a specified pressure (P). The pressure outflow (O) and walls (W) were introduced to the outflow and walls of the model, respectively (see Figure 3). To include the Renormalization Group, rather than constant factors, the turbulent model of kε (RNG) was employed. The VOF method was utilized to calculate the free-surface profile of the flow downstream in the service gate. To find an optimal size for the reservoir, Jamali & Manafpour (2019) analyzed the velocity profiles at different sections of a bottom outlet. The results demonstrated no significant changes in the profiles when the length and width of the reservoir exceeded 30 and 29.53 m2, respectively. Hence, these dimensions were chosen for the reservoir in the present study (Figure 3).
Table 1

Boundary conditions in numerical model

ItemDefinition
Model input Specified pressure (P
Model output Pressure outflow (O
Walls Wall (W
Border between blocks Symmetry (S
Total number of computational mesh 1,503,019 
ItemDefinition
Model input Specified pressure (P
Model output Pressure outflow (O
Walls Wall (W
Border between blocks Symmetry (S
Total number of computational mesh 1,503,019 
Figure 3

Boundary conditions of numerical model and flow pressure distribution along bottom outlet.

Figure 3

Boundary conditions of numerical model and flow pressure distribution along bottom outlet.

Close modal

The number of mesh increased as a result of applying the grid overlay boundary condition to the entrance of the bottom outlet, rather than to the upstream reservoir, in the investigated scenarios. Half of the flow was simulated due to the longitudinal symmetry of the conduit, which boosted the accuracy of flow simulation in the region. The grid size, ranging from 2 to 25 cm, decreased from the upstream toward the downstream of the conduit. This method generates a higher resolution for the transition regions. Table 2 indicates the numerical model sensitivity under various conditions.

Table 2

Sensitivity of numerical model under various boundary conditions, simulated areas, amd mesh sizes

RowInlet boundary conditionSimulated areaThe size of cubic meshes (m) (from upstream block to downstream of conduit)Total cellsThe computational time (s)R2
10%30%70%100%
Flow Pressure (Entrance of reserviour) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.4–0.3 1,506,304 25 0.921 0.902 0.895 0.912 
Volume Flow Rate (Entrance of the bottom outlet) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.4–0.3–0.25 1,556,654 25 0.881 0.876 0.861 0.862 
Flow Velosity (Entrance of the bottom outlet) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.4–0.3–0.25 1,586,718 25 0.862 0.854 0.839 0.842 
Flow Pressure (Entrance of the reserviour) Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.35–0.2–0.1 1,706,546 25 0.941 0.902 0.915 0.927 
Flow Pressure (Entrance of the reserviour) Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.30–0.2–0.1–0.05 1,680,255 25 0.971 0.956 0.946 0.941 
Applying Grid Overally bondary condition instead of the reserviour Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.25–0.10–0.05–0.02 1,806,546 25 0.991 0.968 0.966 0.962 
RowInlet boundary conditionSimulated areaThe size of cubic meshes (m) (from upstream block to downstream of conduit)Total cellsThe computational time (s)R2
10%30%70%100%
Flow Pressure (Entrance of reserviour) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.4–0.3 1,506,304 25 0.921 0.902 0.895 0.912 
Volume Flow Rate (Entrance of the bottom outlet) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.4–0.3–0.25 1,556,654 25 0.881 0.876 0.861 0.862 
Flow Velosity (Entrance of the bottom outlet) Whole bottom outlet conduit 0.4–0.3–0.25 1,586,718 25 0.862 0.854 0.839 0.842 
Flow Pressure (Entrance of the reserviour) Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.35–0.2–0.1 1,706,546 25 0.941 0.902 0.915 0.927 
Flow Pressure (Entrance of the reserviour) Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.5–0.30–0.2–0.1–0.05 1,680,255 25 0.971 0.956 0.946 0.941 
Applying Grid Overally bondary condition instead of the reserviour Half of the bottom outlet conduit 0.25–0.10–0.05–0.02 1,806,546 25 0.991 0.968 0.966 0.962 

The cavitation index and flow pressure were computed for 77 scenarios with 7 Froude numbers ranging from 2.56 to 20.1 and 11 expansion angles (0, 1, 2, …, 10) (see Table 3). Different Froude numbers were used to determine the possibility of cavitation and flow pressure at the entrance of the transition region. It is worth noting that the cross-section shape of this region was rectangular in all simulations.

Table 3

Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles used in this study

Specified pressure (reservoir head)Froude numberα
5
7
15
35
50
80
100 (normal water level in Seymareh bottom Dam) 
2.56
4.49
6.30
10.90
14.00
17.50
20.10 
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 
Specified pressure (reservoir head)Froude numberα
5
7
15
35
50
80
100 (normal water level in Seymareh bottom Dam) 
2.56
4.49
6.30
10.90
14.00
17.50
20.10 
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 

The numerical model was evaluated by measuring the mean wall pressure along the conduit wall in the physical model built for the 100 m upstream head of the bottom outlet in Seymareh Dam (Figure 4(a) and 4(b)). The physical model was made of Plexiglass sheets and wood on a 1:15 scale. It includes inlet conduits, middle and downstream conduits, energy dissipation ramps, and emergency and service gates (Water Research Institute 2005). In order to measure the mean wall pressure along the conduit, 74 piezometers were installed at different sections of the conduit (Figure 4(c)). Among them, ten piezometers were used to calculate the mean wall pressure. The service gate openings corresponding to these laboratory tests were 10, 30, 70, and 100%.
Figure 4

(a) Physical model of Seymareh Dam's bottom outlet. (b) Transition region of bottom outlet. (c) Location of piezometers at the entrance of bottom outlet, upstream of emergency gate, and downstream of emergency gate.

Figure 4

(a) Physical model of Seymareh Dam's bottom outlet. (b) Transition region of bottom outlet. (c) Location of piezometers at the entrance of bottom outlet, upstream of emergency gate, and downstream of emergency gate.

Close modal
The results indicated that the numerical data (correlation coefficients [R2] in Figure 5(a)–5(d)) were in good agreement with the experimental data, which verifies the appropriate behavior of the numerical model.
Figure 5

Numerical and experimental results of mean wall pressure along conduit at (a) 10%, (b) 30%, (c) 70%, and (d) 100% of gate openings.

Figure 5

Numerical and experimental results of mean wall pressure along conduit at (a) 10%, (b) 30%, (c) 70%, and (d) 100% of gate openings.

Close modal

In their study, Zhang et al. (2010) observed large negative pressures on the sidewalls of the transition regions for partial gate openings. In a similar vein, Davis & Sorensen (1984) found that air concentration reached its maximum level in small gate openings (the powder flow state). Hence, in the current study, the hydraulic characteristics of flows were investigated in 10% service gate opening as the critical percentage of gate openings. Moreover, the free-surface condition was used for the flow downstream of the gate in all the simulations.

In this study, the flow pressure on the sidewalls of the transition region was determined by geometric and hydraulic parameters, including the density of water (kg/m3), the dynamic viscosity of water (N.s/m2), the average flow velocity u (m/s), the acceleration of gravity g (m/s2), the cross-section area (depth (d) × width (b)) (m2), the cross-section shape, and the lateral expansion angle α. All these parameters are included in the following formula:
(8)

Viscous forces are insignificant at large-scale flows for large Reynolds numbers (Ting 2016). Therefore, in this study, as the Reynolds number (16.52 × 106 < Re < 30.94 × 106) exceeds (Li et al. 2016a) was neglected. Additionally, the shape of the cross-sections was rectangular in all the simulations.

The parameters of and g were selected as independent basic quantities. Given the dimensions of these parameters, a non-dimensional equation was formed through the π theorem as follows:
(9)
The Froude number was calculated at the entrance of the transition region. Thus, Equation (9) was rewritten as follows:
(10)
where and are the velocity and depth of the flow at the entrance of the transition region. Owing to 10% gate opening, and were constant.
(11)

Pressure coefficients () were computed for various entrance Froude numbers () and lateral expansion angles (α) in S1 (the entrance of the transition region where the geometry started to change) along the Z-direction (Figure 2). The results demonstrated that this area was prone to flow separation and local vortices.

Overall, as illustrated in Figure 6(a)–6(e), with an increase in α, the pressure generally decreased for all the . Further analysis revealed negative pressures for the of 2.56 and 4.49 at and , respectively. Similarly, the pressure coefficient values for these reached −0.2 and −0.25, respectively, at α = 10°.
Figure 6

(a–e) Pressure coefficient distribution along the vertical direction on side wall (section 1, S1) for various Fr and α values.

Figure 6

(a–e) Pressure coefficient distribution along the vertical direction on side wall (section 1, S1) for various Fr and α values.

Close modal

Furthermore, there was a remarkable decline in the pressure for Fr0 = 6.30. To explain it more clearly, negative pressures were obtained for all the lateral expansion angles, except for α = 0°. The minimum pressure coefficient value was −0.3 at α = 10°. With the increment of (6.3 < Fr0 ≤ 20.10), the pressure reached stability.

Considering the cavitation index relevance, as another pressure coefficient, the entrance of transition regions is prone to cavitation. Jamali & Manafpour (2019) found that the cavitation phenomenon happened in the initial parts of the transition region. Consequently, in the present study, the cavitation index was measured for two sections, namely, and (2 m after ), along the Z-direction on the side walls.

Figure 7(a)–7(g) depicts variations in σ values for . As illustrated in this figure, the σ values were far higher than the critical value (0.2) for ≤ 4.49 at all degrees of α. The minimum values achieved for the cavitation index were 6 and 1.8 for = 2.56 and 4.49, respectively. These results are in good agreement with those of Thompson & Kilgore's (2006) study. Conversely, Li et al. (2016a) reported cavitation occurrence for Fr0 ≥ 3.89 even at α = 0°.
Figure 7

(a–g) Variations in the cavitation index in S1 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Figure 7

(a–g) Variations in the cavitation index in S1 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Close modal

By increasing the to 14, the value of the cavitation index sharply decreased to less than 0.2 at , which suggests the high possibility of cavitation erosion. The minimum σ value was −0.15 for = 14 at α = 10°. By raising the from 4.49 to 14, the value reached 0.2 at α = 7°.

The values were substantially reduced to less than 0.2 for Fr0 = 17.5 at all the lateral expansion angles, except for α = 0°. In general, when the was boosted to 20.10, the side walls faced the risk of cavitation even at α = 0°.

In (Figure 8(a)–8(g)), the values were greater than the critical amount (0.2) at all the lateral expansion angels for Fr0 ≤ 14. The main reason for the increase in the values was the reduction of the flow velocity near the side walls as a result of conduit width expansion and energy losses (Ashrafizadeh & Ghassemi 2015; Zhang 2017; Tang et al. 2019). Nonetheless, the values declined to less than 0.2 for 14 ≤ Fr0 < 20.10 at all the lateral expansion angles, except for α = 0°. The side walls also faced the risk of cavitation occurrence for Fr0 ≥ 20.10 even at α = 0°. These findings suggest that an increase in accelerates flow velocity, which leads to flow separation near side walls.
Figure 8

(a–g) Variations of the cavitation index in S2 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Figure 8

(a–g) Variations of the cavitation index in S2 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Close modal

Further analysis indicated that there was a sharp decrease in the σ values at α > 7° for all the , which can be associated with several physical processes, such as flow separation and local vortex. Increasing α from 7° to 8° boosted the local vortex intensity in the flow field and strengthened the flow turbulence, which resulted in flow separation. However, further investigations into physical processes are required to address this issue more profoundly.

The comparison of the results reported for S1 and S2 showed that the values measured for these sections were approximately similar when Fr0 ≥ 14. However, for Fr0 ≤ 14, more critical cavitation indices were obtained for . Figure 9(a) and 9(b) illustrates the minimum values of achieved for different Fr and values in .
Figure 9

(a and b) Minimum values of cavitation index in S1 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Figure 9

(a and b) Minimum values of cavitation index in S1 for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles.

Close modal
The graphs depict power and exponential trends for Fr0 < 6.30 and , respectively. Moreover, the cavitation index decreased sharply at for all the . Thus, the relationship of with and can be expressed through the following equations:
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
The forms of Equations (14) and (15) bear close similarities to those of the exponential equations mentioned by Li et al. (2016a), except for coefficients. The coefficient values obtained from Equations (12) to (15) are presented in Table 4. The theoretical curves of Equations (14) and (15) are also illustrated in Figure 10.
Table 4

Results of correlation coefficient R2 in Equations (12)–(15)

FrαABCDER2
  18.879 −0.264 −0.280 0.780 −0.031 0.990 
 152.631 −87.87 12.112 0.0750  0.998 
  0.0745 0.703 −11.808 15,126.758  0.988 
 17.921 −17.26 300.66 656.25  0.973 
FrαABCDER2
  18.879 −0.264 −0.280 0.780 −0.031 0.990 
 152.631 −87.87 12.112 0.0750  0.998 
  0.0745 0.703 −11.808 15,126.758  0.988 
 17.921 −17.26 300.66 656.25  0.973 
Figure 10

Theoretical curves from Equations (13) and (14).

Figure 10

Theoretical curves from Equations (13) and (14).

Close modal
The comparison of the σ values achieved from Equations (12) to (15) and the numerical data, as displayed in Figures 11 and 12, reveals that the results of the proposed relevance are in good agreement with the numerical data. To be more precise, the correlation coefficient values obtained from Equations (12) to (15) were 0.990, 0.998, 0.988, and 0.973, respectively (Table 4). Likewise, in Li et al. (2016a)’s study, the σ value of 0.987 was obtained through these equations.
Figure 11

Comparison of calculated and numerical values of σ for Fr < 6.3.

Figure 11

Comparison of calculated and numerical values of σ for Fr < 6.3.

Close modal
Figure 12

Comparison of calculated and numerical values of σ for 6.3 ≤ Fr ≤ 20.1.

Figure 12

Comparison of calculated and numerical values of σ for 6.3 ≤ Fr ≤ 20.1.

Close modal
In the design of transition regions in hydraulic structures, it is of paramount importance to determine the permissible size of the lateral expansion angle (αa) in order to prevent cavitation occurrence. As shown in Figure 8(a)–8(g), the values of the cavitation index dropped to the critical amount (0.2) for Fr0 ≥ 6.30. The values of for Fr0 ≥ 6.30 are provided in Figure 13. As can be seen, this value was reduced slightly from 7° to 6° for , followed by a sharp decrease to 0° for Fr0 = 17.5. The comparison of the results of this study with those of previous studies indicates that the obtained values exceed those reported in the literature for . On the contrary, as for , the computed values are lower than those mentioned in previous studies.
Figure 13

Comparison of numerical results of in this study with those of in previous studies.

Figure 13

Comparison of numerical results of in this study with those of in previous studies.

Close modal

In this study, the flow pressure distribution and cavitation index on the side walls of the transition region for various Froude numbers and lateral expansion angles were numerically examined, and the possible relationship of with and was explicated. Ultimately, the allowable lateral expansion angle was measured. Based on the results, the following conclusions can be drawn:

  • The comparison of the cavitation indices of S1 (the entrance of the transition region) and (2 m after ) revealed that S1 was an area prone to local vortices, flow separation, and consequently, cavitation.

  • By increasing the expansion angle (α), the pressure decreased for all the . Negative pressure was observed for Fr0 = 2.56 at . For Fr0 ≥ 4.49, negative pressure was reported at all the lateral expansion angles, except for α = 0°.

  • Pressure coefficient values reached −0.2 and −0.25 for Fr0 = 2.26 and 4.49, respectively, at α = 10°. By raising the from 6.3 to 20.1, the pressure values stabilized and the minimum pressure coefficient value was obtained (−0.3).

  • The probability of cavitation formation on the side walls of the transition region was very low at all the lateral expansion angles for Fr0 ≤ 4.49. The obtained results are well aligned with those of Thompson & Kilgore (2006). However, they differ from the results of Li et al. (2016a) who observed the occurrence of the cavitation phenomenon for Fr0 ≥ 3.89 even at α = 0° in partial gate openings.

  • With an increase in the to 14, the values of the cavitation index dropped to less than 0.2 at and reached 0.2 at α = 7°. To put it in other terms, the probability of cavitation erosion was very high under these conditions.

  • Given that the values of the cavitation index were less than 0.2 at all the lateral expansion angles, the expansion of side walls in transition regions should be prevented for Fr0 ≥ 17.5. Furthermore, the side walls held the risk of cavitation for Fr0 = 20.1 even at α = 0.

  • The increased local vortex intensity and flow separation led to a dramatic reduction in the σ values at α > 7° for all the Froude numbers.

These findings have great practical implications for designing and constructing transition regions. In this study, the capability of the CFD model to predict some flow characteristics, such as pressure distribution and flow separation, in transition regions was confirmed. However, gaining a deeper understanding of the issue requires carrying out experimental investigations under the aforementioned conditions at various gate openings (in the current research, the percentage of gate openings remained constant [10%]). Moreover, this study was limited to the case of rectangular cross-sections. Future research should scrutinize other shapes for cross-sections (e.g., the trapezoidal shape).

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Asnaashari
A.
,
Akhtari
A. L.
,
Dehghani
A. A.
&
Bonakdari
H.
2015
Effect of inflow froude number on flow pattern in channel-Expansive transitions
.
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
142
(
1
),
06015004-1-5
.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000935
.
Bhosekar
V. V.
,
Asce
S. M.
,
Jothiprakash
V.
&
Deolalikar
P. B.
2012
Orifice spillway aerator: hydraulic design
.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
138
(
6
),
563
572
.
Chen
Y. N.
,
Zhan
J. M.
&
Li
Y. T.
2021
Numerical simulation of cavitation-bubble expansion and collapse inside a bottle subjected to impact on its topside
.
Journal of Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics
doi:10.1080/19942060.2021.1976279
.
Dargahi
B.
2010
Flow characteristics of bottom outlets with moving gates
.
Journal of Hydraulic Research
48
(
4
),
476
482
.
Davis
C. V.
&
Sorensen
K. E.
1984
Hand Book of Applied Hydraulics
, 3rd edn.
McGraw-Hill Book Company
,
Tokyo
.
Ebrahimnezhadian
H.
,
Manafpour
M.
&
Babazadeh
V.
2020
Simulation of the effect of flip bucket edge angle on flow hydraulic characteristics
.
Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research
51
(
5
),
2085
2010
.
Falvey
H. T.
1990
Cavitation in Chutes and Spillways
.
US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation
,
Denver
, p.
145
.
Hirt
C.
&
Nichols
B.
1981
Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries
.
Journal of Computational Physics
39
,
201
225
.
Jablonská
J.
,
Kozubková
M.
,
Himr
D.
&
Weisz
M.
2016
Methods of experimental investigation of cavitation in a convergent – divergent nozzle of rectangular cross section
.
Journal of Measurement Science Review
4
,
197
204
.
Jamali
T.
&
Manafpour
M.
2019
Investigation on cavitation occurrence potential in Seymareh dam's bottom outlet
.
ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
.
Published online doi:10.1080/09715010.2019.1627919
.
Jamali
T.
,
Manafpour
M.
&
Lotfi
M.
2022
Effects of flow condition and chute geometry on the shockwaves formed on chute spillway
.
Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology-Aqua
71
(
2
),
312
329
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/aqua.2022.139
.
Krüger
S.
&
Rutschmann
P.
2006
Modeling 3D supercritical flow with extended shallow-water approach
.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
132
(
9
),
916
926
.
Li
S.
,
Zhang
J.
,
Xu
W.
,
Chen
J.
&
Peng
Y.
2016a
Evolution of pressure and cavitation on side walls affected by lateral divergence angle and opening of radial gate
.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
142
(
7
),
05016003-01
05016003-11
.
doi.10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001129
.
Li
S.
,
Zhang
J.
,
Xu
W. l.
,
Chen
J.
,
Peng
Y.
,
Li
J.
&
He
X.
2016b
Simulation and experiments of aerated flow in curve connective tunnel with high head and large discharge
.
International Journal of Civil Engineering
14
(
1
),
23
33
.
Li
S.
,
Zhang
J.
,
Chen
X.
,
Zhou
G.
&
Chen
J.
2017
Characteristics of aeration flow downstream the radial gate with sudden fall- divergence aerator in discharge tunnel
.
Journal of Water Science and Technology: Water Supply
18
(
3
),
790
798
.
Liu
B.
,
Pan
Y.
&
Ma
F.
2020
Pulse pressure loading and erosion pattern of cavitating jet
.
Journal of Engineering Application of Computational Fluid Mechanics
14
(
1
),
136
150
.
doi:10.1080/19942060.2019.1695675
.
Miidla
P.
2012
Numerical modelling. IntechOpen, London 420 p. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/books/1867 doi: 10.5772/2292. Accessed 12 January 2023
.
Najafi Nejad Nasser
A.
2011
An Experimental Investigation of Flow Energy Losses in Open- Channel Expansions
.
Msc Thesis
,
Civil Engineering, Concordia University
.
Ntintakis
I.
,
Stavroulakis
G. E.
&
Plakia
N.
2020
Topology optimization by the use of 3D printing technology in the product design process
.
HighTech and Innovation Journal
1
(
4
),
161
171
.
Sengupta
A. R.
,
Gupta
R.
&
Biswas
A.
2019
Computational fluid dynamics analysis of stove systems for cooking and drying of muga silk
.
Emerging Science Journal
3
(
5
),
285
292
.
Sha
H.
,
Wu
S.
&
Chen
Z.
2006
3D numerical simulation for spillway tunnel
.
Advances Water Science.
17
(
4
),
507
511
.
Sreedhar
B. K.
,
Albert
S. K.
&
Pandit
A. B.
2017
Cavitation damage: theory and measurements-a review
.
Wear
372–373
,
177
196
.
Stamou
A. I.
,
Chapsas
D. G.
&
Christodoulou
G. C.
2008
3-D numerical modeling of supercritical flow in gradual expansions
.
Journal of Hydraulic Research
46
(
3
),
402
409
.
doi:10.3826/jhr.2008.3162
.
Tang
P.
,
Juárez
J. M.
&
Li
H.
2019
Investigation on the effect of structural parameters on cavitation characteristics for the venture tube using the CFD method
.
Journal of Water
11
(
10
),
1
13
.
Thompson
P. L.
&
Kilgore
R. T.
2006
Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipaters for Culverts and Channels
, 3rd edn.
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA
.
Ting
D. S.-K.
2016
Chapter 1 - Introducing Flow Turbulence
. In:
Basics of Engineering Turbulence
.
Academic Press
, pp.
3
16
,
doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803970-0.00001-5
.
Wang
G.
,
Wu
Q.
&
Huang
B.
2017
Dynamics of cavitation-structure interaction
.
Journal of Acta Mechanical Sinica
33
(
4
),
685
708
.
Water Research Institute
2005
The Final Report of Seymareh dam’s bottom outlet Hydraulic model. Water Research Institute, Tehran, Iran
.
Xiaogang
X.
,
Liang
F.
,
Anjun
L.
,
Zhenbo
W.
&
Shuxun
L.
2020
3D numerical investigation of energy transfer and loss of cavitation flow in perforated plates
.
Journal of Engineering Application of Computational Fluid Mechanics
doi:10.1080/19942060.2020.1792994
.
Yamini
O. A.
,
Mousavi
S. H.
,
Kavianpour
M. R.
&
Safari Ghaleh
R.
2021
Hydrodynamic performance and cavitation analysis in bottom outlets of dam using CFD modelling
.
Journal of Advances in Civil Engineering
2021
,
1
14
.
doi:10.1155/2021/5529792
.
Yamini
O. A.
,
Movahedi
A.
,
Mousavi
S. H.
,
Kavianpour
M. R.
&
Kyriakopoulos
G. L.
2022
Hydraulic performance of seawater intake system using CFD modeling
.
Journal of. Marine Science Engineering
10
,
988
.
doi:10.3390/jmse10070988
.
Zhang
J. M.
,
Xu
W. L.
,
Wang
W.
&
Liu
S. J.
2010
Cavitation damage to sidewalls in a sand flushing tunnel under high head
.
Journal of Hydroelectric Engineering
29
(
5
),
197
201
.
(in Chinese)
.
Zhang
J. M.
,
Chen
J. G.
,
Xu
W. l.
,
Wang
Y. R.
&
Li
G. J.
2011
Three-dimensional numerical simulation of aerated flows downstream sudden fall aerator expansion-in a tunnel
.
Hydrodynamics Journal
23
(
1
),
71
80
.
Zhaoa
W. L.
,
Zhanga
J.
,
Hea
W.
,
Zhangb
T. X.
,
Wanga
S.
&
Shia
L.
2022
Hydrodynamic characteristics of lateral withdrawal with effects of the slope ratio
.
Journal of Water Infrastructure, Ecosystems and Society
71
(
1
),
72
85
.
doi:10.2166/aqua.2021.222
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).