Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid

Mechanics

ISSN: 1994-2060 (Print) 1997-003X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcfm20

Simulation of Flow Transients in a Water Filling

Pipe Containing Entrapped Air Pocket with VOF
Model

Ling Zhou, De-you Liu & Chuan-qi Ou

To cite this article: Ling Zhou, De-you Liu & Chuan-qi Ou (2011) Simulation of Flow Transients in
a Water Filling Pipe Containing Entrapped Air Pocket with VOF Model, Engineering Applications of
Computational Fluid Mechanics, 5:1, 127-140, DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2011.11015357

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.2011.11015357

Copyright 2011 Taylor and Francis Group

LLC

Published online: 19 Nov 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2271

View related articles

Citing articles: 26 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcfm20
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 127–140 (2011)

SIMULATION OF FLOW TRANSIENTS IN A WATER FILLING PIPE

CONTAINING ENTRAPPED AIR POCKET WITH VOF MODEL
Ling Zhou*+, De-you Liu* and Chuan-qi Ou**

* College of Water Conservancy & Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
+ E-mail: zlhhu@163.com (Corresponding Author)

** International Center on Small Hydro Power, Hangzhou 310002, China

ABSTRACT: The pressure within an entrapped air pocket in a filling pipeline without air release is investigated
both experimentally and numerically. Volume of Fluid (VOF) model is introduced to simulate the transient flow.
Both VOF model and experimental observations show that the air-water interface moves irregularly, and the water
column near bottom pipe wall firstly reaches and impacts on pipe end wall, which could induce a sudden pressure
jump. Due to assumptions of “air pocket occupies entire cross section” and “air-water interface is perpendicular to
pipe centerline”, the existing one-dimensional model is incapable of calculating the jump pressure. Comparisons
between calculated and measured results demonstrate that VOF model is effective to simulate movement of air
pocket and pressure surge. In a one-dimensional model, only the first peak pressure is close to the measured value,
but the following peak pressures are not. Therefore, VOF model is a feasible and more advanced method to
investigate further this problem.
Keywords: transient flow, water pipeline, entrapped air pocket, VOF model, 1D elastic model, pressure jump

pointed out that when valve was opened suddenly,

1. INTRODUCTION
Air-water two-phase flow often occurs in pipeline
facilities, including hydropower plants, pump
stations, thermal power plants, nuclear power
stations, urban supply and drainage sewer system
etc. This air pocket may be entrapped as a result of
(1) incomplete removal during the filling operation,
(2) the action of an air vacuum breaker admitting
air during a low pressure transient, (3) a gradual
evolution of air from solution, or (4) air admitting
vortex action at an intake or at the riser of a surge
tank or air chamber (Martin, 1976). The existence
of entrapped air pocket may prove to be either
detrimental or beneficial, depending upon the
amount and location of air pocket as well as the
pipeline configuration. The entrapped air pocket is
often beneficial under depressurization transient or
sudden deceleration. However, when pump starts
up or upstream valve is opened abruptly, a sudden
pressurization transient may induce unwanted
high-pressure surge, which can lead to
deformation or rupture of the pipe (Wylie and
Streeter, 1993; Zhou et al., 2004; Thorley, 2004).
Many researchers have investigated the flow
transients during a water filling process in pipe
with entrapped air pocket experimentally and
theoretically. Ocasio (1976), Holley (1969), and
Albertson and Andrews (1971) observed the form
of the entrapped air pocket and pressure surge, and
the entrapped air pocket would result in severe
pressure surge. Zhou et al. (2000, 2001, 2002a, b, c,
2004) and De Martino et al. (2008) conducted
numerical and experimental studies on rapid
pressurizing of entrapped air pocket both in a
confined pipeline with closed end and in a venting
pipeline with an orifice at pipe end. They explored
the influences of initial volume of air pocket, inlet
pressure and orifice size on pressure surge. Their
investigations showed that when the orifice size
was small, air-water flow would occur at the end of
the water filling pipe, leading to very high
impacting pressure which may be higher than the
maximum pressure with no air release.
Complexity of the filling process causes
difficulties and challenges in the numerical
simulation. The existing numerical methods for
the transient flow are all one-dimensional (1D),
and may be classified into two types: elastic water
model (EWM) and rigid water column model
(RWCM). The EWM considers the elasticity of
water and pipe and is solved using the Method of
Characteristics (MOC) and the entrapped air
pocket is treated as ideal gas. The RWCM ignores
the elasticity of water and pipe and is based on the
rigid water column theory, and the entrapped air
pocket is treated as ideal gas. The following
assumptions are necessary in the development of
1D mathematical model (Cabrera et al., 1992;
Zhou et al., 2002c): (1) the air pocket occupies the

Received: 24 Jun. 2010; Revised: 1 Oct. 2010; Accepted: 12 Oct. 2010

127
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
entire cross section; (2) the air-water interface is
perpendicular to the centerline of pipeline; (3)
during the filling process, the mixture of air and
water, the dissolution and release of air in water
are negligible; (4) the pipeline is fully closed and
no water and air are released; (5) the wall friction
factor for steady flow is applicable under unsteady
flow condition; and (6) a polytropic law is
applicable for the air phase and the polytropic
exponent m is constant.
Martin (1976) developed the simple rigid water
column model, in which water compressibility was
neglected. Fuertes (1999), Cabrera et al. (1992),
Izquierdo et al. (1999) and Zhou et al. (2002c)
improved Martin’s model with filling water
column, air phase model and energy loss. Liu and
Suo (2004 and 2005) proposed a complete rigid
water column model that considered some
practical factors, such as energy loss at upstream
inlet, valve opening time and elevation change of
pipeline. Streeter and Wylie (1993), Jönsson
(1985), Abreau et al. (1991), Guarga et al. (1996),
Lee and Martin (1999), Chaiko and Brinckman
(2002) and Lee (2005) included water
compressibility and solved the governing
equations by using the MOC, and built up the
elastic model. Chaiko and Brinckman (2002) and
Lee (2005) considered elasticity of liquid as well
as acoustic effects in air phase and proposed the
most complete numerical model for the problem of
entrapped air pocket at the end of a pipe. They also
pointed out that compared with water phase, wave
speed in air phase could be ignored.
Lee and Martin (1999) analytically and
experimentally studied the pressurization of an air
pocket entrapped against the closed end of a
horizontal pipe containing water. As shown in Fig.
1, rapid pressurization of the air pocket was
accomplished by the sudden opening of a valve
separating the air, initially at atmospheric pressure,
from the pressurized fluid. They investigated the
influences of inlet pressure and initial volume of
air pocket on the peak air pressure, and conducted
the comparisons of calculated and measured
results. As shown by Lee and Martin (1999),
Fig. 1 Schematic of a pressurized horizontal pipe
system containing entrapped air pocket.
128
RWCM breaks down for systems with small air
pockets and even high inlet pressure while the
EWM shows good overall agreement with
experiments in the peak air pressure. However, the
pressure oscillation patterns show that only the
first peak air pressure calculated by 1D model is
close to the measured value, and the following
peak pressures are not.
Zhou (2002b) and Lee (2005) presented the results
of an observational study related to the behavior of
entrapped air pocket in a water filling horizontal
pipe with a closed end (see Fig. 1). Zhou (2002b)
showed a series of photographs for the case of no
air release. Lee (2005) described the sequence of
events during the entrapped air transient according
to the experimental observations. Their
observations suggest that the water front was
relatively free of entrapped air, rather than a
vertical air-water interface, the water approached
the pipe end with the bottom rolled up first. After
reaching the pipe end, the water column rolled up
and the air, which was initially ahead of the water
column, was then trapped on top of the water
column. After that, the pressure dropped,
indicating the air pocket underwent expansion
until the pressure reached the first trough. After
that, the air pocket gradually elongated and the
whole system reached equilibrium at a given
pressure. According to the assumptions (1) and (2)
of 1D model, the air pocket always occupies the
pipe end and the water column never reaches and
impacts on the pipe end. Consequently, the
existing 1D models are incapable of simulating
effectively the movement of air pocket, especially
the pressure jump from water striking on the pipe
end.
In this paper, the volume of fluid (VOF) model of
computational fluid dynamics is firstly applied to
the simulation of the transient flow in water filling
pipe containing entrapped air pocket. The VOF
model was proposed firstly by Hirt and Nichols
(1981), and was designed for two or more
immiscible fluids where the position of the
interface between the fluids is of interest.
Hargreaves et al. (2007) made the validation of
VOF model in simulation of the free surface flow
over a broad-crested weir. Cheng et al. (2007)
suggested that VOF model is feasible model to
simulate the complex free surface-pressurized
transient flow in the tailrace tunnel. Liu and Zhou
(2009) and Liu et al. (2009) simulated the transient
flow during the filling process in water pipeline
containing air pocket by using two-dimensional
(2D) VOF model.
In this paper, VOF is introduced to simulate the
flow transients during the filling process in detail.
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

Firstly, 2D VOF model is used to predict the C1ε=1.44, C2ε=1.92. Gk is turbulence kinetic energy
movement of air pocket and transient pressure in a generated by the average velocity gradient, and
filling horizontal pipe, which are compared with can be expressed by
the observational results of Zhou et al. (2002b) and
Lee (2005). The influence of initial volume of air  u u j  ui
Gk   t  i   (5)
pocket on pressure surge is investigated by using  u  u
2D VOF model and 1D EWM. Then, in order to
 j ui  j
verify 2D VOF, 3D VOF and 1D EWM, Turbulent kinetic viscosity μt can be expressed by
comparisons of calculated and observed pressure the function of k and ε:
oscillation patterns are conducted.
k2
 t  C  (6)
2. MATHEMATICAL MODELS AND 
NUMERICAL SOLUTION
where Cμ=0.09 is experimental constant.
2.1 Turbulence model
2.2 VOF model for air-water two-phase flow
The k−ε two-equation turbulence model used here
is the model introduced by Launder and Spalding The VOF model based on multiphase flow theory
(1972). The continuity equation and momentum is an effective numerical simulation method to
equation can be written respectively as follows. track interface between two or more immiscible
fluids. In the calculation, all fluids share the
  turbulence model. And the interface is tracked by
   (  )  0 (1)
t introducing the volume fraction of the ith phase, αi,

n
 which satisfies  i  1 in each cell, where n is
ui    ui uj  i 1
the number of phases. For air-water two-phase
t x j
(2) flow, αw and αa are respectively the volume
p  fraction of water phase and air phase. For each
   ij  g i
x i x j control cell:
 w a 1
where ρ is fluid density; t is time;  is fluid (7)
velocity, and ui and uj are the velocity component
In each cell, if it contains only water, then αw=1; if
in i direction and j direction, respectively; xi and xj
none, then αw=0. For cells that contain the
are coordinate component in i direction and j
air-water interface, 0<αw<1. When simulating the
direction, respectively; p is pressure; gi is
air-water interface, volume fraction equation for
gravitational acceleration in i-direction; and τij is
water phase can be written as
stress tensor.
k-Equation:  w 
    w  0 (8)
  t
  k     ku j 
t x j The fluid properties in each cell are adjusted
(3) according to the volume fraction, for example, the
  k
 [(   t ) ]  Gk   fluid density in each cell is,
x j  k x j
   w  w  1   w  a (9)
ε-Equation:
which is similar with the expression for molecular

    uj  viscosity, μ.
t x j
 t  (4) 2.3 Numerical algorithms
 [(   ) ]
x j   x j The Finite Volume Method (FVM) is introduced
  2 to deal with the governing equations. The
 C 1 Gk  C 2  simulation domain is divided into discrete control
k k
volumes by the staggered mesh. The implicit time
in which, k is turbulent kinetic energy; ε is differencing method is used here. For the transient
turbulent dissipation rate; µ is molecular viscosity; flow in water filling pipe with entrapped air
σk and σε are turbulence Prandtl numbers of k and ε, pocket, the robust Pressure Implicit with Splitting
σk=1.0 and σε=1.3, respectively; constants are

129
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
of Operators (PISO) is employed to accomplish
the coupling solution of velocity and pressure
equations. In the present work, the geometric
reconstruction method of Youngs (1982) was
applied to determine the detailed location of the
air-water interface.
3. SIMULATIONS AND ANALYSES OF
THE TRANSIENT FLOW IN FILLING
PIPELINE
The existing 1D models were developed based on
a simple and horizontal pipe that were gradually
close to the real pipe system. In order to facilitate
1D calculations and investigation of effects of pipe
parameters on pressure surge, the single
characteristic horizontal pipe shown in Fig. 1 was
proposed to conduct calculations and analyses in
this part. As shown in Fig. 1, the upstream
reservoir is infinitely large; pipeline is horizontal
and has a downstream dead end. D is pipe diameter;
Lw0 is the initial length of the pipe section filled
with pressurized water; La0 is the length of the rest
pipe section filled with entrapped air pocket (at
atmosphere pressure), and Hr is the upstream water
head (that is the distance between the water level
of upstream reservoir and the centerline of
horizontal pipe).
In Fig. 1, basic parameters of pipe system are:
D=0.3 m, Lw0=2.7 m, La0=0.8 m, Hr=5 m,
acceleration of gravity g=9.806 m/s2, and the
Darcy friction coefficient of pipe f=0.016. The
initial temperature of the system is 294 K (70°F),
and within the air pocket, wall friction is neglected.
The sound speed in the water phase is constant and
taken equal to 1423 m/s corresponding to the
sound speed of 70°F water in a 0.0254 m steel pipe
accounting for pipe wall elasticity. The air pocket
is assumed to obey the ideal gas equation of state,
and compression and expansion of the air occurs
isentropically. To make the comparisons and
analyses effective, the transient process is
simulated with 2D VOF model and the 1D
complete elastic water model of Chaiko and
Brinckman (2002). The 1D model is the model П
of Chaiko and Brinckman (2002), which consists
of the time-varying elastic water length and
uniform gas compression. The entrapped air
pocket is considered as ideal gas, and the valve is
assumed to be opened abruptly.
The simulation domain is the pipe region during
the water filling process (see Fig. 2). In 2D
simulation, the real round pipe is simplified into a
rectangular flow region with infinite width and
height equal to pipe diameter. As shown in Fig. 2,
130
0.5 Water Wall Air pocket
Pressure Wall
inlet
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
X (m)
Fig. 2 Schematic of the 2D simulation domain
meshes and boundary conditions in horizontal
filling pipeline.
the simulation domain is divided by rectangular
mesh, in which the area of each cell is 0.0001 m2
and time step is set as 0.0001 s. The boundary
conditions shown in Fig. 2 are defined as follows:
a. Inlet: it is the entrance of the pipeline. The
upstream reservoir is very large, and the inlet
pressure can be assumed to be constant
during the filling process.
b. Air: entrapped air pocket is treated as ideal
gas. During the filling, the entrapped air is
confined in pipeline with no air release.
c. Wall: it consists of the walls of the pipe and
the dead end. The non-slip condition is
imposed by using the wall-function.
The simulations using the VOF model described
here can be realized by using the Visual Fortran or
are run using version 6.2 of FLUENT.
3.1 Movement of air pocket and pressure
oscillation
The calculated results of the above case are shown
in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4(a). In order to investigate the
influence of system parameters on pressure surge,
three other pipe systems with different parameters
are also simulated, and the results are shown in Fig.
4(b) to Fig. 4(d). As shown in Fig. 4(a) to (d), Hmax
and Ha are the maximum pressure of pipe system
and air pressure (expressed by pressure in mH2O)
at any time respectively. 1D and 2D are the
calculations of 1D elastic water model and 2D
VOF model respectively.
It is found from Fig. 3 that the position and shape
of air-water interface both change with time freely,
which is in agreement with the observation of
Zhou et al. (2002b) and Lee (2005). That means
the hypothesis of “the air-water interface is always
perpendicular to the centerline of pipeline” in 1D
model would cause some computational errors.
The simulation results of VOF model indicate that,
due to the water impacting on pipe wall during
filling process, local pressure and the maximum
pressure of pipe system would get a sudden
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

air-water phase configuration and pressure

0.5 Water Air pocket distribution are shown in Fig. 3 at t=0.2876s.
The corresponding maximum system
0 pressure jumps suddenly too, which is shown
0 1 2 3
X on the Hmax curve of VOF model in Fig. 4(a).
t = 0.0000 s 16
0.5
2D-Hmax 2D-Ha 1D Ha
12

Pressure (m)
0
0 1 2 3 8
X
t = 0.2876 s 4
0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0 1 2 3 Time (s)
X
t = 0.3380 s (a) La0 = 0.8m
0.5
15 2D-Hmax 2D-Ha 1D Ha
12
0
Pressure (m)
0 1 2 3
X 9

t = 0.4380 s 6
0.5 3

0
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0 1 2 3
X Time (s)
t = 0.8380 s
0.5
(b) La0 = 0.1m
15
2D-Hmax 2D-Ha 1D Ha
0 12
0 1 2 3
Pressure (m)

X
9
t = 0.938 s 6
Fig. 3 Schematic of entrapped transients of air 3
phase with VOF Model.
0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2
increase, which may make the maximum pressure
Time (s)
of pipe system much greater than the maximum
pressure of air pocket. With different pipe (c) La0 = 1.3m
systems, the pressure jump has different effects
on the maximum pressure of pipe system (see Fig. 15
2D-Hmax 2D-Ha 1D Ha
4(a) to (d)), and that could be illustrated through 12
Pressure (m)

the Fig. 3 and Fig. 4(a) as follows: 9

a. When the valve is opened instantaneously, 6
pressure difference between pressurized
3
water and non-pressurized air pocket pushes
water to move ahead. Due to gravity gradient, 0
the front surface of water flow is layered; the 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2
Time (s)
water column at the bottom of the pipe
moves faster and arrives at the end of the
(d) La0 = 3.3m
pipeline first.
Fig. 4 Pressure oscillation patterns: the maximum
b. Due to obstruction of the end pipe wall, the pressure of pipe system and the pressure of
water column impacts on the wall and causes entrapped air pocket.
a sudden increase of the local pressure. The

131
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

c. After the first sudden increase of the system minimum volume the first time, the water
pressure, the end of the water flow moves up column does not impact on pipe end wall, and
along the pipe-end wall and strikes the top subsequent pressure jump has no effect on the
pipe wall, leading to another sudden pressure maximum system pressure. (b) When initial
jump. Then, the water goes back along the top air pocket volume is very small, before the
wall and entraps the air pocket. During the maximum air pocket pressure occurs, the
process of air pocket being re-compressed, water column begins to impact on the end
the water column near the air-water interface wall. Since the air pocket is very small, the
rolls up and down, separating the entrapped water impacting speed is very slow, and the
air pocket into several parts. pressure jump is not obvious, as shown in Fig.
4(b). (c) For the intermediate air pocket
3.2 Influence of initial volume of entrapped volume, the pressure jump by water
air pocket on pressure of pipe system impacting pipe wall has important effect on
According to the calculations and analyses of the maximum system pressure, as shown in
above cases with VOF model, the sudden pressure Fig. 4(c). If the pressure jump happens just at
jump by water impacting on pipe wall could or near the time of the maximum air pocket
directly affect the maximum system pressure. pressure, the system pressure could jump to
Initial air pocket volume has important influence the maximum value from the maximum air
on the position and rate of the water impacting pocket pressure, and the peak pressure value
pipe wall, and is the significant factor affecting on is very dangerous for the pipe system, as
the maximum system pressure. Therefore, the shown in Fig. 4(a).
14
calculation and analysis were made here for
different values of La0. 13
Pressure (m) 1D-Hmax
2D-Hmax
As shown in Fig. 1, pipe system parameters are: 12
2D-Hamax
D=0.30m, Lw0=2.7m, Hr=5m. For different values
of La0, the calculation results with VOF method 11

and 1D EWM are listed in Table 1. 10

Calculations and analyses show that 0 4 8 12 16
Length of air pocket (m)
a. The maximum system peak pressure is always
(a) Pressure change of the two models.
higher than the maximum air pocket pressure.
3
As initial air pocket volume decreases, the
pressure difference, ∆H, changes gently at 2
△H (m)

first; later on, ∆H abruptly increases and then

declines, the pattern of which is shown in Fig. 1

5(b). That is because under the different initial

air pocket volume, the influence of jump 0
0 4 8 12 16
pressure caused by water impacting on pipe Length of air pocket (m)

wall on the system pressure is also different. (b) Change of ∆H.

(a) As shown in Fig. 4(d), when initial air Fig. 5 Effects of various length (volume) of initial air
pocket volume is large, as the entrapped air pocket on system pressure.
pocket is compressed to very near the
Table 1 Comparison between results of various La0 cases, which D=0.30m, Lw0 =2.7m, Hr =5m.

1D EWM 2D VOF model

La0 / m
Hmax / m tm / s Hmax / m tm / s Hamax / m tm / s ∆H / m
0.05 12.94 0.0694 12.31 0.0740 11.80 0.0740 0.51
0.1 12.93 0.0991 12.62 0.1000 12.00 0.1010 0.62
0.3 12.86 0.1720 12.89 0.1735 12.05 0.1735 0.84
0.8 12.70 0.2869 13.88 0.2871 11.95 0.2830 1.93
1.3 12.56 0.3739 12.53 0.4010 11.86 0.3650 0.67
3.3 12.09 0.6373 11.80 0.6110 11.60 0.6080 0.20
6.3 11.59 0.9593 11.40 0.8920 11.20 0.9010 0.20
9.3 11.21 1.2526 11.06 1.140 10.87 1.151 0.19
15.3 10.65 1.8089 10.60 1.593 10.40 1.617 0.20
Note: Hmax is the maximum pressure of pipe system; tm is the occurrence time of the maximum pressure; Hamax is the maximum air pocket pressure;
∆H=Hmax-Hamax.

132
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
b. Fig. 5(a) shows that for the 1D EWM, the
maximum air pocket pressure is equal to the
maximum system pressure, and the pressure
increases all along with the decrease of initial
air pocket. However, the maximum system
pressure and the maximum air pocket
pressure from VOF model firstly become
greater and then diminish, and the change
trend is in agreement with the real condition.
c. When air pocket is large, namely, jump
pressure does not affect the maximum system
pressure, comparisons between the
calculations of 1D EWM and VOF model
indicate that the occurrence time of the
maximum pressure tm from VOF model is
shorter relatively, but the maximum pressure
values are close. Especially, when air pocket
is very large, the calculated results by the
two models are in good agreement.
d. It is found from Fig. 4(a) to Fig. 4(c) that, for
the two models, the first peak pressure values
are very close; however, the following peak
values are different. Before the water column
impacts on the pipe-end wall, air-water
interface moves in a forward direction along
pipeline and the interface configuration
remains more or less fixed. Thus, the
assumption of “the air-water interface is
perpendicular to pipe centerline” is quite
reasonable, and the 1D model is applicable to
simulating the filling process before water
impacting on pipe-end wall. However, during
the later filling process, due to the great
complication of interface movement, it is
difficult for the 1D model to deal with local
kinetic energy item and energy loss that
computational errors become larger and peak
pressure value may be distorted.
4. EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENT
AND ANALYTICAL MODEL
VERIFICATION
The above calculations and analyses demonstrated
that VOF model could be used to simulate not only
R e s e r v o ir
G a te V a lv e
52
P T : P re ssu re T ra n sd u c e r
P G : P re ssu re G a u g e
U n it: c m
Fig. 6
transient pressure, but also movement of air-water
interface and configuration of entrapped air pocket.
In order to verify VOF model, comparisons of
calculated and observed pressure oscillation
patterns were conducted. Taking account of the
convenience of discussing influence of air pocket
volume on pressure, the former studies were based
on the single horizontal pipe system. However,
through investigation about water-hammer
accident and occurrence location in real pipeline
system, it is found that, pipe rupture would arise
easily at high points along pipeline. For complex
pipe systems, VOF model can be used to simulate
hydraulic transients without any assumptions and
limitation; furthermore, some related experimental
investigations could be performed. Therefore, in
this paper, an undulated pipe system containing
entrapped air pocket was constructed to observe
the filling process.
4.1 Experimental program
To explore flow transients in a filling pipe
containing entrapped air pocket, an experimental
study was conducted at the Hydraulic Laboratory
of Hohai University. Fig. 6 depicts the
experimental set up used in this investigation. The
system consists of an upstream reservoir, a gate
valve, a quarter-turn ball valve, a water vent and a
444.45 cm long pipe (9 cm in inside diameter and
0.5 cm in pipe thickness). Pipe system contains
five parts in turn, a 130 cm long horizontal pipe, a
73 cm long vertical pipe, a 131.45 cm long
horizontal pipe, a 100cm long vertical pipe and a
30cm long horizontal pipe. The horizontal pipe
with the gate valve is a PVC pipe, and the
following undulated pipeline is transparent
organic glass pipe. In all experiments, an air
pocket is entrapped at the dead end of pipe system.
Water vent at the bottom horizontal pipe is used
to regulate initial location of entrapped air pocket.
Initially, the gate valve is completely open and
the ball valve is closed. Air pocket is entrapped at
the end of pipe system, and the water vent is
closed.
PT1 30
78 D ead E nd
44
PG PT5 PT4 PT2
PT3
3 9 .5 2 4 3 7 .9 5
73
56
1 3 1 .4 5 W a te r V e n t
B a ll V a lv e
Experimental set up.
133
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
The experimental measuring system consists of
one pressure gauge and five pressure transducers.
The pressure gauge is installed upstream of the ball
valve to measure the initial static pressure head
upstream of ball valve, and the inlet pressure head
of the upstream reservoir could be obtained from
the measured pressure. The locations of the 5
pressure transducers are shown in Fig. 6: PT1 is
located near the dead end where the air is always
entrapped, to measure the pressure which is very
close to the pressure oscillation of air pocket; PT2
is installed at the bottom of the elbow joining the
above horizontal pipe and the vertical pipe; PT3 is
at the middle of the vertical pipe near pipe end;
PT4 and PT5 are fixed along the lower horizontal
pipe at a distance of 24 cm downstream of the ball
valve and 10 cm upstream of the ball valve,
respectively. These 5 pressure transducers have the
same scale: the fluid pressure scale is from
-0.1MPa to 2.0MPa; response frequency ranges
from 30 to 300 kHz; operating temperature ranges
between -40ºC and 150ºC; linearity ranges from
0.03% to 0.3% of the full range; lag error is
between 0.03% and 0.3% of the full range. Each of
these transducers is calibrated beforehand. Then
during the measurement, the transducers collected
the data every 1 ms. Each of these transducers was
connected to a carrier demodulator which was, in
turn, connected to a data acquisition board
controlled by a personal computer. The data
acquisition software was set to initiate data
collection automatically. The pressure oscillation
history at each of these transducers was first
displayed on the computer screen and then saved
to a file for later analysis.
To facilitate calibration of the mathematical
model later on, the friction factor f of the pipe, the
minor loss coefficient for the valves and the pipe
elbow are indirectly measured under steady-flow
conditions. The minor loss coefficient for the ball
valve is first measured in the range from 0.1 to
0.13 under the full opening of the entire pipeline
and steady-flow state. The friction factor, f, is
determined based on total losses, ranged between
0.045 and 0.05, and f = 0.05 is adopted in the later
calculation.
Pipe filling is achieved by manually turning the
quarter-turn ball valve, so instantaneous valve
opening is an ideal condition. The record of a
high-speed digital camera shows the valve
opening time (from fully closed to fully open)
ranges from 0.05 to 0.1 second, and in calculation
a valve opening time of 0.1 second is assumed.
The speed of the water hammer pressure wave is
required for calculating the pressure in the elastic
water model, however, it is difficult to measure
134
the wave speed in the pipeline system with air
entrainment (Chaudhry, 1985). The wave speed is
estimated by measuring the time difference of the
pressure spikes between the upstream and
downstream transducers, which is around 400 m/s
in this study case.
4.2 Comparison of experimental and
calculated results
In 2D VOF model, the real round pipe is simplified
into a rectangular flow region with infinite width
and high of pipe diameter, and that could lead to
simplification error. To analyze the validity of
different models, 3D VOF is also introduced to
simulate the transient flow, and all the calculated
results are compared with measured data. In
experiments, because opening valve takes some
time, the numerical simulation takes account of
opening valve time. The details of various models
are as follows:
a. 1D EWM: the elastic water model of Chaiko
and Brinckman (2002) ignores the opening
valve time. The orifice equation for valve
(Wylie and Streeter 1993) is necessary to be
added to the EWM. Due to the variation of
elevation in an undulating pipeline, the initial
length of air pocket can be converted from the
same air volume based on the basic
assumptions of the model.
b. 2D VOF model: the dynamic meshes method
is used in valve simulation. In 2D VOF model,
valve structure needs to be simplified in
calculations (as shown in Fig. 7(a)). For the
experimental pipe system, the computational
region is meshed using 8987 unstructured
quad grids. The calculations of dynamic valve
need a very small time increment, which is set
as 0.0001s. The boundaries are as follow:
 Inlet: the entrance of the pipeline. The
inlet pressure can be set as the measured
pressure in experiments.
 Air: entrapped air pocket is treated as
ideal gas. During the filling, the
entrapped air is confined in pipeline with
no air release. The initial air pressure is
atmospheric pressure.
 Wall: the walls of the pipe and the dead
end. The non-slip condition is imposed by
using the wall-function.
 Valve: the valve opening time is 0.1s
from totally closed to totally opened.
Valve simulation can be realized by using
the dynamic meshes.
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

Air pocket

Wall
1 Air-water interface

0.8

0.6 Wall Wall

Y (m)

0.4

Water
0.2 Valve

Inlet
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X (m)

(a) 2D meshes and boundary conditions. (b) 3D simulation domain and boundary conditions.
Fig. 7 Schematic of the simulation domain and boundary conditions in experimental filling pipeline.

c. 3D VOF model: because 3D valve simulation atmospheric pressure.

involves a huge amount of calculations  Wall: the walls of the pipe and the dead
taking a very long time, the valve is assumed
end. The non-slip condition is imposed by
to be opened instantaneously in 3D model.
using the wall-function.
For the experimental pipe system, the
simulation domain is divided into 64528 As shown in Fig. 6, under different air pocket
unstructured non-uniform grids. Time volumes and inlet pressures, experimental
increment 0.001s is used in simulation. As investigation of transient flow during water filling
shown in Fig. 7(b), the boundaries are as process was conducted. Three experimental cases
follows: referring to initial water depth in the end horizontal
pipe Z, and the upstream inlet pressure Hr (namely,
 Inlet: the entrance of the pipeline. The
water level of upstream reservoir based on the
inlet pressure can be set as the measured
lower horizontal pipe centerline) are as follows: (1)
pressure in experiments.
Z=0 cm, Hr=7.0 m; (2) Z=4.7 cm, Hr =6.48m; (3)
Z=6.6 cm, Hr=5.86m. The linear opening time of
 Air: entrapped air pocket is treated as
ball valve is 0.1 s. The pressure at pressure
ideal gas. During the filling, the
transducer PT1 was calculated with 1D EWM, and
entrapped air is confined in pipeline with
2D and 3D VOF models. In 1D model, the air
no air release. The initial air pressure is
pocket pressure is recorded to compare with the

t = 0.0 s t = 0.0180s t = 0.05s t = 0.07s t = 0.1s

t = 0.1375 s t = 0.18s t = 0.25s t = 0.355s t = 0.65s

Fig. 8 Schematic of entrapped transients of air phases with 2D VOF model (Z=0m and Hr=7.0m case).

135
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
pressure at PT1, and VOF model is capable to
predict the pressure at PT1 directly. In order to
make a comparison of 2D and 3D VOF models, the
case of ignoring the valve is also simulated by
using 2D VOF, and TV is the opening valve time
in Fig. 9 to Fig. 11.
Conclusions from comparisons between calculated
and measured results are as follows.
a. Fig. 8 shows the movement of ball valve and
the air-water interface with 2D VOF model.
When the valve is fully open, the water
column begins to flow through the ball valve
and fill the pipe. During the whole filling
process, the air-water interface always
changes shape, which is similar to
experimental observation. That is very
different from the 1D assumption of “the
air-water interface is perpendicular to pipe
centerline”.
b. It is demonstrated from Fig. 9 to Fig. 11 that
all the numerical models can reproduce the
experimental pressure oscillation pattern
approximately. The results predicted by VOF
models are much closer to those observed in
18 Experiment 3D (Tv=0s)
Pressure (m)
12
0
0 0.15
Fig. 9 Pressure oscillation pattern at PT 1# in Z = 0 cm case.
16 Experiment 3D (Tv=0s)
12
Pressure(m)
0
0 0.11
Fig. 10 Pressure oscillation pattern at PT 1# in Z = 4.7cm case.
the experiments, such as the peak pressure
and oscillation cycle. When the air pocket is
very small, there is a little difference between
pressure oscillation patterns of VOF model
and experiment. One explanation might be
that measuring initial air pocket volume is
difficult, and the evolution and solution of air
pocket are ignored during the filling process
in calculations. In 1D elastic water model,
only the first peak pressure is close to the
measured value, but the following peak
pressures and cycles are not similar to those
recorded in the experiments. The reason is
that, in the present experimental pipe system,
the air-water interface moves orderly forward
in order within the first cycle of the
oscillation, and 1D model could be applied to
determining the pressure surge. During the
later cycles, the movement of air-water
interface becomes more complicated and
orderless. Therefore, it is very difficult with
1D model to consider kinetic energy and
energy loss during the filling process
precisely, and that would lead to the larger
error.
2D (Tv=0s) 2D (Tv=0.1s) 1D (Tv=0.1s)
0.3 0.45 0.6
Time (s)
2D (Tv=0s) 2D (Tv=0.1s) 1D (Tv=0.1s)
0.22 0.33 0.44
Time (s)
136
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
16
Experiment 3D (Tv=0s)
12
Pressure(m)
0
0 0.09
Fig. 11 Pressure oscillation pattern at PT 1# in Z = 6.6cm case.
c. The simulation results of 2D and 3D VOF
models are in substantial agreement. Fig. 9 to
Fig. 11 show that the pressure oscillation
patterns of 2D VOF model are consistent
with those of 3D VOF when the valve is not
considered (TV = 0.1 s). That demonstrates
2D VOF model is applicable despite of
spatial simplification. It highlights that 2D
simulation is simpler and quicker than that of
3D. Therefore, 2D VOF has the advantage in
further investigating the transients flow with
entrapped air.
d. 1D model needs more assumptions to
simulate flow transients in water filling pipe
containing entrapped air pocket, especially in
undulated pipeline system. 1D model just
predicts the maximum air pocket pressure,
but does not provide the occurrence location
of the maximum pressure and air-water phase
distribution, especially in the rising and
falling pipe. In contrast, VOF model can
simulate air-water configuration and pressure
distribution in detail, and predict not only the
maximum system pressure and the maximum
air pocket pressure, but also the occurrence
location of the maximum system pressure.
Consequently, VOF model can make more
rational and effective supports in design and
protection of water pipe systems.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND PROSPECTS
The movement of air pocket, transient pressure
and flow pattern are analyzed in this paper by
using VOF model. Based on the results, the
conclusions may be drawn as follows:
a. The VOF model used above is applicable to
the air-water transient flow in a filling pipe
with a closed end. It is better than the
137
2D (Tv=0s) 2D (Tv=0.1s) 1D (Tv=0.1s)
0.18 0.27 0.36
Time (s)
existing models, both in terms of physical
relevance and numerical accuracy. Especially,
it can be used to simulate the sudden pressure
jump by the water impacting on the pipe-end
wall.
b. Experimental observations and VOF model
simulation both show the water front is
relatively irregular rather than a vertical
air-water interface during the water filling
process. A very important revelation from
VOF is that a sudden pressure jump occurs
by the water impacting on the pipe-end wall.
However, the assumptions of “the air pocket
occupies the entire cross section” and “the
air-water interface is perpendicular to the
centerline of pipe” result in that the air
pocket always occupies the pipe end and the
water column never reaches and impacts on
the pipe end. Thus, 1D model cannot
simulate effectively the movement of air
pocket, especially the pressure jump by water
striking on the pipe end.
c. The dangerous pressure jump depends
greatly on pipe parameters. When the water
column impacted on pipe wall just at or near
the time of the maximum air pocket pressure,
a severe pressure jump would occur, and that
could lead to pipeline failure, as shown in
Fig. 4(a). Location and time of water striking
on pipe wall were different in pipe systems
with different parameters.
d. Calculations and analyses show that, when
air pocket is large, the water impacting on
pipe wall had no effect on the maximum
system pressure. Since 1D model could
predict the approximate first peak pressure as
VOF model does, thus, to reduce the
calculations, 1D model was used prior to
VOF model. When air pocket is very small,
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

pressure pattern from 1D model is obviously Hmax the maximum pressure of pipe system,
different from that of VOF model, and the mH2O
change of peak pressure from the two models Hr the upstream water head, mH2O
are essentially different, as shown in Fig. k turbulent kinetic energy, m2/s2
4(a). Consequently, in this circumstance, 1D La0 initial length of entrapped air pocket, m
model simulates the pressure surge with large Lw0 initial water column length, m
error, and even could reach some wrong MOC Method of Characteristics
conclusions. PISO Pressure Implicit with Splitting of
Operators
e. The simulation results of 2D VOF model are
RWCM Rigid Water Column Model
consistent with those of 3D VOF. Due to the
t time, s
advantage of simplicity and computational
tm occurance time of the maximum
efficiency, 2D VOF is a good choice to make
pressure, s
for a large amount of simulations.
TV the opening valve time, s
As this is the first attempt to use VOF model to UDF User-Defined Function
simulate the pressurized flow in water pipeline VOF Volume of Fluid
containing entrapped air pocket, more work has to Z initial water depth in the end horizontal
be done before it becomes mature. pipe, cm
a. Verify further the VOF model by physical Greek Symbols
model tests in exactly the same conditions of
ε dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic
simulation.
energy, m2/s3
b. Use VOF model to study thoroughly the αa volume fraction of air phase in one
mechanisms of pipe rupture caused by control cell
entrapped air pocket in the rapid filling of a αw volume fraction of water phase in one
pipe with air orifice. control cell
c. Combine the VOF model with water hammer ρ density, kg/m3
model to simulate the transient processes in τ stress tensor
long water pipelines or complex pipe systems. σk turbulence Prandtl numbers of k
This would be more valuable and practical. σε turbulence Prandtl numbers of ε
μ viscosity coefficient
μt turbulence kinetic viscosity

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  velocity, m/s
The writers gratefully acknowledge the financial Subscripts
support for this research from the National Natural i, j direction of coordinate
Science Foundation of China (grant No. a air phase
50979029). w water phase
0 initial state
NOMENCLATURE
REFERENCES
1D One-dimensional
2D Two-dimensional 1. Abreu J, Cabrera E, Garcia J, Pérez R (1991).
3D Three-dimensional Boundary between elastic and inelastic
ADI Alternative Direction Implicit models in hydraulic transients analysis with
C1ε, C2ε the constant for the ε equation entrapped air pockets. Proc. of the 9th Round
D pipe diameter, m Table on Hydraulic Transients with Water
EWM Elastic Water Model Column Separation. September 1991,
f the Darcy friction coefficient of pipe Valencia, Spain, 159–179.
FVM Finite Volume Method 2. Albertson ML, Andrews JS (1971).
g gravitational acceleration Transients caused by air release. Control of
Gk turbulence kinetic energy generated by Flow in Closed Conduits, J.P.Tullis, ed.,
the average velocity gradient, m2/s2 Colorado State University, Fort Collins,
Ha air pocket pressure, mH2O Colorado, 315–340.
Hamax the maximum pressure of air pocket,
mH2O

138
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)
3. Cabrera E, Abreu J, Perez R, Vela A (1992).
Influence of liquid length variation in
hydraulic transients. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, ASCE 118(12):1639–1650.
4. Chaiko MA, Brinckman KW (2002). Models
for analysis of water hammer in piping with
entrapped air. Journal of Fluids
Engineering-Transactions of the ASME
124(1):194–204.
5. Chaudhry MH (1985). Limitation of
hydraulic-transient computation. 21st IAHR
Congress. 19–23 August, Melbourne,
Australia, 132–136.
6. Cheng YG, Li JP, Yang JD (2007). Free
surface-pressurized flow in ceiling-sloping
tailrace tunnel of hydropower plant:
simulation by VOF model. Journal of
Hydraulic Research 45(1):88–99.
7. De Martino G, Fontana N, Giugni M (2008).
Transient flow caused by air expulsion
through an orifice. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, ASCE 134(9):1395–1399.
8. Fuertes VS, Cabrera E, Izquierdo J, Iglesias
PL (1999). Peak pressure evaluation in
pipelines with entrapped air pockets.
Proceedings of the 3rd ASME/JSME Joint
Fluids Engineering Conference. July 18–23,
1999, San Francisco, California, 1–10.
9. Guarga R, Acosta A, Lorenzo E (1996).
Dynamic compression of entrapped air
pockets by elastic water columns. Hydraulic
Machinery and Cavitation, E Cabrera, V
Espert, and F Martinez, eds., Kluwer
Academic Publishers, The Netherlands,
710–719.
10. Hargreaves DM, Morvan HP, Wright NG
(2007). Validation of the volume of fluid
method for free surface calculation: the
broad-crested weir. Engineering Applications
of Computational Fluid Mechanics
1(2):136–146.
11. HIRT CW, Nichols BD (1981). Volume of
fluid method for the dynamics of free
boundary. Journal of Computational Physics
39:201–225.
12. Holley ER (1969). Surging in laboratory
pipeline with steady inflow. Journal of the
Hydraulics Division 95(3):961–980.
13. Izquierdo J, Fuertes VS, Cabrera E, Iglesias
PL, Garcia-Serra J (1999). Pipeline start-up
with entrapped air. Journal of Hydraulic
Research 37(5):579–590.
14. Jönsson L (1985). Maximum transient
pressures in a conduit with check valve and
air entrainment. Proceeding of International
Conference on Hydraulic of Pumping Stations.
139
September 1985, Manchester, England,
55–69.
15. Launder BE, Spalding DB (1972). Lectures in
mathematical models of turbulence.
Academic, London.
16. Lee NH (2005). Effect of pressurization and
expulsion of entrapped air in pipelines.
Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Georgia, United States.
17. Lee NH, Martin CS (1999). Experimental and
analytical investigation of entrapped air in a
horizontal pipe. Proceedings of the 3rd
ASME/JSME Joint Fluids Engineering
Conference. 18–23 July 1999, San Francisco,
California, 1–8.
18. Liu DY, Suo LS (2004). Rigid model for
transient flow in pressurized pipe system
containing trapped air mass. Advances In
Water Science 16(6):717–721. (Chinese)
19. Liu DY, Suo LS (2005). Rigid model of
transient analysis for multiple-characteristic
long pipelines with trapped air mass. Journal
of Hydrodynamics 20(1):44–49. (Chinese)
20. Liu DY, Zhou L (2009). Numerical
simulation of transient flow in pressurized
water pipeline with trapped air mass. 2009
Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering
Conference (Appeec). Wuhan, China,
104–107.
21. Liu DY, Zhou L, Suo LS, Wang F (2009).
Simulation and analysis of the rapid filling in
pipeline containing trapped air mass with
VOF models. Chinese Journal of
Computational Mechanics 26(3):390–394.
(Chinese)
22. Martin CS (1976). Entrapped air in pipelines.
Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Pressure Surges. 22–24
September 1976, Bedford, England, London,
15–27.
23. Ocasio JA (1976). Pressure surging
associated with pressurization of pipelines
containing entrapped air. Special M. S.
Research Report, School of Civil Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology.
24. Thorley ARD (2004). Fluid Transients in
Pipeline Systems, Professional Engineering
Publishing Ltd, London.
25. Wylie EB, Streeter VL (1993). Fluid
Transients in Systems, Prentice Hall, New
York.
26. Youngs DL (1982). Time-dependent
multi-material flow with large fluid distortion.
Numerical Method for Fluid Dynamics,
Academic Press, New York, 273-285.
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 5, No. 1 (2011)

27. Zhou F (2000). Effects of trapped air on flow

transients in rapidly filling sewers. Doctoral
dissertation, University of Alberta, Canada.
28. Zhou F, Hicks F, Steffler P (2002a). Effects
of trapped air during rapid filling of partially
full pipes. Annual Conference of the
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering. 5–8
June 2002, Canada, 1–10.
29. Zhou F, Hicks F, Steffler P (2004). Analysis
of effects of air pocket on hydraulic failure of
urban drainage infrastructure. Canadian
Journal of Civil Engineering 31(1):86–94.
30. Zhou F, Hicks FE, Steffler PM (2002b).
Observations of air-water interaction in a
rapidly filling horizontal pipe. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE
128(6):635–639.
31. Zhou F, Hicks FE, Steffler PM (2002c).
Transient flow in a rapidly filling horizontal
pipe containing trapped air. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE
128(6):625–634.
32. Zhou F, Tsang D, Hicks F, Steffler P, Ward C
(2001). Pressure oscillation induced by
trapped air in a trunk-shaft sewer system.
15th Canadian Hydrotechnical Conference of
the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering.
30 May–2 June 2001, Victoria, British
Columbia, Canada, 1–8.

140