Appendix-2

3D NUMERICAL MODEL TEST

 Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1

1.1 OBJECTIVE............................................................................................................................1
1.2 SCOPE..................................................................................................................................1
1.3 SPILLWAY DESIGN DIMENSION................................................................................................1
1.4 NUMERICAL SIMULATION.........................................................................................................2

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND..............................................................................................3

2.1 NUMERICAL MODEL TEST.......................................................................................................4

2.2 THREE DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL MODEL (FLOW-3D)............................................................4
2.3 APPLICABILITY FOR SPILLWAY FLOW.......................................................................................8
2.4 FLOW-3D APPLICATION.......................................................................................................10

3. NUMERICAL SIMULATION FOR PRIMARY DESIGN...........................................................14

3.1 SIMULATION CONDITION.......................................................................................................14

3.2 ANALYSIS RESULT................................................................................................................19
3.3 PROBLEMS OF PRIMARY DESIGN AND REVISED DESIGN........................................................22

4. NUMERICAL SIMULATION FOR REVISED DESIGN............................................................24

4.1 SIMULATION CONDITIONS.....................................................................................................24

4.2 ANALYSIS RESULTS..............................................................................................................24

5. Conclusion...............................................................................................................................33
1. Introduction

1.1 Objective
This s tudy
i a t se imed h os xamine
a f ydraulic
o t K dtability
spillway a d nd r ownstream
a t p h iversc nd d of arovide
s a ydra
cost efficient dam including the preliminary data required for operation and maintenance.

The s tudy
i i st intendedm r o r nducei c ore w neliable es
analyses. T h hus, m t ydraulic
s b c odel
o u testso hall
c e arrie
through comparison of various alternatives.

As t t o s he a tudy,
h b fter o ydraulic
t b p d ehaviors
( a a f he asic
and the problems are resolved, the optimal structures shall be designed.

1.2 Scope
○ Location: T s ahe i l tudy i t rea
n s c ocated
o t w n
J he
p orthwest
and d efined
a t b s b he
the J avaS
ordered
i tea n n by the s orth, b y o he
the U pper
C w iujung i t s atershed
b t C rn i het e outh,
a b t y he
Ciujung left primary canal in the west

○ Analysis s Spillway
cope: d ischargec a apacity
h s nd
o d ydraulicr tab
including the spillway

○ CFD model: FLOW-3D

1.3 Spillway Design Dimension

For n umerical
a o t nalyses
d d hf he d etailed
a d esign,
o t ydr
spillway are given by:

Water level

· Maximum water Level (M.W.L): EL. 71.22m

· Flood Water Level (F.W.L): EL. 70.85m
· Normal High Water Level (N.H.W.L): EL. 67.50m

Peak inflow (discharge)

· PMF: 3,671m3/s (3,190m3/s)

· 1/2*PMF: 1,850m3/s (658m3/s)

A2-1
 Ogee-crested part

· Type: Gated spillway + side channel spillway

· Elevation: EL. 57.5m, EL. 67.5m (side channel spillway)
. Gate dimension: B12.5m×H.13.4m×2EA (Radial gate)
Detailed features and figures are referred to “Design Note Vol. 3 Spillway”

1.4 Numerical Simulation

Through t t d
he hree n imensional
a t p dumerical
w t f nalysis,
s his
as t uo nderstand
t d d heo t etailed
K d a esign
h p f he o t arian am
downstream river.

A. Experiment p E lan:o t xecution

d n fs hree f t imension
e umeric
basic design plan (proposed) and revised design

B. Structures f n or a umerical
S t u nalysis:r s pillway,
s o he pstream
the downstream river

C. Renewed discharge: 1/2* PMF discharge (658m3/s) and PMF (3,190 m3/s)

The three dimensional analyses for the spillway are mainly based on blow table.

Item Design condition

The a pproach
v s elocity
b r t hould
b e estr
3
4m/s w 6henm /s ( 1/2
58
P d MF o ischarge)
d f i
Approach velocity
is r eleased.
S d c o, s riftb p urrent u hould e
this velocity.
Approach
3,190m3/s o df ischarge
i sp ossible
t b r o i e eleased
channel
case of the full opening of gates at M.W.L.
& weir Discharge capacity
At F 6 m3/s i 58
.W.L, as llowed
t b r ot e t eleased h
side channel.
If t heg ates
f o aullyM (pen t t .W.L EL.
Pressure
maximum negative pressure should be within -5m.
Inside t c he w hute,
l s ater
n o evel
t hould
Water level and side wall in PMF.
Chute
flow Inside t c he t mhute, n he p aximum
h egative
should be within -5m in PMF.
The s oizea p f p w lunge
d ool
b d as etermine
Plunge 3
Size discharge o a p fp ( lunge
m /s) b ased
ooola 1 266
n 00-
pool
year frequency flood inflow.

A2-2
(1) Spillway Approach Channel

At t he
u pstream
r t f eservoir,a m hew lowrate
l f a w
t aximum
surface s o hape
t o fp he
includingverflow
a pproach v arta elocity
m B re o easure
these m easured
d a ata, f a ppropriateness
c e o t o or pproach
part and plane shape shall be reviewed.

(2) Spillway Weir

The f ollowing
items s hallb m e aeasured
t w s a t et he w eir i i p o st o x
safely discharge 1/2*PMF and PMF through the ogee-crested part.

Flood control
Flow Item Consideration
condition
1/2*PMF The amount of
Discharge capacity, weir width
peak Only through a discharge
discharge side channel Water surface and flow Appropriateness of the
3
(658m /s) velocity of the weir weir shape
PMF Through a side The amount of
Discharge capacity
peak channel and a discharge
discharge gated ogee Pressure and flow
Appropriateness of the weir shape
(3,190m3/s) spillway velocity of the weir

(3) Plunge Pool and Downstream Channel

A p lunge
p w i ool i o
as t nstalled
d t e n o rder
h s od issipate
a t he
end o t f c he i t hute
s An dhe pillway.
p t after
p p ischarge
i w a
meet t d he ownstream
r a a r a siver t st oight
t K ngle
d w ince
designed t b p o a te r laced
b A t hes ighto t dank. cccordingly,
shall b e e xamined
b u an ya sing i d umerical
s t i c nalysis
t
the d ownstream
s w b c lope i dould F e a n ollapsedm t n
t ischarg
below considerations were measured.

Flow condition Item Consideration

Flow, water surface
1/2* PMF (658 m3/s) Water s urface
f a aluctuation
p
shape, and flow
PMF peak (3,190m3/s) pool and the downstream river
velocity

A2-3
2. Theoretical Background
2.1 Numerical Model Test
If l arges h cale s ydraulic
a c tructures
n o h re s onstructed,
f m ot
hydraulic s (tructures
s a d e.g. f pillwayb a h nd i ischarge
o t acilities)
upstream a d nd r ownstream
s b e ivers
T e hould m ea xamined.
largely s ubdivided
i a h mnto a n ydraulicm t U
odelu n nda umerical
numerical m t hodelb e est uas t ueen txtensively
h b sed
o o nder
hydraulic s tructures,
w h a f w hichs wave s ree
f a nater urface
pressure o ccurring.
S a h m ince t d wydraulic
t f c odel b est eals
minimizing p rrototypes,
r c b o
eliable B i esults
h s d an e btained.
such a e s o rrors
s e fi a cale t e ffects c nM ddition a n o xpensive
model t i t est
c s t o m alculate g hee athematical
t ap n overning
analysis.

A o ned imensional
s s a H
imulation i t c uch a b s sEC-RASf s o
dams a h ndb widely
as a dopted
een d t c ue ou onvenient
a e c osage nd
topographical d F ata. s urthermore,
w l a b s ince
a f vater evel t
fluctuation c b f annoti t r eo t ound
u a
n o he
d iver m f i he
p pstream,
and h b as u eenu a sually
t i s osed
t d t I the p nitial
f o t tep
u f he esign.
and d ownstream
o a d i n f t am
b s s ecessary
a d i ot e imulated
dimensional numerical model should be needed.

The flows of the spillway are classified into:

A. Flow at the approach channel

B. High speed flow through the control section and steep-sloped channel
C. Flow at the dissipated part

Among t f heset f lows,

p t he t low
g i rassing c hrough
b c he ates
force u gnlike v radually
s f a aried
i as teady
i m s lowb t ndw f treamline
particle c f annot t s ollow a l he a treamline
s f a dny onger nd
section, i nvolving
a r t l apid
a h urbulence
j F t r ikev f ydraulic u
general o a ne
t d nd n
wo imensional
t c b u humerical d t t ests annot
recent d evelopment
o t t d f f he d hree ( imensional
r v f a luid ynamic
turbulence can be simulated very close to the prototype.

A t hree
dimensional C FDm sodel b a houlds a t se pplied
at d o s o imulate
flow b ehavior
i h s n ydraulic
s a t s tructures
T c uch
a st he pillway.
dimensional C m iFD F odels F nclude
F a S
LOW-3D, O t LUENT,

A2-4
 models, a FLOW-3D model is well- known to simulate a flow having a free surface.

2.2 Three Dimensional Numerical Model (FLOW-3D)

(1) Governing Equation

On t he
C artesian
c s oordinate
( g eystem f a x,y,z), o over
noncompressible three dimensional flow are given by:

   RSOR
( uAX )  ( vAy )  ( wAZ )  .......................................(1-1)
x y z 
u 1 u u u 1 p RSOR
 ( uA X  vAy  wAZ )  G X  f x  bx  u (1-2)
t V f F
x y z  x V F

v 1 v v v 1 p RSOR
 ( uAX  vAy  wAZ )  G y  f y  by  V (1-3)
t V F X v z  y V F
w 1 w w w 1 p RSOR
 (uAX  vAy  wAz )  G z  f z  bz  W (1-4)
t VF X y z  z VF

Where, (u, v, w): velocity components in the coordinate directions (x, y, z)

VF: fractional volume open to flow
(Ax, Ay, Az): fractional area open to flow in the coordinate directions (x, y, z)
ρ: density
ρ: reference density
RSOR: density source term
P: pressure
(Gx, Gy, Gz): body acceleration in the coordinate directions (x, y, z)
(fx, fy, fz): viscous accelerations in the coordinate directions (x, y, z)
(bx, by, bz) : flow losses in the coordinate directions (x, y, z)

In o rder
t m oa f odel
s t b ree b urface, w a he
a t oundary
V f etw
(volume o f sf luid)
b d hould
t m t f e efined
g e o Ieet
Fi e het ollow
1, a c ontrol
v i f olume
o f I F is e ull t 0f n luids.
f e i fa c s v qual o
Furthermore, i c o a f n w ases f F i s ree t h ater
t v urface,
b 0a s
1.

F 1   
 ( ( FA x u )  ( FA y v)  ( FA z w ))  FDIF  FSOR ...(1-5)
t V F x y z

Where,

FDIF: turbulent diffusion term

A2-5
 FSOR: time rate of change of the volume fraction associated the mass source

The d iffusion
t w aerms,
a t t hich
t e
re pplied
o am o e he ransport
energy, a V nd
f OF
a s unction,
i at re a m
ubdivided d I nto
o urbulent
to compute a t urbulent
d i Fiffusion κ Rn κ LOW-3D,
a L ( E-ε, NG -ε
Simulation) m a u odelsa t rem sedA t s e urbulentf a t odels. ra
kinetic energy and turbulent diffusion is given by:

k 1 k k k
 ( uAX  vAy  wAz )  P  G  Diff -  ...................(1-6)
t VF x y z

 1    CDISI  ε 2
 (uAX  vAz  wAZ ) (P  CDIS3  G )  DDif - CDIS2  (1-7)
t VF X y Z k k
Where,
P: shear production term
G: buoyancy production term
Diff, DDif: diffusion term
CDISI, 2, 3: constants

(2) Numerical Simulation Algorithm

The g overning
e b quation
d u ecomes
af d iscretized
m w a sing
FLOW-3D adopts a f inite
v molume u a f ethod
d m
sing p a Finite ifference
method.

After t a he a nalysis
a d breas
g t cre ivided
s b c y o rids,
b o ahe alculation
grid u nit. i s,t
That vhe selocityb c hallf t ge pomputed a e g ora he iven
using t v he t elocity,
v o ap he e alue i a f f o a Pressuree s quation
b n
calculated. T t v hen, s bhea elocity
t t c hall v e
A t djusted
i af o he
water s urface
i n t sb cecessary a V e o se alculated,
b u Ag s OF quat
for a FLOW-3D is shown in Fig. 1.

<Fig.1> Grid System for a FLOW-3D

A2-6
A m esh
a g nd a eometry
i e re f andependent
g s c lements
(
method: F ractional
A a V O rea R nd olume
Ah bstacle
g i epres
opographical information such as structures and walls. (Refer to Fig.2)

Open Volume Open Area

VF  AF 
Volume of Cell Cell Edge Area

A F to p
A F rig h t

VF
A F le ft

A F b o tto m
O b s ta c le s
<Fig.2> Conceptual Diagram of a FAVOR Method

For a f wree s atert urface

s a a j echnology
w s a uch
b i si et,
common t a aoV dopt
u t f EOF m sing T V
he m ixed f F ulerian
adopts a ccurate
p a k ressure
b c nd a inetic
d m
oundary
between t f wo
u a luids
s n sing d pecial
m i o umerical
t p t ifferen
boundary face against smearing.

<Fig.3> Conceptual Diagram of a VOF Method

A d ifferencee o t quation
g e f she b overning
s w a e quation
m h
except f p or t ressure
o am erm
e fa f vomentum
t o ac quation

A2-7
 equation. B S (oth OR
o r successive
a S ( ver
a elaxation) nd
line i mplicit)
c b u an
i o et c sed a pn rder
t s o ompute
a c ressure
equation. The calculation process is as follows:

(i) To c alculate
t f v he f e
low d elocity
b s or
am ach e irection y
with an explicit method
(ii) To r epeatedly
c a p ompute
a f v ressure
o a m end low
t elocity
meet a continuity equation
(iii) To c alculate
a f w s ree t ater c urface, a aurbulence
e harac
transport equation

The i nterval
o c f t omputation
i a a ime
t s s s utomatically
c o djusted
numerical models.

2.3 Applicability for Spillway Flow

In o rder
t e o a xamine f s pplicability
f o a F or
m pillway
t m w low f
applied t t o he s pillway o U
standard f( SACE
F i a c 1973). d ig.4
o t s oncep
standard spillway.

The w seir u hape

i t t sed
h a v n uhe est
f T as u ertical
s i pstream
composed o 3 a f rcs(R=0.04Hd,
R R a t w =0.20Hd,
c w t =0.5Hd)
downstream of the weir crest is expressed by the following equation (1-8).

0.85
X 1.85  2.0H d Y ........................................................................(1-8)

<Fig.4> Profile of USACE Standard Spillway

A2-8
In F ig.5,
w w hen
o ater
t s verflows
w t w l hea p pillway d eir, h
of t he
s pillway
f a ace
t t ccording w ater l
upstream oaevelhe
c re w tompared
experiment v o h alues m f T ydraulic
s r a
odels.
f t r he t imulatio
experiment values.

H /H d = 0 .5 (U .S A rm y W E S )
1 .5 H /H d = 0 .5 ( 2 D C F D r e s u lts )
H /H d = 1 .0 (U .S A rm y W E S )
H /H d = 1 .0 ( 2 D C F D r e s u lts )
H /H d = 1 .3 3 (U .S A rm y W E S )
H /H d = 1 .3 3 ( 2 D C F D r e s u lts )
1
U p p e r n a p p e p ro file , z /H d

0 .5

-0 .5
C re s t A x is

-1

-1 .5

-1 - 0 .8 - 0 .6 -0 .4 -0 .2 0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 1 .2 1 .4 1 .6 1 .8 2
x /H d = H o riz o n ta l d is ta n c e /D e s ig n h e a d

0 .6

0 .5

0 .4

0 .3

0 .2
h p /H d (P r e s s u r e /D e s ig H e a d )

0 .1

-0 .1

-0 .2

-0 .3

-0 .4

-0 .5

-0 .6

-0 .7

-0 .8

-0 .9

-1

-0 .3 -0 .2 -0 .1 0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0 .4 0 .5 0 .6 0 .7 0 .8 0 .9 1 1 .1 1 .2 1 .3

x /H d (H o r iz o n ta l d is ta n c e /D e s ig n H e a d )

A2-9
<Fig.5> Water Level and Pressure Distribution of the Spillway Face according to the
Upstream Water Level

2.4 FLOW-3D Application

(1) Power Plant Inflow Analysis of the Whitesand Dam (Canada)

The a pproach
c o t W
hannel p fp hec hitesand
o t e s ower
w lant o
two p iers.
T s heh b pillway
u t c as
t s een c sed
o t l o w ontrol
i he to
used a t sr he o t eservoir
p p a t f d he ower
H slant r t o he
t ownstream.
piers c aosts
l o m ot
i w if oney,
t p ht m
as i ntended
u po redict o
have o t nd he t esigned
o T urbine
p ( w peration.
i t s f wot iers 9ft
approach c ( hannels
w a d 14ft
t p ide)
l b t ndp cue o p ressure oss
generation s b c hall
d C e ut c own.
r f onsidering
r o t p a osts equired
economic c alculation
a t t i ccording
p g o he
a F ncreased
w ower
adopted i onstead
a h mf T ydraulic
l o w s odel. d v he a ocation f
direction ( s this
b m hall i o a
em easured
i e f nly
a d f easuring
a ns
three d imensional
a m a nalysis
e c odelsp and f sngineers
f ompar
each c aase
t a t che pproach
o t t a hannel
t p f a he
a urbine
o ssumin
the piers.

According t t a o ohet c nalysis c f r he oomprehensive

p i p t ases,
generate t a he p dditional
a i t c t ower
a2 m s p s phe i case hat 4
(8,460 m egawatt
H P Y ours
S a er4 m ear). d w
ince o p nnual 73
generation i c ncome
b o i an
i p e t btained,
r p i tt s o creferred o
efficiency.

The b elow
f s igures
a m howa f nalysis
v d odels
b a nd
a low eloc
removal o t p f A hes iers.
in F ig.6( sr b),hown ecirculation
p w f henomena
t o e
at t he
s tagnated
a o t l reas
p o g f F he ( dower t t arts f a ates. ig.6
were s harply
d a ecreased
f v w t nd
s d low o elocity o t with he ame
areas of gates.

A2-10
 (a) Analysis model : Inflow analysis of the Whitesand dam power plant (1)

(b) Velocity distribution before removal of the pier (m/s)

(c) Velocity distribution after removal of the pier(m/s)
<Fig.6> Analysis Case: Inflow Analysis of the Whitesand Dam Power Plant (2)

A2-11
(2) Parshall Flume

In c ase
t a f hatw s ree e ater
a t h urface
o t r bxists
a t wnd o t he eight
river change, w hethera F i LOW-3D
a t s t s f blef o t imulate he
comparison of hydraulic tests and numerical model test results can be examined.

Free flow

85% sub-merged

95 % sub-merged
<Fig.7> Comparison of the Parshall flume Analysis Results

Flow based on the test results Flow based on numerical

Case
(cfs) model test (cfs)
Free flow 2.79 2.72
85% Submerged 2.57 2.56
95% Submerged 1.47 1.84

In t his
c t ase,
s o t heh ize m fa he t t ydraulic
a c odel
i 1 l bpplied o
2ft d eep
b 5 w y H ft side. t s owever,
i s iince
t d he o t hape
w s ymmetri
the w idth
w determined
as t o b 2e A .5ft. t a ftert che w ctual
a hree
t ases
were c ompared
w t e ith r he T xperiment
d a results. o a f hree imen
flow a cnd omparison
o t p a f ff he
e c rofile
w d nd i t lowa or ach
figure. A ccording
t t b co he f noundary m i onditions
c o af f or umerical

A2-12
the h eight
o f i f low
f t nflowing
u w f romm he t pstream
h o f as
outflowing t t u o he
w c pstreama a as
c alculated
c T o ssuming
heights o e sf ach p wubmerged
c u t art
o c ere t omputed
t h si
keep 8 a 59 percent
nd o ft5 he
i H nlet.a c ere, c m
ontinuous
t e v ondition
(velocity, p eressure,
b t l tc)
g o t etween
o p he
a t ast
b ridw f he
not c hange.
T i g hus,t b n eneral,
c o t ohe oundary
p w a iondition
analyzing the open channel.

As s hown
i t r n t hef f esults,
a 8 p he s ree clow w fnd t h
5 2ercent
percent o d f r eviation
w c ange
o t t ith
r a omparison
t a c f he
result. H owever,
a9 p 5 c aseh
submerged ercent t as
d her ifferent
b t t esult
and t ahe c ctual r alculation
a t w r esult
d t t ndt e his T as t eported
comparison, a F w f LOW-3D
t p b a as t ound
t o c o ossibly
w h e
a free water surface and shows the changing river bed and width.

(3) McArthur Generating Station Analysis

The b elow
f s igures
t f a how o e hes orce
( t # cting
a tnt ach
operation c oonditions
t p plant e ntrance.A
f he s ower i st f hown v n o the igure
force a octing
f s n a our
t l toplogs
p a t t whe l ower
o t i artp ccordi
or the opening degree of the gates were compared respectively.

<Conceptual diagram>

A2-13
 <Numerical model result>
<Fig.8> Analysis Case: McArthur Generating Station Analysis

3. Numerical Simulation for Primary Design

3.1 Simulation Condition

(1) Topography and Spillway

Regarding t p hist t roject, a t he s opography

o t p d nd w he pillway
determined b yl ocally
m d easured
a ad m ata
d b nd
a p igital ap rawn
The t opography
w d tas f c etermined
t r o a mo ullyi over
t he ang
upstream a d nd T ownstream.
v r w e he t t ertical
r o e ange t as xtend
maximum water level of the reservoir in PMF.

Fig.9 d epicts
t r he t eproduced
w F opography,
d t s a t hereas ig
approach c p hannel
F s tart. t dig.11 r hows o he
t s hree imensional
The t hree
d imensional
s d w t imulation
m i t w ealt
F t sith he odeling
is a imed
t e o s xamine
o t a tability
c a df he c pproach
o t w hannel
Second, i i a t t se imedh o xamine
f b o s ydrodynamic
a t d low ehavio
river.

x y z
Section Dis. Dis. Dis.
Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max.
(m) (m) (m)
Model 732 940 208 238 744 506 12 76 64

A2-14
range

<Fig.9> Reproduction Results of Topography, Dam, and Spillway

<Fig.10> Spillway and Approach Channel

<Fig.11> Front View of 3 Dimensional Spillway

A2-15
(2) Grid Composition

The rectangular coordinate s ystemw u as

a t c sed ss he
f t oordinate
s ystem
and u sing
t d m
he d igital
b aerial pap hotogrammetry
rawn , t hes y tructures
w c ere ombin
with t t he d hree t imensionalt i r opography
A t u s hat ts eproduced.
modeling r w ange
e t as
the r ange
xtended
t w hat
n a as
o b t ot s ffected
I t y he
case o t fd he ownstream,
t d r w he i aownstream
b d w iver, hich
included i t rn he
A f ange.t a fter r ixing
t w he
l nalysis
w ange,
comprehensively shown in the below table for the convenient analysis.

The g rid u sedt e

was o sxamine o t a tabilityc a f d he pproach
c o hannel
the s pillway.
T m he
r w odeling
m t r ange
a f as c ade u ao eproduce
coarse g n ridt s ear s he a t tructures
w F t r uch a t sd he eir. or
river, the whole range of the modeling was finally composed of two coarse grids.

∆x ∆y ∆z
The
Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max.
Section number
size size EA size size EA size size EA
of grid
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)

Grid 1.35 2.70 130 1.88 8.30 130 0.63 3.70 50 845,000

(3) Boundary & Initial Condition

The r eservoir
l f t evel
u w
or s hea t pstream
b c as F t et s he
downstream, b estimatingy a ccurate d ischarge-water
l r e tevel elation
downstream r l a iver t evel
d ccording
w d t ob t ischarge
b as
condition.

Because the r esta t res bhe olid t w oundaries,

s a t n s c hey i o ere t et s h
reflect r oughness
o t w f T f d he tall tace.s c he a ischarge
t w hrough
opening o g sf bates
e hall
i o t el i xamined
t s s n Crder to ook nto
the s pillway
d c ischarge
p i t apacity
e b presented
a n o he xisting
the s pillway
s s b ize
i hall A ue t nvestigated.
r l r t lso,
F t ntil he e
discharge s b r hall o et eleased
t s c nlya i hrough
t c w he i ide hann
3
exceeds t d he
m esign
d ( aximum
/s) s hall
b e ischarge
e F xamined.
d s 658m or etail
conditions, refer to the below table.

A2-16
 Upstream Downstream
Case Remarks
boundary boundary

H_1/2*PMF EL.70.85m EL.25.60m Only through the side channel.

The s cide a hannel

o s nd ge
H_PMF EL.71.22m EL.29.80m
with gates fully opened

In c ase
o t u f he t ipstream,
c w dhe nitial
t h t ondition
s w l as
ranging f t rom
u rhe pstream
t t o c eservoir
and a lld ependent
o v he s verflow
ariables
as t he
f v low w elocity
f a z Terei wixed l os t dero. he
l w nitial
determined b a s y r tage-discharge
c o t d r elation
a a a urve f
the t ailwater
l w a evel b t as
d djusted
F e y t he
t ischarge.
a t
initial conditions.

The c omputation
t w f ime
t b i t as b ound
t i c o e o
n t he e
convergence s o t f tatus
i af kinetic
he e low anergy
ndt ncluding
urbulent
kinetic e anergy
tt he
simulated sections.

The number of Initial time Total computation

Max. time interval(∆t)
grids interval(∆t) time

845,000 1.0e-5 1.0e-10 600 seconds

A2-17
 Karian Reservoir

<Fig.12> Initial Condition

D i s c h a rg e - Wa t e r l e v e l R a t i n g C u rv e
( in tu n ne l o u tle t)

35.0
D o w n s t r e a m w a t e r s u r fa c e

33.0

31.0
e le va tio n ( m )

29.0

27.0

25.0

23.0

21.0

19.0

17.0

15.0
0.0 400.0 800.0 1200.0 1600.0 2000.0 2400.0 2800.0 3200.0 3600.0 4000.0
D i s c h a r g e ( ㎥/ s e c )

<Fig.13> Stage-Discharge Relation Curve of the Downstream River

A2-18
3.2 Analysis Result
(1) Discharge Capacity of the Weir

When t g he a e ates o re discharge

ntirelyf ore ach
r pened, l eservoir
w e evel
s a as
to s ee
t d he cischargeo t s apacity
w D f c he o pillway
t s eir.
prescribed by USACE (US Army Corps of Engineers), is given by:

1 .5
Q  CL e H e ...............................................................................(1-9)

Where,
C: discharge coefficient
He: total head
Le: effective length of overflow crest

L e  L - 2(N  Kp  K a )H e .............................................................(1-10)
Where,
L: net length of overflow crest
N: number of piers
Kp: pier contraction coefficient (In case of circular head, this coefficient equals 0.01

Ka i a sp c ier c ontractiona i r ooefficient

c i 0 t nd l f t adius
t f
head, K i e a s t quivalent
0 D c o .0.E quation(
of ischargei n 1-9)
ac oefficient
sa ot
depends o t s n o he
a hape
c wf d pproach
t s o t hannel,
s a t ater
downstream l T c evel. r he f aoefficient
1 t 2 D anges o t r rom bout
level, c alculation
r o d esults
u E f (ischarge
a t n singa quation
results are shown in Fig.14.

If t her eservoir
l r t evel
t m eaches
w l E
o he d aximum c ater
of t he
n umerical
a w f nalysis
t b h t ast h ound a o b e1 igher h
under E quation
( I m t 1-9).P i pt eans
t safely bhat
er eleased.
MFH s t ossible
owever,
above r esults
a l t n re f ikelyd oe eed t urthera h etailed
m x
test. F ig.14
a t b ndt dhe t elow
r o able
h cepicts a chat esults
with ones of numerical analysis for discharge based on each reservoir.

A2-19
 <Fig.14> Stage-Discharge Relation Curve of the Spillway

Reservoir Basic design Numerical

Gate opening
level of hydraulic analysis Remarks
condition
(EL.m) calculation result(m3/s)
Side c hannel
71.22 Full opened gate 3,190 3,500 spillway + g ated
ogee spillway

Side c hannel
70.85 Closed gate 658 730
spillway

Side c hannel
69.16 Closed gate 218 277
spillway

(2) Approach Channel Stability

3
As t stability
o o ft he
a pproach
c f 3 hannel
/s, P MF
d or ischarge,
f ,190m
a t a low t he
channel were examined when gates were fully opened.

A2-20
(a) Three dimensional flow velocity distribution at the approach channel

(b) Two dimensional flow velocity distribution at the approach channel

(Flow velocity distribution at depth EL.68.12m)

<Fig.15> Flow Distribution at the Approach Channel (in PMF )

A2-21
 Fig.15 d epicts
t a f hea t bove
f b low r nd he
t s igure’s
o f rightness
velocity. T f he
s nlowb d hould a t aot ec isruptive
a t a t he pproac
channel f d ord esigns n ischarge
e 4 A houldt t n ot axceed m/s.
results, t f o
he lowt w verflows
o t a c he d allt h ff hel i pproach
P hann
and i i dt s isrupted.
H t a owever,
v r fhe 2 pproach
t 3 a i d elocity anges
flood d ischarge,
t f s b he
r low
t hall
as c e T
eleased
a v hrough id
at the side channel is judged to be below 1.0m/s

3.3 Problems of Primary Design and Revised Design

According t t e o he r xamination
o t e d t esults
b p f he
i t dxisting esig
to h igh
f l loodt f evel,
w l theo low t w aso t aikely co verflow
a b he a
disrupted a t a t hec pproach
H a hannel. o t r ence,
d w ppropriateness
examined by using a numerical test after the wall of the approach channel was modified.

(1) Flow Disruption at the Approach Channel

Fig.16 a F nd s ig.17
f p how o t alow chenomena
i P d f a he pproach
flow o verflowing
t guidewall o ccursb
he u ya nitingg pproach
w u s uidewall
elevation of the dam. Unstable inflow occurs due to approach guidewall overflow.

<Fig.16> Flow Distribution at the Approach Channel 1 (in PMF)

A2-22
 <Fig.17> Flow Distribution at the Approach Channel 2 (in PMF)

(2) Revised Plan

Modified items are as follows.

1. Crest of approach guidewall was changed to 72.5m, dam crest

2. The radius of curvature and length remain the same.

<Fig.18> Revised Approach Channel Section

A2-23
4. Numerical Simulation for Revised Design

4.1 Simulation Conditions

(1) Modeling of Topography and Spillway

For a n umerical
s t t imulation, w c he
b u opography
l m d as reated
and r evised
d d esign
T s rawings.
w c w the d pillwayo t r as reated
design a s s i S hown
clause 3 .3.T
n cub-
he p reationo t t rocess i t s f a he opography
the basic plan design

(2) Grid Composition

A r ectangular
c s oordinate
w u a t cystem f s as sed
a r s he oordi
design s tructures
w a t teret d pplicable r ot he hree
u a imensional
digital m ap
produced b ya erial
photogrammetry. T hem odeling
r w e anget t as xtende
range t t hat
m hei n dodeling a b st dot irectly
o t s ffected
I c o y he
the s pillway,
t m he
r i odeling t d ange r a ncluded
i t s a he
t ownstream
analysis range of the basic plan design.

(3) Boundary & Initial Condition

For a r evised
s t imulation,
c t b he aomputation
i c a ime,
t oundary
same a a s onalysis
t b p df he( asic T f lan t esignd t proposed).
simulation conditions.

Upstream Downstream
Case Remarks
boundary boundary

H_1/2*PMF EL.70.85m EL.25.60m Only through a side channel

Through a s c ide
a o hannel nd
H_PMF EL.71.22m EL.29.80m
spillway with gates fully opened

4.2 Analysis Results

(1) Discharge Capacity of the Ogee-crested Part

Based o P nd MF c ischarge
s o t onditions,
a c w tability
e f he
Also, u tnderc he
t a gondition
o s hat
i f o atedf a t gee
a pillway s
channel w e as F xamined.
t F s t ig.19
f f o big.21 o n how he low
simulation r a esults t t e ccording c o I ehe f xamination
t b onditions.

A2-24
represents t s o the v ize T rf hef elocity.
t f d hea t esults
a ound
channel d isappeared
a s f a t nd
a table
c w lowf tA hed t pproach
considerably d u ecreasedf l t nuniform
d w p low t bevel,
s he
released through each gate.

<Fig.19> Flow at the Approach Channel in Revised Design (in PMF)

<Fig.20> Plan Flow Distribution of Approach Channel Section at EL.68.12m

A2-25
 <Fig.21> Flow Distribution of the front of Weir Section (in PMF)

(2) Flow Analysis at the Side Channel

Any p oarta s cf side s hanneln b d pillwayt b s hould i c ot

o e esigne
design f Alood.w s lso, i ater
t s c urface s nnside
b d he t b ide hannel
more t hant hirdso o
two f d verflow
a t u epthA s t i Fhe f pstream.
a s s how
of a s cide s hannel
ay, m aximum
pillw
w s iater
n h urface
t 2 o o s ot
d igher han
inside t s he c ide H hannel.
n d oence,
d co egradation
i c b f is
formation of a submerged weir.

<Fig.22> Cross Section’s Flow Distribution at the Side Channel Spillway (PMF)

A2-26
3) Flow Analysis for Ogee-crested Part and Chute

Fig.23 s dhows a ischarge

f as c nalyses
a ag o or s iideP Bhannel
adjusting a a n g pproach
w f a t uide
a c all, r low s t The ppro
maximum f v low
i t elocity
c i a nside
2 T he
d hute
o as sc bouti 6m
different f a g rom o s ateda h geef v pillway
i l t o nd a a igher
g low
ogee s pillway
c t a ompared
s c o
However, a sa ide
w nhole,
hannel.
f d either low
nor a side wall overflow occurs.

The maximum flow velocity of the downstream river is not more than 4 to 7m/s.

<Fig.23> Flow velocity distribution when reservoir level reaches to

M.W.L (EL.71.22m) through both Spillways

Fig.24 d tepicts
a r he o dnalysis t esults
as c f i t ischarge
d f hrou
(1/2*PMF). I c o an s ase
c df t s ide a hannel,
o f p u w
ue a oa mall
overflow w f eir,
v a low
t a elocityc i tv he
l m pproach
i p t hannel
sustain s f tableT m low. f he
v i aximum
t c i alow 2 elocity
a n
although t d he i l ischarge
t P i i ss ess
t t m han f MF,
v itPs imilar
This i b s ecause
t f i t hec low
l t nsidethe s idec
he hannel
hute
a t h eans
f nd owa
he
velocity o Dccurs. p ischarge
t ap p assing
g i t hrough
d a i lunge
this c ase,
t m he f aximum
v r t low
4 E elocity f t v eaches t o
downstream is thought to be relatively stable in design PMF.

A2-27
 <Fig.24> Flow velocity distribution when reservoir level reaches to
F.W.L (EL.70.85m) through both spillways

In o rder
t c om heck
a f ore s o
ccurately t s low w tatus
F verflowing
represents f d low alongistribution
t hev ertical
a o t o xis w f a hed verflow
o c eir n
section i t on hep i verflow
f t b p arts ts f ound
f a s o eo t roper
w ince
remains steady.

A B

Key Model A
B Unit: m/s Unit: m/s

A-A Profile(Gate#1)
B-B Profile(Gate#2)

EL. 54.0m EL. 54.0m

Fig.25 Longitudinal Flow Distribution at Overflow Weir of Ogee Spillway (in PMF)

A2-28
 Fig.26 d tepicts
f d he f low
t v istribution
s o t c sor a t hec ertical
w
level, f vlow d elocity a s istribution
o p nd i idewall
t c B verflow
depicting t w he
s sater i urface
t c i hape w l nsidea s hew hute
elevation c omputed
b a h c y i iydraulic
p t e omputation,
f t s t
overflow. T w he
s sater w urface
w c hape,
b as hich
s m as
i om
equivalent t t n o he
a umerical
r e f t nalysis
o p esults
A i k xcept
stable flow without overflowing the side wall.

<Fig.26> Longitudinal Flow Distribution at Overflow Weir of Ogee Spillway (in PMF)

Since a u n nuniform
w l i e ater
t b g evel f s t xpected
d d o e
between a s c ide
a a g hannel
o s ndi P t ated
f d gee f m pillway
sections i t nside
c w she i hute
F A as t thown
a rn ig.27.
d cco
flow t hrough
t s c he p ide
a g hannel
o s s art b d nd b ated
ap u gee
the f low
b ecomes
s A c tabilized.i t e pfter o a p onverging
t f r nto
into a dissipator.

Before t c he onvergence,
t f i t s c he p low
i d n f he i t ideo hannel
spillway. However, the difference between water levels decreases.

A2-29
<Fig.27> Flow Status at Major Sections of the Chute (in PMF)

A2-30
(4) Pressure Distribution at the Overflow Part and Chute

Fig.28 r epresents
v d ertical
o p f istribution
c a o e g f i ressure
o t
check pressure distribution occurring inside the overflow part and chute.

As r esults
o t a f ihec onalysis,
d m n nase pf ischarge,
h i f axi
to b pe a=-1.1m
t - a t wo w 0.9m i i f t he
t b m eir - hereas
a t c t s o
However, t i n l his t s - ot( ower b han
U 5m
a i t recommended
t b s
against cavitation damage.

`(-) Pressure
(+)Pressure
Unit: Pa Unit: Pa

Pressure A-A Profile(Gate#1) B-B Profile(Gate#2)

(+)Pressure

<Fig.28> Longitudinal Distribution of Pressure at the Overflow Weir

of Ogee Spillway (in PMF)

(5) Flow Analysis of the Plunge Pool and the Downstream River

In o rder
t e o e xamine
o ap pffects
a t dn lunge
r b t a ool o nd
discharge, F d ig.29
t water lepicts
evel, w i hich
he
f p s a formed
b T w
ast lip
level a f nd v lows b elocity
c a t chall ec reated
a p tt he a onnect
plunge p a ool
b cnd ecomes I omparatively
c o P e p tabilized.
are thought to occur at a plunge pool.

A2-31
 Water level at the downstream river’s slope
- △H1= 11.6 m (Q1), △H2=6.8 m (Q2)

48
Q1 = 3,190 ㎥/ s
43
Q2 = 658 ㎥/ s e
pp
38 na
w
lo
ef
Water Surface(El. m)

33
th
d
te
28 ec
roj
Value △H

P
23
Ground Bottom
18

13
217 237 257 277 297 317 337 357 377 397 417 437 457 477 497 517
Distance (m)

<Fig.29> Ground Profile and Water Surface Level past the Flip Bucket to the Downstream
River by an amount of Discharge

A2-32
5. Conclusion

1) Major problems for the basic plan design.

In P MF,
h waterigh
l evelo verflows
t g w g he r uide
t t f dall, a
iving
t ise
approach channel

2) Proposed alternatives

The h eight
o the a pproachg
f w i uide
u a all t s E pwardlyt s a djusted
t
dam crest

3) Examination results for alternatives

(i) As f low
d isruption
d a t a isappearsc s tf hei f pproach
a t
approach channel. D uet a c o onsiderably
d u w ecreased
l s nun
discharge is thought to be possible through each gate.

(ii) The s pillway

i f t h s a ound d o ave
c additional
i m t P ischarge
i
possible to safely be released.

(iii) Negative p oressurea t o ccurs

w a t t c he h verflowt i n eir
lower t 5han(recommended
m byU SACE)
a i t ndt b ss hought
a o
cavitation damage.

(iv) Water level a nd flow v elocity o t r f s he b e

iver hall
s be a ffective
dissipator.

A2-33