Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2016, 10(4): 438–444

DOI 10.1007/s11709-016-0337-y

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Numerical modeling of cavitation on spillway’s flip bucket

Abbas PARSAIEa* , Sadegh DEHDAR-BEHBAHANIb, Amir Hamzeh HAGHIABIa
a
Department of water Engineering, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran
b
Hydro Structures, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: Abbas_Parsaie@yahoo.com

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

ABSTRACT Numerical modeling of hydraulic phenomenon by computational fluid dynamic (CFD) approaches is one
of the main parts in the high cost hydraulic structure studies. In this paper, using Flow 3D as CFD commercial tool, the
cavitation phenomenon was assessed along spillway's flip bucket of the Balaroud dam. Performance of numerical
modeling was compared to the physical model, which was constructed to this purpose. During numerical modeling, it was
found that RNG turbulence model is a suitable performance for modeling the cavitation. Physical modeling shows that
minimum cavitation index is about 0.85 and minimum cavitation index based on Flow 3D results is about 0.665, which
was related to the flood discharge with return period of 10000 years. The main difference between numerical and physical
modeling is related to the head of velocity, which is considered in physical modeling. Results of numerical simulation
show that occurrence of cavitation based on cavitation index equal to 0.25 is not possible along the spillway.

KEYWORDS cavitation Index, numerical simulation, spillway’s flip Bucket, CFD, Balaroud Dam, physical modeling

1 Introduction such as K-epsilon (k-e) turbulence model, Re-Normal-

Study of important hydraulic structures is usually based on
physical modeling construction. Physical modeling of
hydraulic structure is based on basic fluid mechanic Eq [1].
Spillways are one of the main parts of dam construction
projects. Due to the importance of spillways in dam safety,
study of hydraulic properties of this structure is conducted
by numerical and physical modeling approaches [2].
Physical modeling is usually carried out by constructing
a physical scale model in hydraulic laboratory. Physical
scale model is a small size of prototype structure, the
hydraulic properties of which is similar to prototype
structure. Due to the high cost of physical modeling and
the need for advance equipment, researchers used
numerical methods along with physical modeling to
reduce experimental costs [3–10]. In the field of numerical
modeling, governing flow equations which are usually
Navier-Stokes (NS) equations are solved by various
numerical methods such as finite volume and finite element
[11,12]. To simulate turbulent flow and to solve NS
equation, many turbulence models including one equation
models such as prandtl length and two equation models
Article history: Received Jun 8, 2015; Accepted Jan 11, 2016
ization Group (RNG) methods have been proposed [13].
The main hazard of spillways is cavitation. To design a
spillway, which is safe in terms of cavitation phenomenon,
researchers have conducted several investigations on
defining the condition of cavitation occurrence. Cavitation
is evaporation process due to the reduction of local
pressure in hydraulic structure where the temperature
remains constant. Variation of roughness on the surface
especially on concrete structures constructed by human
causes of derivation of flow streamlines that leads to
change in flow velocity ultimately redound to the
cavitation [14,15]. Reducing the pressure causes of
evaporation and creation of bubbles, which moved along
the flow and at the end bubbles are blowout when they are
reached to the high-pressure zone. Blowing the bubbles
sometimes creates a pressure close to 1000 mega Pascal on
the surface [16,17]. These values of pressure act on the fine
area and create a huge force on the surface, which causes
destruction of structure. This destruction occurs in high
pressure zones such as chute spillway, flip bucket and
stilling basin; therefore, this problem should be studied by
physical and numerical modeling [12]. To avoid cavitation
problem in hydraulic structures, especially spillways, the
value and distribution of pressure and velocity should be
 Abbas PARSAIE et al. Numerical modeling of cavitation on spillway’s flip bucket 439

defined in all parts of the structure [3]. Researcher depth of chute channel was 0.5 m and the channel chute
proposed an index for defining structure potential to width was 0.5 m. Figure 1 shows the Balaroud Spillway in
cavitation occurrences. This index is called cavitation laboratory. As shown in Fig.1, about 37 stations were
index and is derived from Bernoulli equation as sympto- considered for measuring the Piezomertic Head and mean
matic of energy formula. Equations (1)–(3) show deriva- velocity.
tion process of cavitation index. Equation (1) is Bernoulli
equation which was hold between two points.

Vo2
V 2
þ Po þ Zo
g ¼ þ P þ Z
g; (1)
2 2
where Po and Vo are pressure and velocity of flow at the
beginning of spillway and P and V are the desired location
through the spillway. By a small change in Bernoulli
equation, dimensionless form of energy formula can be
derived as Eq. (2).
 2
ðP þ
gZÞ – ðPo þ
gZo Þ V
¼ 1– : (2)
1 2 Vo

V
2
Since cavitation is direct proportional of pressure, height
(Z) parameters has been disregarded. Therefore, Eq. (2)
can be written as Eq. (3).
Fig. 1 Sketch of scaled model of Balaroud spillway flip bucket
P – P0
CP ¼ : (3)
1 2 3 Numerical modeling
pV 0
2
CP is the cavitation index and reminds the Euler number. Computational fluid dynamic (CFD) technique was used
For spillways, especially the flip bucket part, Eq. (3) can be for modeling flow characteristics on Balaroud dam spill-
used as Eq. (4). way. To this purpose, Flow 3D software was used for
numerical modeling of the flow characteristics along the
 
PAm Pv h Vo2 chute and flip bucket of spillway. Figure 2 shows a 3D
– þ hcosðÞ   modeling of Balaroud dam spillway.
g g g r
¼ : (4)
Vo2
3.1 Flow 3D software
2g
Plus symbol is related to the concave and minus is Flow 3D is a commercial CFD tool, which is able to solve
related to the convex floor. In this equation, g is complex fluid dynamic problems. This software has high
gravitational acceleration, g is the specific weight,  is performance for modeling free surface flow in unsteady
the angle of floor to horizontal surface, h is the flow depth conditions. Volume of fluid technique has been used in this
and r is the radius of the floor curvature. Studying the software for defining free surface flow. Regular mesh is
cavitation, researchers proposed a critical value for used to discrete the computational domain. Flow 3D offers
cavitation occurrence, which was called cr [3,16,18–23]. five types of turbulence models: Prandtl mixing length, K-e
Values of critical cavitation for spillways are between 0.20 equation, RNG models, large eddy simulation (LES)
and 0.25. The aim of this study was assessing the potential model.
of Balaroud spillway for cavitation occurrence through
chute spillway and flip bucket using physical and 3.2 Review of the governing equations in Flow 3D software
numerical modeling.
The continuity equation at three-dimensional Cartesian
coordinates is given as Eq. (5).
2 Materials and method ∂
∂ ∂ ∂ PSOR
vf þ ðuAx Þ þ ðvAy Þ þ ðwAz Þ ¼ , (5)
∂t ∂x ∂x ∂x

A physical scaled model of the Balaroud Dam spillway
was constructed at the hydraulic laboratory of Shahid where u,v,z are velocity components in x,y,z directions;
Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran. The model scale was Ax , Ay , Az are cross sectional area of the flow,
is fluid
1:40. The length of the chute spillway model is near to 9 m, density, PSOR is the source term, vf is the volume fraction
440 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2016, 10(4): 438–444

Fig. 2 Sketch of 3D model of Balaroud dam spillway

of fluid and three-dimensional momentum equations are ∂ ∂

ð
kÞ þ ð
ui kÞ
given in Eq. (6). ∂t ∂x 
  ∂ ∂k
∂u 1 ∂u ∂u ∂u ¼ α þ Gk þ Gb –
ε, (8)
þ uAx þ vAy þ wAz ∂xi k eff ∂xi
∂t vf ∂x ∂y ∂z
 
1 ∂P ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ε
¼ – þ G x þ fx ð
εÞ þ ð
ui εÞ ¼ α

∂x ∂t ∂x ∂xi k eff ∂xi
 
∂v 1 ∂v ∂v ∂v
þ uAx þ vAy þ wAz
∂t vf ∂x ∂y ∂z ε ε2
þC1ε ðGk þ C3ε Gb Þ – C2ε
– R, (9)
1 ∂P k k
¼ – þ G y þ fy ,

∂y in which Gk is the rate kinetic energy creation, R is the
 
∂w 1 ∂w ∂w ∂w density of turbulence defined as below.
þ uAx þ vAy þ wAz
∂t vf ∂x ∂y ∂z C
η3 ð1 – η=η0 Þ ε2 k2
1 ∂P R¼ ,  ¼
C  , (10)
¼ – þ G z þ fz , (6) 1 þ βη3 k t
ε

∂y
in these equations β ¼ 0:012, η0 ¼ 1:38:
where P is the fluid pressure, Gx ,Gy ,Gz are acceleration
created by body fluids fx ,fy ,fz are viscosity acceleration in 3.3 Steps of problem solving in Flow 3D software
three dimensions and vf is related to the volume of fluid,
defined as Eq. (7). For modeling free surface profile, VOF Computational modeling of hydraulic phenomenon by
technique has been used based on volume fraction of Flow 3D involved some steps given as follows: 1-
computational cells. Since the volume fraction F represents Preparing 3D model by AutoCAD software and exporting
the amount of fluid in each cell, it takes a value between 3d model with STL suffix file; 2- Summon STL file in
0 and 1. Flow 3D software and defining the fluid properties in the
software and meshing the computational domain which is
  usually bigger than the hydraulic structure, During CFD
∂F 1 ∂ ∂ ∂
þ ðFAx uÞ þ ðFAy vÞ þ ðFAz wÞ ¼ 0: (7) modeling it was attempted to refine size of meshes
∂t vf ∂x ∂y ∂y
sufficiently; 3- Choosing the basic equations that should
Modeling turbulent flow requires defining suitable be solved; 4- Defining the boundary and initial conditions;
turbulence model, which creates close form with 5- Adjusting the control parameters and outputs; 6-
Navier-Stokes equation. Re-Normalization Group (RNG) Choosing the calculation method; and 7- Running the
model is a powerful turbulence model which has software. Defining the mesh size and boundary conditions
suitable performance for modeling the fine cavity, there- is an important stage of simulation with Flow 3D software.
fore, this model is very useful for modeling cavitation This software has a wide range of boundary conditions.
problems. Most equations used in RNG model are given in Figure 3 shows the 3D modeling of Balaroud Dam
Eqs. (8) and (9). spillway in Flow 3D software.
 Abbas PARSAIE et al. Numerical modeling of cavitation on spillway’s flip bucket 441

4 Results and discussion and numerical simulation was assessed and is given in
Figs. 4–6. Figures 4–6 are the results of running Flow 3D
Performance of Balaroud scaled model during experiments for flow discharges of 0.0667(m3/s), 0.0859 (m3/s), and

Fig. 3 Balaroud dam spillway model in Flow 3D

Fig. 4 Results of Flow 3D simulation at Q = 0.0667 (m3/s)

Fig. 5 Results of Flow 3D simulation at Q = 0.0859 (m3/s)

442 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2016, 10(4): 438–444

Fig. 6 Results of Flow 3D simulation at Q = 0.1903 (m3/s)

Fig. 7 Measured pressure along Balaroud Dam spillway

the best performance to define cavitation occurrence

Fig. 8 Cavitation index in flip bucket at Q = 0.0667 (m3/s)
0.1903 (m3/s). These figures show the pressure distribution
along the spillway at each discharge as well. To choose the
best turbulence model with the best suitable performance, a
try and error process was conducted; however, recommen-
dations proposed by Erfanain-Azmoudeh and Kamanbe-
dast [24] and Chanel and Doering [25] were considered.
During numerical simulation, RNG turbulence model has
through spillway. For evaluating the potential of flip
bucket for cavitation occurrence, four flood discharges
with return periods of 2, 100, 1000 and 10000 years were
considered for measuring flow characteristics such as
pressure and velocity. Flood discharge related to return
period in laboratory was equal to 0.0667 (m3/s), 0.0859
(m3/s), 0.160 (m3/s), and 0.1903 (m3/s), consecutively. As
mentioned in the literature, the high-pressure zones are
susceptible areas for occurrence of cavitation phenom-
enon. Therefore, as could be seen from Fig. 7, the area near
flip bucket has the potential of cavitation, because these
areas are placed in high-pressure zone, therefore, the focus
of analysis was on these area for cavitation occurrence. The
piezometer number of 22 to 37 was placed on the flip
bucket part. Results of cavitation index calculation both
with experimental measurement approach and Flow 3D
modeling for each flood discharges are given in Table 1.
Figures 8–10 show cavitation index along the flip bucket.
As shown in Figs. 8–10, by receding from the crest,
cavitation index is decreased because of the increase in
flow velocity and then head pressure decreased. This
 Abbas PARSAIE et al. Numerical modeling of cavitation on spillway’s flip bucket 443

Table 1 Results of the measuring and Flow 3D cavitation Index

Q = 66.7 (m3/s) Q = 85.9 (m3/s) Q = 160 (m3/s) Q = 190.3 (m3/s)
piezometer distance from
σcr physical physical physical physical
number crest Flow 3D Flow 3D Flow 3D Flow 3D
model model model model
22 6.407 0.25 1.78 1.55 1.78 1.85 1.1 0.97 1.29 1.02
23 6.507 0.25 1.39 1.62 1.32 1.83 1.14 0.96 1.24 1
24 6.607 0.25 1.41 1.6 1.29 1.74 1.22 0.92 1.09 0.95
25 6.717 0.25 1.7 1.51 1.34 1.62 1.08 0.9 1.02 0.9
26 6.807 0.25 1.57 1.55 1.43 1.49 1.13 0.9 1.07 0.92
27 7.207 0.25 1.65 1.28 1.45 1.26 1.11 0.87 1.1 0.89
28 7.58 0.25 1.16 1.07 1.25 1.01 0.93 0.76 1.09 0.81
29 7.978 0.25 1.11 0.94 1.14 0.98 0.94 0.67 0.94 0.68
30 8.178 0.25 1.11 0.91 1.03 0.95 0.84 0.7 0.87 0.66
31 8.378 0.25 0.95 0.97 1.05 1 0.77 0.81 1 0.84
32 8.438 0.25 0.84 1.08 1.05 1.18 0.97 0.93 1.23 1.04
33 8.542 0.25 0.9 1.53 1.31 1.79 1.13 1.33 1.53 1.42
34 8.602 0.25 1.28 1.76 1.53 2.05 1.25 1.42 1.58 1.53
35 8.662 0.25 1.37 1.71 1.56 2.07 1.4 1.43 1.61 1.53
36 8.722 0.25 1.5 1.88 1.46 1.94 1.26 1.48 1.59 1.47
37 8.782 0.25 1.66 1.88 1.51 1.7 1.26 1.2 1.37 1.22

decrease in cavitation index for all flood discharge values

Fig. 9 Cavitation index in flip bucket at Q = 0.0859 (m3/s)
continues to flip bucket structure when flow reaches the
flip bucket, since the concave curve shape for the flip
bucket causes the increasing in pressure and thus cavitation
index increases. The main difference between measured
data and Flow 3D results is related to the velocity head. In
Flow 3D results, the pure pressure is directly derived
whereas in physical model measurement, the Piezomertic
Head is considered, which is included in velocity head in
addition to the pressure head. The minimum value of
cavitation index is about 0.655 that occurs in maximum
flood discharge related to flood with return period of 10000
years. Overall, Figs. 8–10 show that the design of Balaroud
Dam spillway is safe versus cavitation index.

Fig. 10 Cavitation index in flip bucket at Q = 0.1903 (m3/s)
5 Conclusions
Study on hydraulic structure characteristics is usually
conducted by physical and numerical modeling. Among
hydraulic structures, dam spillways are one of the most
important structures, which require applying both physical
and numerical approaches. The main hazard of spillways is
cavitation, which in most cases leads to destruction of
overall structure. Results of this study show that physical
modeling and numerical simulation of flow over different
parts of spillway structures including chute, flip bucket and
staling basin helps to control the structure safety versus
cavitation and other hazards. Result of minimum cavitation
444 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2016, 10(4): 438–444
index of Balaroud is about 0.665, which occurs at flood
discharge with return period of 10000 years and it means
that Balaroud spillway is safe against cavitation.
References
1. Ettema R. Hydraulic Modeling: Concepts and Practice. ASCE, 2000
2. Chau K W. Modelling for Coastal Hydraulics and Engineering.
Taylor & Francis, 2010
3. Fattor C, Bacchiega J. Design Conditions for Morning-Glory
Spillways: Application to Potrerillos Dam Spillway. In: Advances
in Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Springer Berlin
Heidelberg. 2009, 2123–2128
4. Gourbesville P, Cunge J, Caignaert G. Advances in Hydroinfor-
matics: SIMHYDRO 2012 – New Frontiers of Simulation. Springer
Singapore Pte. Limited, 2013
5. Parsaie A, Haghiabi A. The effect of predicting discharge coefficient
by neural network on increasing the numerical modeling accuracy of
flow over side weir. Water Resources Management, 2015, 29(4):
973–985
6. Parsaie A, Yonesi H, Najafian S. Predictive modeling of discharge in
compound open channel by support vector machine technique.
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 2015, 1(2): 1–6
7. Parsaie A, Haghiabi A, Moradinejad A. CFD modeling of flow
pattern in spillway’s approach channel. Sustainable Water
Resources Management, 2015, 1(3): 245–251
8. Parsaie A, Haghiabi A. Computational Modeling of Pollution
Transmission in Rivers. Applied Water Science, 2015, 1–10
9. Parsaie A, Haghiabi A. Predicting the longitudinal dispersion
coefficient by radial basis function neural network. Modeling Earth
Systems and Environment, 2015, 1(4): 1–8
10. Parsaie A, Yonesi H, Najafian S. Predictive modeling of discharge in
compound open channel by support vector machine technique.
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 2015, 1(1–2): 1–6
11. Kim D, Park J. Analysis of flow structure over ogee-spillway in
consideration of scale and roughness effects by using CFD model.
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2005, 9(2): 161–169
12. Gessler D. CFD modeling of spillway performance. In: Proc. World
Water and Environmental Resources Congress. May, 2005
13. Aydin M C. CFD simulation of free-surface flow over triangular
labyrinth side weir. Advances in Engineering Software, 2012, 45(1):
159–166
14. Johnson M C, Savage B M. Physical and numerical comparison of
flow over ogee spillway in the presence of tailwater. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 2006, 132(12): 1353–1357
15. Chanson H. Design of weirs and spillways, in Hydraulics of Open
Channel Flow. 2nd ed. Chanson H, 2004, Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann, 2004, 19: 391–430
16. Wu J, Ma F. Cavity flow regime for spillway aerators. Science China
Technological Sciences, 2013, 56(4): 818–823
17. Dong Z Y, Chen L, Ju W J. Cavitation characteristics of high
velocity flow with and without aeration on the order of 50 m/s.
Journal of Hydrodynamics. Ser. B, 2007, 19(4): 429–433
18. Chatila J, Tabbara M. Computational modeling of flow over an ogee
spillway. Computers & Structures, 2004, 82(22): 1805–1812
19. Toloshinov A V, et al. Development of the design for the No. 2
spillway at the Boguchany hydroproject. Power Technology and
Engineering, 2009, 43(3): 135–142
20. Szymkiewicz R. Numerical Modeling in Open Channel Hydraulics.
Springer, 2010
21. Kirkgoz M S, Akoz M S, Oner A A. Numerical modeling of flow
over a chute spillway. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2009, 47(6):
790–797
22. Lv J, Liu M. Research to the Stilling Basin Types of the Spillway
Outlet. In: Advances in Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineer-
ing. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009, 1536–1540
23. Aydin M C, Ozturk M. Verification and validation of a computa-
tional fluid dynamics (CFD) model for air entrainment at spillway
aerators. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 2009, 36(5): 826–
836
24. Erfanain-Azmoudeh M H, Kamanbedast A A. Determine the
appropriate location of aerator system on Gotvandoliadam’s spill-
way using Flow 3D. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural &
Environmental Sciences, 2013, 13(3): 378–383
25. Chanel P G, Doering J C. Assessment of spillway modeling using
computational fluid dynamics. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineer-
ing, 2008, 35(12): 1481–1485