Efficient Solution Algorithm for Unsteady Flow in Channel

Networks Using Subtiming Technique

Jani Fathima Jamal 1 and S. Murty Bhallamudi 2

Abstract: This paper describes a computationally efficient numerical model for unsteady flow computations in open channel networks
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

using the four-point Preissmann implicit scheme. The proposed algorithm achieves improved convergence and computational efficiency
by: (1) adopting a junction point water stage prediction and correction technique based on recurrence coefficients in the double sweep
algorithm for the Preissmann scheme; (2) incorporating an adaptive relaxation technique in the iterative loop; and (3) adopting a subtiming
framework for time stepping. Subtiming strategy requires small computational time steps for only those channels of the network where
temporal variations in flow conditions are significant, while larger time steps are taken in other channels. The subtiming strategy min-
imizes computational inefficiency due to temporal overdiscretization associated with schemes using uniform time step size throughout the
domain. The application of the proposed algorithm is illustrated for three test cases. For a large network of channels, the proposed algo-
rithm increased the computational efficiency by a factor of two, as compared to the conventional junction point water stage prediction and
correction algorithm presently available in literature. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001474. © 2020 American Society of Civil
Engineers.

Introduction
Numerical solutions of the Saint Venant equations are com-
monly employed for simulating unsteady flows in open channels.
Among the numerical integration schemes, implicit finite differ-
ence schemes are widely accepted because they offer uncondi-
tional stability. The four-point Preissmann implicit scheme is one
of the most widely adopted implicit schemes for flood routing in
channels (Sen and Garg 2002; Zhu et al. 2011).
For a single channel, the numerical solution of the Saint Venant
equations using the Preissmann scheme involves the solution of
a matrix equation with a well-structured coefficient matrix or
Jacobian matrix. Efficient methods such as the double sweep
algorithm (DSA) can be used for the solution of the matrix equa-
tion (Cunge et al. 1980). However, computations are often required
for simulating unsteady flows in a network of channels as in the case
of interconnected stormwater drainage systems, irrigation canal sys-
tems, braided rivers, and divided shipping channels (Chaudhry
2007). The backwater effect at the channel junctions imposes simul-
taneous simulation of flows in all the channels, considering the
entire network as a single unit (Islam et al. 2005). Unsteady flow
computation in a network of channels requires the inclusion of
additional equations at the junctions, based on the application of
principles conservation of mass and energy at junction. These equa-
tions modify the banded structure of the matrix equation. As a result,
efficient algorithms, applicable for single channels are not directly
applicable for a system of channels. The computational memory
1 downstream boundary nodes becomes upstream boundary nodes.
Ph.D. Research Scholar, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India. Email: jani.cet.05@
gmail.com
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
Madras, Chennai 600036, India (corresponding author). ORCID: https://
orcid.org/0000-0002-8941-5426. Email: bsm@iitm.ac.in
Note. This manuscript was submitted on January 21, 2019; approved on
January 9, 2020; published online on April 13, 2020. Discussion period
open until September 13, 2020; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Irrigation
and Drainage Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9437.
and the time required for the simultaneous solution of the entire
channel network is therefore enormous.
Schulte and Chaudhry (1987), Naidu et al. (1997), Reddy and
Bhallamudi (2004), and Santiago-Collazo and Silva-Araya (2019)
have dealt with computations in open channel network but consid-
ered only steady flows. Fread (1973) developed an iterative method
for simulating the transient response of an elementary river system,
considering tributary flows as lateral inflows. Joliffe (1984) imple-
mented a sparse matrix algorithm to store and solve the set of linear
equations, which reduced computational time and effort. Further,
a class of algorithms was proposed, which involved the decompo-
sition of the Jacobian matrix by the reduction of bandwidth. Swain
and Chin (1990) used a matrix diagonalization routine to reduce
the bandwidth of the coefficient matrix and then solved it using a
banded matrix routine for diagonally banded matrices. Choi and
Molinas (1993) proposed a simultaneous solution algorithm based
on the double sweep method, which utilized separate recurrence
equations for each component so that the computational storage
and the time were reduced considerably. However, the applicability
of this algorithm is limited to networks where there are only three
channels at any junction. Another category of algorithms required
a specific node-numbering scheme, where a particular pattern had
to be formulated in numbering the nodes and the channels in the
network so as to obtain a banded matrix of reduced bandwidth
(Schulte and Chaudhry 1987; Nguyen and Kawano 1995). Nguyen
and Kawano (1995) considered one of the downstream boundary
nodes as the foot node with node number 1 and all the branch flows
were assumed to be directed to that foot node so that the rest of
However, this node numbering scheme limited the applicability of
the preceding models only to nonlooped networks (Nguyen and
Kawano 1995).
Another class of algorithms employed simultaneous solution
of network of channels in three different phases: forward elimina-
tion phase, simultaneous solution phase, and back substitution
phase (Sen and Garg 2002; Islam et al. 2005; Zhang and Shen
2007). Sen and Garg (2002) separated out the end node variables
of channels in the forward elimination phase and the resulting

© ASCE 04020012-1 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 global matrix including end node variables and necessary boundary
conditions are solved in the simultaneous solution phase, and the
intermediate node values of the channels are computed in the back
substitution phase. Islam et al. (2005) compared the algorithm of
Sen and Garg (2002) with an alternate three-phase algorithm that
used branch-segment transformation equations for separating out
end-node variables of each channel. Zhang and Shen (2007) em-
ployed a three-step solution, where the junction equations are
solved upon the boundary conditions of channels, followed by the
solution for stage and discharge at all the sections of channels,
while using the Gauss elimination method for solving the sparse
matrix. These algorithms focused on the improvement in the com-
putational storage by reducing the number of equations in the si-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
time-step size in the major share of matrix domain excluding the
fractures.
This paper presents the improvements that are made to the
JPWSPC algorithm of Zhu et al. (2011) to obtain more robustness
and computational efficiency while computing unsteady flows in
open-channel networks. These modifications are: (1) updating of
water stages at junctions based on the recurrence coefficients of
the double sweep algorithm in contrast to the characteristic equa-
tions used by Zhu et al. (2011); (2) incorporation of adaptive under
relaxation method in the iterative step; and (3) embedding of the
JPWSPC algorithm into a subtiming framework, which makes it
possible to use larger time steps in channels where the temporal
variation is not significant, and smaller time steps in channels

multaneous solution phase to four times the number of branches in where temporal variation is significant. The proposed model is
the network. However, the advantage of the banded nature of the compared with the earlier model of Zhu et al. (2011) for assessing
equations is not taken into account because it solves for the entire the improvement in the computational efficiency.
set of equations simultaneously (Islam et al. 2005; Zhu et al. 2011).
Zhu et al. (2011) proposed a solution algorithm that incorporated
the backwater effects at the junction points based on the junction- Numerical Model
point water stage prediction and correction (JPWSPC) method for
solving general open-channel networks. The JPWSPC method en- Governing Equations
abled independent computation of each branch, resulting in a sim-
One-dimensional (1D) unsteady flow in open channels can be de-
pler and efficient model as compared to the earlier three-phase
scribed using the Saint-Venant equations (Chaudhry 2007). These
algorithms.
may be expressed as follows:
When the Newton Raphson iterative method is employed for
solving a system of nonlinear equations, there may be cases of
slower convergence or even divergence (Janicke and Kost 1998; ∂h ∂v ∂h
þ Dh þv ¼0 ð1Þ
Zhou et al. 2010). Research involving the solution of a system ∂t ∂x ∂x
of nonlinear equations from diversified fields emphasized the need
for relaxation to aid faster convergence in the Newton-Raphson and
the Picard iterative schemes (Nakata et al. 1992; Durbin and ∂v ∂v ∂h
þv þg ¼ gðSo − Sf Þ ð2Þ
Delemos 2007; Li and Wei 2015; Ren et al. 2016). Therefore, while ∂t ∂x ∂x
dealing with some complex open-channel networks or flow condi-
tions, the robustness of the iterative JPWSPC algorithm can be fur- where v = velocity of flow; h = flow depth; Dh = hydraulic mean
ther improved by employing efficient relaxation methods. Also, depth; g = acceleration due to gravity; So = channel slope; x =
while carrying out unsteady flow computations in channel net- distance along the channel; t = time; and Sf = resistance to flow,
works, the entire network would constitute a single computational which is given by manning’s equation:
domain. The implementation of classical finite-difference or finite-
volume scheme use the same time step for temporal discretization
of all the channels in the entire system. Nevertheless, in a network n2 v 2
Sf ¼ ð3Þ
of channels, significant flow variations in time domain may occur R4=3
only in a few channels, and only these channels require the use of a
small computational time step for the sake of computational accu- where n = Manning’s roughness coefficient; and R = hydraulic ra-
racy. Usage of a uniform time step size throughout the network dius. Hydraulic conditions at junctions are satisfied by considering
leads to temporal over discretization in the channels where the tem- the same water level in all channels at a junction. The other com-
poral changes in the flow are not rapid. This aspect is especially patibility equation at channel junctions is obtained using the prin-
relevant for implicit schemes which are normally used for long- ciple of conservation of mass. The compatibility conditions may be
duration simulations. Adoption of subtiming algorithms in such stated as follows:
simulations can reduce the computational time without compromis-
ing the numerical accuracy. The subtiming technique was used by X X X
Q¼ Qin − Qo ¼ 0 ð4Þ
Singh and Bhallamudi (1997) while simulating flow conditions in a
basin irrigation system. This technique was employed within the
framework of an explicit finite-volume method. Bhallamudi et al. where Q = flow rate; and subscripts in and o refer to inflow into
(2003) developed a subtiming algorithm for implicit time-stepping junction and outflow from junction, respectively.
schemes to solve flow and transport equations. Misra et al. (2012)
demonstrated how a subtiming strategy can be adopted to overcome
the difficulties that arise when a higher-order (Crank-Nicholson) Discretization
implicit ENO scheme is applied to advection dominated contam- Although the proposed methodology is applicable for any channel
inant transport problems. Liao et al. (2015) made use of the sub- shape, it is described here for a wide rectangular channel for the
timing approach in the modeling of coupled groundwater and sake of simplicity. Eqs. (1) and (2) are discretized using the
surface water systems. El-Amin et al. (2018) employed sub-time- four-point implicit Preissmann scheme (Chaudhry 2007). The dis-
stepping in the simulation of transport of nanoparticles, with a two- cretized Saint-Venant equations in the nonconservative form at
phase flow in fractured porous media, to get the advantage of larger node i for a wide channel can be written as follows:

© ASCE 04020012-2 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

  kþ1  kþ1   k  
iþ1 þ hi
hkþ1 − hki − hkiþ1 þ vkþ1 hiþ1 − hkþ1 v þ vki hkiþ1 − hki
kþ1
v
Fci ¼ þ α iþ1 i i
þ ð1 − αÞ iþ1
2Δt 2 Δx 2 Δx
 kþ1 kþ1  kþ1 kþ1   k  
h þ hi viþ1 − vi h þ hki vkiþ1 − vki
þ α iþ1 þ ð1 − αÞ iþ1 ¼0 ð5Þ
2 Δx 2 Δx

 kþ1  kþ1   k  
vkþ1 þ vkþ1
iþ1 − vi − viþ1
k k
v þ vkþ1 viþ1 − vkþ1 v þ vki vkiþ1 − vki
Fmi ¼ i
þ α iþ1 i i
þ ð1 − αÞ iþ1
2Δt 2 Δx 2 Δx
 kþ1 kþ1   k k   kþ1 kþ1   k 
h − hi h − hi Sf i þ Sf iþ1 Sf i þ Sf kiþ1
þ α · g iþ1 þ ð1 − αÞ · g iþ1 − g So − α · − ð1 − αÞ · ¼0 ð6Þ
Δx Δx 2 2

where α = forward weighing coefficient that ensures unconditional stability; the subscripts i and i þ 1 denote the precedent and antecedent
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

nodes respectively in the space domain; and superscripts k and k þ 1 denote the known and unknown time levels, respectively. The discretized
equations, when combined with the boundary conditions, form a set of nonlinear simultaneous equations, which is then solved by the
Newton-Raphson iterative method.
In the Newton-Raphson iterative scheme, the initial values of unknown variables at time level, k þ 1 are assumed at each node and are then
iteratively updated to get the correct values. For a single channel, the corrections at each iteration level are obtained by solving the matrix
equation of the form:

½J × ½delta ¼ ½F ð7Þ

where J = Jacobian matrix, which is formed by the partial derivatives of the discretized equations with respect to variables at unknown time
level; delta is the column vector comprising the corrections to be applied to the values of variables at unknown time level; and F is the
column vector comprising the negative values of the discretized equations corresponding to the corrected values of variables at the unknown
time level. The matrix form of J, delta, and F are as follows:
0 1
∂Fðu=sÞ ∂Fðu=sÞ
B ∂v 0 0 0 0 ··· 0 0 0 0 C
B 1 ∂h1 C
B C
B ∂Fc1 ∂Fc ∂Fc ∂Fc C
B 1 1 1
0 0 ··· 0 0 0 0 C
B ∂v1 ∂h ∂v ∂h C
B 1 2 2 C
B C
B ∂Fm1 ∂Fm1 ∂Fm1 ∂Fm1 C
B 0 0 ··· 0 0 0 0 C
B ∂v1 ∂h 1 ∂v 2 ∂h 2 C
B C
B ∂Fc ∂Fc ∂Fc ∂Fc C
B 0 0 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 C
B ··· C
B ∂v2 ∂h2 ∂v3 ∂h3 C
B C
B ∂Fm ∂Fm ∂Fm ∂Fm C
J¼B 0 0 2 2 2 2
· · · 0 0 0 0 C ð8Þ
B ∂v2 ∂h2 ∂v3 ∂h3 C
B C
B C
B .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. C
B . . . . . . · · · . . . . C
B C
B ∂Fc ∂Fc ∂Fc ∂Fc C
B 0 0 0 0 0 0 ··· N N N N C
B ∂v ∂h ∂v ∂h C
B N N Nþ1 Nþ1 C
B C
B ∂FmN ∂FmN ∂FmN ∂FmN C
B 0 0 0 0 0 0 ··· C
B ∂vN ∂hN ∂vNþ1 ∂hNþ1 C
B C
B C
@ ∂Fðd=sÞ ∂Fðd=sÞ A
0 0 0 0 0 0 ··· 0 0
∂vNþ1 ∂hNþ1

In the above equation, vi refers to velocity at node i at time level k þ 1 and hi refers to the flow depth at node i at time level k þ 1.
0 1
δv1
B C
B δh1 C
B C
B δv C
B 2 C
B C
B δh2 C
B C
B . C
B . C
delta ¼ B . C ð9Þ
B C
B C
B δvN C
B C
B δh C
B N C
B C
B δv C
@ Nþ1 A
δhNþ1

© ASCE 04020012-3 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 0 1
Fðu=sÞ ACi δvi þ BCi × δhi þ CCi δviþ1 þ DCi × δhiþ1 ¼ ECi ð11Þ
B C
B Fc1 C
B C Ami δvi þ Bmi × δhi þ Cmi δviþ1 þ Dmi × δhiþ1 ¼ Emi ð12Þ
B Fm1 C
B C
B C
B C The coefficients ACi , BCi , CCi , and DCi correspond to the partial
B Fc2 C
B C derivatives of the discretized form of the continuity equation at the
B C
B Fm2 C node i with respect to vi , hi , viþ1 , and hiþ1 , respectively. The co-
F ¼ −B C ð10Þ efficients Ami , Bmi , Cmi , and Dmi correspond to the partial deriv-
B .. C
B C atives of the discretized form of the momentum equation at the
B . C
B C node i with respect to variables vi , hi , viþ1 , and hiþ1 , respectively.
B C
B FcN C ECi and Emi correspond to the negative values of the residuals in the
B C
B C continuity and the momentum equations because of the use of esti-
B FmN C
@ A mated values of variables corresponding to the present iteration.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fðd=sÞ
where N = number of reaches in the channel; Fðu=sÞ and Fðd=sÞ cor-
respond to the upstream and downstream boundary conditions; and
δh and δv correspond to the incremental improvements of respec-
tive variables between the iteration levels.
The Newton-Raphson method for the iterative corrections of
flow velocity and flow depth for time level, k þ 1 at any node i
can be expressed as follows:
For every single channel, Eq. (7) is solved independently at each
iteration level using the double sweeping algorithm. The double
sweep algorithm assumes a linear relationship between the un-
knowns δh and δv as shown below (Wu 2008)
δhi ¼ Si × δvi þ T i ð13Þ
where Si and T i = recurrence coefficients at node i. If Si and T i
are known for node i, S, and T for node i þ 1 may be written
as (Wu 2008)

ððACi þ BCi × Si ÞCmi − ðAmi þ Bmi × Si ÞCCi Þ

Siþ1 ¼ − ð14Þ
ððACi þ BCi × Si ÞDmi − ðAmi þ Bmi × Si ÞDCi Þ

ððACi þ BCi × Si Þ × ðEmi − Bmi × T i Þ − ðAmi þ Bmi × Si Þ × ðECi − BCi × T i ÞÞ

T iþ1 ¼ ð15Þ
ðACi þ BCi × Si ÞDmi − ðAmi þ Bmi × Si ÞDCi Þ

The solution algorithm is executed in two sweeps. The forward
sweep calculates recurrence coefficients S and T at all i, starting at
node i ¼ 1 and the reverse sweep gets the values of unknown var-
iables using the downstream boundary condition at i ¼ N þ 1. The
recurrence coefficients of the upstream most node are obtained from
the upstream boundary condition and the respective values for the
subsequent nodes are calculated using Eqs. (14) and (15) (Wu 2008).
JPWSPC Algorithm
The numerical model for a channel network is based on the
junction-point water stage prediction and correction (JPWSPC) al-
gorithm for the simultaneous solution of the entire channel network
considering the backwater effects at the junction (Zhu et al. 2011).
The JPWSPC method assumes the water stage at each junction ini-
tially. These assumed water stages at the junction points serve as:
(1) the downstream boundary condition for the upstream most
channels; (2) both the upstream and the downstream boundary con-
ditions for the intermediate channels; and (3) the upstream boun-
dary condition for the downstream most channels. This facilitates
the prediction of velocities and water levels at the unknown time
level at all grid points in each channel. Each channel can be handled
independently using the computationally efficient double sweep al-
gorithm (Wu 2008). At the end of this phase, flows at all the junc-
tion nodes in all the channels would be known. These predicted
flows at the junction nodes are further utilized to correct the as-
sumed water stages at junctions by imposing the conservation of
mass equation (Zhu et al. 2011). The iterative corrections for water
stages are carried out until convergence is achieved for mass bal-
ance at all the junctions. Based on the method of characteristics
(MOC), Zhu et al. (2011) suggested the following equation for cor-
recting the junction point water level

P j
ðQ Þ
Δhj ¼ γ P pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi P pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð16Þ
ðð gAin Bin − Qin Bin =Ain Þj Þ − ðð gAo Bo þ Qo Bo =Ao Þj Þ

where Δh = correction to be applied to the water level at the junc-
tion; A = cross-sectional area; B = top width of the channel; Q =
flow rate; superscript j indicates the values predicted at the iteration
level, j; and subscript in refers to the end node values of inflow
channels and subscript o refers to the first node values of outflow
channels at a junction. The summation sign applies to all the chan-
nels at the junction. γ is an adjustable parameter that accounts for
approximations made in the derivation. Zhu et al. (2011) recom-
mended a fixed value of γ ranging between 0.5 and 1.0. In the
present study, γ is obtained for each junction point independently

© ASCE 04020012-4 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 using the adaptive under relaxation method suggested by Durbin
and Delemos (2007).
In this work, besides following the method suggested by Zhu
et al. (2011) for updating water levels at junction points, an alter-
native method is proposed based on the double sweep algorithm.
In order to apply the double sweep algorithm, governing equations
[Eqs. (5) and (6)] are linearized using the first-order Taylor series as
shown below. The linearized continuity and moment equations at
any node i can be written as:
AtCi ΔvI þ BtCi × Δhi þ CtCi Δviþ1 þ DtCi × Δhiþ1 ¼ EtCi
ð17Þ
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
predicted discharges at the junction nodes of channels should
satisfy the mass balance condition at junctions. However, if the
condition is not satisfied, water stage corrections need to be applied
so as to bring the net discharge at the junction to zero iteratively.
For the current values of junction water level i.e., at the iteration
level, j, the net flow at the junction can be expressed as follows:
X X X
Qin j − Qo j ¼ Qj ð24Þ
P j
The residual Q has to be minimized in the subsequent iter-
ations by applying corrections to the water levels at the junction.
Flow values in the inflow and the outflow channels change when
the water level correction, Δh, is implemented for iteration level

Atmi Δvi þ Btmi × Δhi þ Ctmi Δviþ1 þ Dtmi × Δhiþ1 ¼ Etmi j þ 1. For an inflow channel, flow rate at the junction node for
ð18Þ the iteration step, j þ 1, is given below

where Δv and Δh correspond to the difference in flow velocity and Bin  kþ1;j 
kþ1;jþ1
Qin ¼ × hin þ Δhj 2
the flow depth between time levels k and k þ 1, at any node. The Stin
 
detailed derivation for linearization with expanded coefficients and Ak St
the constant terms is provided in the Appendix. The proposed al- − in × hkin þ Ttin − kin × Qkin ð25Þ
Stin Ain
gorithm uses the linear relationship of the double sweep algorithm
established between Δhi and Δvi to get the equation for the junc- Expanding and neglecting higher-order terms,
tion point water stage correction. The details of the derivation are
given below Bin  kþ1;j 2 B
Qkþ1;jþ1
in ¼ × hin þ 2 × Δhj × in × hkþ1;j
in
Stin Stin
Δhi ¼ Sti × Δvi þ Tti ð19Þ  
Ak St
where St and Tt represent the recurrence coefficients at any node i, − in × hkin þ Ttin − kin × Qkin ð26Þ
Stin Ain
between two time levels. These values of recurrence coefficients
can be obtained from Eqs. (14) and (15) after replacing the terms Similarly for an outflow channel,
ACi , BCi , CCi , DCi , ECi , Ami , Bmi , Cmi , Dmi , and Emi with AtCi ,
BtCi , CtCi , DtCi , EtCi , Atmi , Btmi , Ctmi , Dtmi , and Etmi , respec- Bo  kþ1;j 2 B
Qkþ1;jþ1
o ¼ × ho þ 2 × Δhj × o × hkþ1;j
o
tively. It may be noted that the values of the coefficients AtCi , Sto Sto
BtCi , etc. (except EtCi and ET mi ) will be the same as the coeffi-  
Ak St
cients of ACi , BCi , etc., as the Newton-Raphson iterations for indi- − o × hko þ Tto − ko × Qko ð27Þ
vidual channels approach convergence. Sto Ao
The discretized form of Eq. (19) is as follows:
The net flow at the junction on implementing the correction is
hi kþ1 − hi k ¼ Sti × ðvi kþ1 − vi k Þ þ Tti ð20Þ illustrated below.
X X
where ðQin kþ1;jþ1 Þ − ðQo kþ1;jþ1 Þ
X X B
Qi kþ1 Qi k ¼ Qin kþ1;j þ 2 × Δhj× in × hkþ1;j
vi kþ1 − vi k ¼ − ð21Þ Stin in
Ai kþ1 Ai k
X X B
where A = cross-sectional area of the channel. − Qo j − 2 × Δhj × o × hkþ1;j
o ð28Þ
Sto
To solve for the channel junctions, flow discharges in all chan-
nels meeting at the junction are required. The flow discharge at the The equation for water stage increment between two consecu-
junction node is obtained by substituting Eq. (21) in Eq. (20). tive corrector steps obtained from Eq. (28) is shown below.
  P j
A kþ1 A kþ1   St 1 ðQ Þ
Qi kþ1 ¼ i × hi kþ1 þ i × −hi k − Tti þ ki Qi k ð22Þ Δhj ¼ × P B  ð29Þ
Sti Sti Ai 2 kþ1;j  P Bin  kþ1;j 
o
Sto × h o − Stin × hin
Eq. (22) is modified for a rectangular channel and then simpli-
fied by assuming Ai kþ1 ≅ Ai k . This simplification reduces the At any junction iteration level j, the value of Stin is obtained
number of arithmetic operations to be made and thus reduces from the respective recursive coefficient value of the iterative sol-
the computational time. Numerical experimentation made during ution of the individual channel. This is because as the Newton-
the developmental stage of the work indicated that the simplifica- Raphson iterations for individual channels converge, the value
tion did not have a significant effect on convergence. of S for i ¼ N þ 1 approaches to the value of Stin for inflow chan-
  nels and S for i ¼ 1 approaches to the value of Sto for outflow
Bi  kþ1 2 Aki Sti channel. For the way boundary conditions are implemented at a
Qkþ1
i ¼ × h i − × h k
i þ Tt i − × Q k
i ð23Þ junction in this work i.e., specification of flow depth, the valueof
Sti Sti Aki
Sto is zero at a junction. Therefore, a small value of 0.01 is assumed
where Bi = channel width at node i. for Sto at any iteration level j. Numerical experimentation has in-
For channel junctions, subscript i corresponds to the end node dicated that the value of Sto in the range of 0.01–0.005 provided
for inflow channels and the first node for outflow channels. These convergence for junction point corrections within 5 iterations.

© ASCE 04020012-5 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 Finally, the water stage correction is applied as follows:
hjþ1 ¼ hj þ Δhj ð30Þ
These corrections are applied to the junction water stage at every
iteration level, j until convergence.
The solution procedure of the JPWSPC algorithm can be sum-
marized as follows:
• Assume the value of flow depth at the junctions (for the first
time step, use the initial values of flow depth);
• Solve for flow depth and flow velocity at all the nodes in each
channel of the network individually using the Newton-Raphson
iterative scheme for the solution of discretized equations;
• Check if the mass balance is satisfied at the junctions. If the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
mass balance is not satisfied, apply the corrections to the flow
depth at junctions using Eqs. (29) and (30);
• Repeat the steps using the corrected values of flow depth at
junction;
• Continue the iterations until the convergence criterion is
satisfied.
Adaptive Relaxation
In the proposed methodology, the adaptive under relaxation method
(Durbin and Delemos 2007) is applied while implementing iterative
corrections to any variable, during both the Newton-Raphson iter-
ation for individual channels and the junction water level correction
procedures. The iterative correction formula for the variables, using
the adaptive under relaxation is illustrated below
X pþ1 ¼ X p þ γ × δX ð31Þ
where X represents any unknown that is being predicted and cor-
rected using an iterative procedure; δX is the increment between
Fig. 1. (a) Flow chart for adaptive under relaxation; and (b) variation of relaxation factor with error.
© ASCE 04020012-6
J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012
two iterative steps; and γ is the relaxation factor. The value of γ
is obtained using the following equation
γ ¼ γ min þ ð1 − γ min Þ expð−ρðδ − εÞÞ ð32Þ
where γ min = minimum value of the under-relaxation factor; and
ρ is the shape factor for the under-relaxation function (>zero).
In the case of Newton-Raphson iterations for individual channels,
δ ¼ δX max , i.e., maximum value of δX in the channel. γ is different
for flow depths and flow velocities and is different for each channel.
In the case of iterations for updating the junction depth, δ ¼ δX for
that junction and therefore, γ is different for different junctions. ε is
the convergence criterion. It can be seen from Eq. (32) that the
under relaxation factor, γ tends to a minimum value when the
δX value is large compared to the convergence criterion, and it ap-
proaches 1.0 as the iterations converge. The parameters γ min , ρ, and
ε are provided as inputs to the iterative procedure.
The iterative scheme may also tend to diverge between succes-
sive iterations. In such cases, i.e., when δX p > δX p−1 , the under-
relaxation function is scaled downward by modifying the values of
γ min and ρ using the relations given below (Durbin and Delemos
2007).
ðpÞ ðp−1Þ
γ min ¼ γ min ф ð33Þ
ðpÞ ðpÞ
ρðpÞ ¼ −lnððγ ðp−1Þ ф − γ min Þ ð1 − γ min ÞÞ=ððδ − εÞ ð34Þ
where ф = specified scaling factor ranging from 0 to 1. The flow
chart for implementation of the adaptive under relaxation is shown
in Fig. 1. Typical variation of γ with the value of δ is also pre-
sented in Fig. 1.
J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 2. Schematic for timeline interpolation.
Subtiming Algorithm
Channels in the network where the transient conditions are signifi-
cant are identified a priori, and a smaller computational time step
(dt) is chosen based on the accuracy requirements. In all the other
channels, a larger computational time step (Dt) is adopted such that
Dt is an integer multiple of dt. The integer multiple can be as large
as possible for achieving computational efficiency, while not intro-
ducing significant interpolation errors. A simple two-channel sys-
tem as shown in Fig. 2 is considered here for the sake of illustration.
The steps are summarized as follows:
• Adopt a smaller computational time step dt for channel J and
a larger computational time step Dt for channel L, such that
Dt ¼ 3dt and the number of sub-steps, Nsub ¼ 3.
• Assume flow depth at unknown time level k þ 1 at the channel
junctionfor time step, Dt.
• Use this flow depth as the upstream boundary condition and a
specified rating curve or stage hydrograph as the downstream
boundary condition, to solve for flow depth and flow velocity
in channel L at time t þ Dt.
• Get the values of flow depth at different subtime levels at the
junction by linear interpolation.
• Use these interpolated values of the depth at the sub-time
levels at the junction as downstream boundary conditions for
channel J.
• Utilize these downstream conditions at subtime levels along
with the specified upstream boundary condition, to determine
flow velocity and flow depth at all the nodes and subtime levels
for the channel J.
• Use the flow rates at time t þ Dt at the last node of channel J
and the first node of channel L to determine the correction to be
applied to the assumed flow depth at the channel junction, using
the JPWSPC algorithm.
• Repeat the procedure for all the junctions in a complex network.
• Continue the iterative procedure until the convergence criterion
is satisfied.
Results and Discussion
Performances of different models were evaluated using three proof-
of-the-concept test cases. The nomenclature for different models is
as follows: (1) the conventional model proposed by Zhu et al.
(2011), which is based on the JPWSPC algorithm using method
of characteristics for updating junction water stage, is referred to
as JPWSPC-MOC; (2) the JPWSPC-DSA model refers to the im-
proved model wherein the junction point corrections are obtained
using the double sweep algorithm; (3) the JPWSPC-MOC-Sub
© ASCE 04020012-7
J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012
model refers to the JPWSPC-MOC model enhanced by the subtim-
ing procedure; and (4) the JPWSPC-DSA-Sub model refers to the
JPWSPC-DSA model enhanced by the subtiming procedure. CPU
times taken by different models are compared to evaluate the com-
putational efficiency. Test Cases (1) and (3) considered unsteady
flow in tree type drainage networks and Test Case (2) considered
unsteady flow in a looped irrigation network. In all the three test
cases, initial flow conditions were assumed to be steady and initial
flow velocity and flow depth were obtained by solving the steady
gradually varied flow equation. The solution was considered to be
diverging when the number of iterations exceeded ten.
Test Case 1
In Test Case 1(a), the JPWSPC-DSA and JPWSPC-MOC algo-
rithms were validated using the experimental data for a simple
three-channel network available in literature (Larson et al. 1971;
Choi and Molinas 1993). The experimental setup was for a drain-
age network of three channels, comprising two parallel channels,
each 12.5 m in length, joining a downstream channel 12.3 m length.
The tributaries were 14-cm wide and the downstream channel was
19-cm wide. The average slope of the channels was 0.0007 and the
Manning’s roughness was 0.009. The network of channels was de-
signed to have uniform flow conditions at the downstream end. The
upstream boundary conditions of the tributaries are presented in
Fig. 3(a) (Choi and Molinas 1993).
Simulations were carried out for a time period of 30 min, with
dt ¼ 10 s. The results obtained using the JPWSPC-MOC and the
JPWSPC-DSA algorithms at the last node of the downstream chan-
nel are compared with the experimental results (Larson et al. 1971)
and the simulated results of Choi and Molinas (1993) in Fig. 3(b).
Output hydrographs obtained using the JPWSPC-MOC and
the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms show close agreement with the ob-
served hydrograph. Average errors in the simulations were 0.0005
and 0.0004 m3 =s, respectively, for the JPWSPC-MOC and the
JPWSPC-DSA methods. These results demonstrate the applicabil-
ity of the JPWSPC-MOC and the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms for
unsteady flow computations in channel networks. The simulation
times of the JPWSPC-MOC and the JPWSPC-DSA were 4.29
and 4.68 s, respectively. The experimental set up was designed for
smaller dimensions and flow capacity, and the experimental run
was for a short duration. Therefore, smaller spatial and time step
sizes were used in the simulations, which ensured convergence
without the need for using the adaptive relaxed iterative scheme.
However, the JPWSPC-MOC and the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms
along with the adaptive under relaxation technique also pro-
duced the same results for simulation times of 4.18 and 4.42 s,
respectively.
The optimal values for the relaxation parameters of adaptively
under-relaxed iterative schemes are fixed based on numerical ex-
perimentations. A higher value of ρ is generally required when
a large value of error has to converge and a small scaling factor
is required when the error tends to diverge between the iterations.
In Test Case 1(a), it has been observed that neither the error to con-
verge was high, nor there was any divergence of error between iter-
ations. For Test Case 1(a), the optimized values for γ min, ρ, and ϕ
were therefore specified as 0.1, 1, and 0.9, respectively.
Next, a dendritic networkof eight channels (Fig. 4), as consid-
ered earlier by Choi and Molinas (1993), is taken up for demon-
strating the applicability of the models. Each channel in this
network was 9,700 m long and had a bed slope of 0.002. Manning’s
coefficient was 0.04 for all channels. The width of the channel
was 30 m for all tributary channels while the widths were 61, 122,
and 151 m for main Channels 3, 6, and 8, respectively. The initial
J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. (a) Inflow hydrographs for Test Case 1(a) for all tributaries (data from Choi and Molinas 1993; Larson et al. 1971); and (b) computed
hydrograph at the downstream end of outflow channel.
steady-state flow rate in all tributary channels was 14.0 m3 =s.
A triangular hydrograph with a maximum discharge of 65 m3 =s
[Fig. 5(a)] was specified as the upstream boundary condition in all
the inflow channels i.e., Channels 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7. Uniform flow
was specified as the downstream boundary condition in Channel 8.
Each channel in the network was spatially discretized into 200
reaches. Also, in all simulations, a tolerance limit of 0.001 m was
used as a convergence criterion.
Numerical experiments indicated that grid convergent results
were obtained with a time step of 50 s. In this test case [Test Case
1(b)], convergent results could not be obtained using the JPWSPC-
MOC and the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms without the adaptive re-
laxation technique. The use of adaptive relaxation was essential for
obtaining the convergent results. The divergence of error (ErCI )
with iterations when using the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm without
the adpative relaxation and the convergence of error (ErURI ) with
iterations when using the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm along with
the adaptive relaxation for this particular case are illustrated in
Fig. 5(b). Fig. 5(b) is plotted for the last node of the last channel.
The tendency of the error to diverge between iterations, in this case
[Fig. 5(b)], ascertains the need for high value for the shape factor
and a small value for the scaling factor. Numerical experimentation
indicated that convergent and accurate results could be obtained
using ρ ¼ 5, ф ¼ 0.3, and and γ min ¼ 0.01.
The outflow hydrographs at the downstream end of Channel 8
obtained by (1) Choi and Molinas (1993), (2) JPWSPC-MOC
Fig. 4. Channel network for Test Case 1(b). (Data from Choi and
Molinas 1993.)
© ASCE 04020012-8
J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012
algorithm with under relaxation, and (3) JPWSPC-DSA algorithm
with under relaxation are presented in Fig. 5(c). It can be ob-
served that the results obtained using the JPWSPC-MOC and
the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms match very well with the previous
results of Choi and Molinas (1993), thus validating the proposed
algorithms. Results obtained using the two variants of the JPWSPC
algorithm match almost exactly. CPU times used by the JPWSPC-
MOC and JPWSPC-DSA algorithm (both with the under relaxation
technique) were 460.9 and 451.8 s, respectively. Results from this
test case demonstrated the need for adaptive relaxation in the
JPWSPC algorithm. However, the computational improvement ob-
tained by the JPWSPC-DSA algorithm over the JPWSPC-MOC
algorithm is only marginal.
Test Case 2
Test Case 2 considered a hypothetical network of ten channels with
a loop as shown in Fig. 6. This proof-of-concept test case was de-
signed to illustrate the applicability of the newly proposed algo-
rithm for updating the junctions of a network of channels with
loops. All the channels in this test case had similar characteristics:
length = 1,000 m; width = 50 m; bed slope = 0.0008; and Mann-
ing’s coefficient = 0.02. Each channel was divided into 50 reaches.
The inflow rates in the inlet channels were 1 m3 =s=m and the
downstream depths in Channels 9 and 10 were 0.7 m and 1.3 m,
respectively. For these inlet and outlet conditions, the false transient
approach was used to obtain the flow velocity and flow depth
at time t ¼ 0 at all the nodes in all the channels. In the False tran-
sient approach, unsteady flow equations are solved for an initial
warm-up period, for time-invariant boundary conditions, to get
asymptotic steady-state solutions (Chaudhry 2007). The upstream
boundary condition in all the inlet channels (Channels 1, 4, and 6)
was specified by the Log-Pearson type III hydrograph shown below
−½t−tp 
  tp
t ½tg −tp 
qu ¼ qo þ ðqp − qo Þe ½tg −tp 
ð35Þ
tp
where tg = time to centroid = 86,400 s; tp = time to peak = 64,800 s;
qp = peak flow rate per unit width ¼ 3 m2 =s; qo = base flow ¼
1 m2 =s; t = time; and qu = discharge per unit width at time t.
Numerical runs were made for a total time of 72 h.
The JPWSPC-MOC algorithm, as proposed by Zhu et al.
(2011), provided convergent results for this case when the
J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. (a) Inflow hydrograph for all the tributaries for Test Case 1(b) (data from Choi and Molinas 1993); (b) convergence of iterative schemes; and
(c) computed hydrographs at the downstream end of Channel 8.

computational time step was less than or equal to 800 s. In these
runs, the fixed value of γ was 0.9. Numerical runs with the
JPWSPC-MOC and the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms with the adap-
tive relaxation technique could produce a consistent improvement
in the convergence time for different time step sizes (Table 1),
without deterioration in the accuracy. The parameters of adaptive
relaxation, i.e., ф and ρ were 0.5 and 1, respectively. Results for
temporal variations in flow depths at midnodes of Channels 1,
2, 5, 8, 9, and 10 obtained using: (1) the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm
without adaptive relaxation, (2) the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm with
adaptive under-relaxation, and (3) the JPWSPC-DSA algorithm
with adaptive relaxation are presented in Fig. 7. As in Test Case 1,
JPWSPC-MOC and JPWSPC-DSA algorithms consumed almost
the same amount of CPU time in all the runs (Table 1). Results
from Test Case 2 demonstrate the applicability of the proposed
algorithm for networks with loops and also demonstrate the com-
putational efficiency obtained by using the adaptive relaxation.
Test Case 3
In Test Cases 1 and 2, channel networks were relatively small in
size and all the channels had a significant role in transferring the
wave. As the transient activity was dominant to the same level in all
the channels, the classical finite difference scheme with a uniform
time step was adopted suitably. A larger network wherein the tran-
sient wave propagation is limited only to a few channels is consid-
ered in Test Case 3. For this test case, the JPWSPC algorithm along
with subtiming (JPWSPC-Sub) was applied so that a smaller time
step is limited only to channels with significant transient activity.
The computational advantage of the subtiming technique is illus-
trated for the above proof-of-concept dendritic network of fifteen
channels as shown in Fig. 8, for three different subcases. Character-
istics of channels in the network for the three subcases are provided

Table 1. Comparison of CPU time in simulations for Test Case 2

CPU Speed CPU Speed
time (s) up time (s) up
Time step
Method size (s) MOC MOC DSA DSA
Conventional 50 268.2 Ref 266.2 1.01
JPWSPC 400 63.18 Ref 64.24 0.98
800 38.1 Ref 33.6 1.13
JPWSPC with 50 259.2 1.04 253.3 1.06
adaptive relaxation 400 50.1 1.27 53.2 1.19
800 31.0 1.23 25.7 1.48
Fig. 6. Schematic of channel network for Test Case 2.
Note: Ref = reference for computing speed up.

© ASCE 04020012-9 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 7. Depth hydrograph at the middle node of channels for Test Case 2: (a) Channel-1; (b) Channel-2; (c) Channel-5; (d) Channel-9; (e) Channel-8;
and (f) Channel-10.

in Table 2. All the inflow channels (Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 11) hydrograph [Eq. (35)], except for the value of peak flow. The values
had a base flow of 1 m3 =s=m at time t ¼ 0 s. The upstream of peak flow in the inflow hydrographs for the Test Case 3 are
boundary conditions for the inflow channels were the same as shown in Table 3.
in the Test Case 2, i.e., obtained using a Log-Pearson Type-III First, simulations were carried out for a period of 72 h using the
JPWSPC-MOC algorithm without the adaptive relaxation tech-
nique (Zhu et al. 2011) at a small computational time step of
50 s, uniformly adopted thorough out the computational domain.
It was found that the convergence was not achieved by the
JPWSPC-MOC algorithm without the adaptive relaxation for this
test case (Test Case 3). On the other hand, the JPWSPC-MOC and
the JPWSPC-DSA algorithms along with the adaptive relaxation
technique produced satisfactory results for much larger time step
of 200 s, as given in Table 4.
Numerical experimentation was carried out to study the effect of
bed slope on the convergence of iterative solvers. The channel and
inflow conditions in this test case [Test Case 3(d)] were the same as
those in the Test Case 3(a), except that the bed slope was 0.00008,
instead of 0.0008. It was found that the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm
without the adaptive relaxation could provide convergent results for
Fig. 8. Schematic of channel network Test Case 3. a time step of 50 s. This indicated that that convergence of iterations
in the JPWSPC algorithm without the adaptive relaxation becomes
difficult, especially when slopes are large.
Table 2. Channel characteristics in Test Case 3
Length Manning’s No. of
Channel No. (m) Bed Slope coefficient reaches
Table 3. Peak flows in the inflow hydrographs for the channels in Test
Case 3(a) Case 3
1, 2 1,000 0.0008 0.02 50
3, 4, : : : ,15 3,000 0.0008 0.02 150 qp (m3 =s=m)
Channel No. Case 3(a) and 3(b) Case 3(c)
Case 3(b) and Case 3(c)
1, 2 1,000 0.0008 0.02 50 1, 2, 10 3 4
3, 10,12,13,14,15 3,000 0.0008 0.02 150 4, 8 1 1.3
4,5,6,7,8,9,11 5,000 0.0008 0.02 250 5, 7, 11 1 1.2

© ASCE 04020012-10 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 Table 4. Comparison of CPU time in simulations for Test Case 3 without subtiming
CPU time (s)
Case 3(a) Case 3(b) Case 3(c)
Time step
Methodology size (s) MOC DSA MOC DSA MOC DSA
Conventional JPWSPC 50 Diverging
Adaptive-JPWSPC 50 1,958.5 1,957.3 2,058.0 2,052.1 2,051.8 2,046.6
200 370.0 362.2 446.8 438.1 488.6 476.9

Adaptively relaxed iterative method produced satisfactory re- Even though adaptive relaxation offers better stability with a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

sults for much larger time steps (200 s). Numerical experimenta- larger time step, there might not be a significant advantage with
tions revealed that adaptive relaxation is mostly required when the respect to computational time in all cases. By using under relaxa-
slopes of the channels are large (>0.00008 in the present experi- tion function, the convergence may be achieved with a larger time
ments). The parameters for adaptively under relaxed iterative step as compared to the case of divergence when the conventional
schemes were optimized based on the magnitude and convergence iterative scheme is used. However, for larger time steps, the number
pattern of error between iterations. A smaller value of shape factor of iterations to attain a converged solution may increase. This may
(slightly greater than one) is sufficient when the bed slopes and lead to reduced computationally efficiency. In the case of complex
peak flows are small as in Test Case 1(a) and Test Case (2). How- channel networks with more channels, transient activity may be
ever, a larger value of shape factor in the range of 2.0 to 5.0 is significant only in a few channels. There may be only a backwater
required when the bed slope and peak flow rate are high, as in Test effect on other channels. If a large uniform computational time step
Case 1(b). Accordingly, in all the three sub-cases of Test Case 3, is adopted for all the channels, the Newton-Raphson iteration con-
the value of shape factor, ρ, was chosen as 5, the value of scaling vergence could become difficult for channels with higher transient
factor ф ¼ 0.5, and the minimum value of relaxation factor, activity. The subtiming algorithm avoids this by using a smaller
γ min ¼ 0.01. time step in channels with significant transient activity and a larger
time step elsewhere in the network. This results in higher computa-
tional efficiency.
Table 5. Comparison of CPU time in simulations for Test Case 3 using
In the Test Case 3, computational time step in Channels 1, 2, 3,
adaptive JPWSPC with subtiming
13, and 15 were assigned a smaller value of 200 s. Channels 1, 2, 3,
Case 3(a) 13, and 15 are expected to have higher transient activity. This is
MOC DSA because Channels 1 and 2 are carrying inflows with higher peak
Time step
Channels size (s) CPU time Speed up CPU time Speed up
values. These Channels 1 and 2 are tributaries for Channel 3. Sim-
ilarly, Channel 3 is a tributary for Channel 13 and Channel 13 is a
1,2,3,13,15 200 273.8 1.35 267.8 1.38 tributary for Channel 15. Therefore, transient activity is expected to
Remaining 600
be significant in all these channels. The other channels might
1,2,3,13,15 200 249.4 1.48 238.5 1.55
Remaining 1,000 mostly have only a backwater effect. The details of numerical runs
1,2,3,13,15 200 253.5 1.45 240.9 1.53 with progressively increased time steps in the remaining channels
Remaining 1,200 are provided in Table 5. Referring to the time taken for simulations
1,2,3,13,15 200 216.0 1.72 188.6 1.96 with different time step sizes for channels, it is clear that the com-
4,5,7,8 1,200 bination of time steps 200, 600, and 1,200 s gives substantial
Remaining 600 improvement to computational efficiency in all cases. The discrep-
Case 3(b) ancy in the outflow hydrograph (hydrograph at the last node of
1,2,3,13,15 200 328.1 1.35 321.5 1.39 Channel 15) for 200, 600, and 1,200 time step combination when
Remaining 600 compared to the JPWSPC-MOC algorithm (with adaptive relaxa-
1,2,3,13,15 200 289.4 1.54 274.3 1.63 tion) with uniform time step size was found to be marginal with
Remaining 1,000 a maximum error and average error of 0.02% and 0.15%, respec-
1,2,3,13,15 200 298.5 1.49 277.1 1.61 tively, for Case 3(a), 1.11% and 0.18% for case 3(b), and 1.18%
Remaining 1,200
and 0.21% for case 3(c). It can also be observed from Table 5 that
1,2,3,13,15 200 214.7 2.08 191.8 2.33
4,5,7,8 1,200 the JPWSPC-DSA performed better than the JPWSPC-MOC when
Remaining 600 subtiming is embedded in the algorithm. The plots showing a varia-
tion of flow depth with time at the last-node of channels obtained
Case 3(c) using the subtiming approach with different subtime levels and the
1,2,3,13,15 200 368.3 1.32 352.1 1.38
traditional uniform time step approach are presented in Fig. 9 for
Remaining 600
1,2,3,13,15 200 359.8 1.36 347.8 1.40 Test Case 3(a). Similar results were obtained for Test Cases 3(b)
Remaining 1,000 and 3(c). The combination of subtime steps, which give the highest
1,2,3,13,15 200 Diverging — Diverging — computational efficiency, without significant deterioration in accu-
Remaining 1,200 racy, depends on channel slopes and peak flow rates in the inflow
1,2,3,13,15 200 251.2 1.94 228.7 2.14 channels. It may be noted that very large time steps cannot be
4,5,7,8 1,200 adopted, even though convergence is ensured, in order to limit the
Remaining 600 deterioration in accuracy due to interpolations inherent in the sub-
Note: Diverging = divergence of error. timing strategy.

© ASCE 04020012-11 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 9. Depth hydrograph at the last node of channels for Test Case-3: (a) Channel-3; (b) Channel-5; (c) Channel-7; (d) Channel-9; (e) Channel-11;
and (f) Channel-15.

Conclusions
The details of the improved JPWSPC method with the subtiming
algorithm for enhancing the computational efficiency of unsteady
flow computations in any general network of channels are pre-
sented in this paper. The proposed JPWSPC-DSA-Sub algorithm
utilizes the recurrence coefficients of the double sweep algorithm
at the channel junctions for junction point water stage corrections.
Adaptively underrelaxed iterative scheme is used to ensure conver-
gence, particularly at larger time step sizes. The adaptive relaxation
scheme makes the convergence faster by offering a suitable shape
for under relaxation function and by downscaling the function if the
error diverges between iteration levels. The subtiming algorithm
builds on the basic advantage of the JPWSPC method, i.e., indepen-
dent solution of individual channels in the network during an iter-
ation. This is brought to effect by utilizing different time step sizes
in different channels, based on the level of temporal variations in
flow conditions in corresponding channels. The subtiming tech-
nique makes use of smaller time step size only in regions where
transient activity is high. Three proof-of-concept-tests illustrated
the need for adaptive relaxation techniques to achieve convergence
with large computational time steps. Test cases also illustrated the
computational speed-up achieved by using the proposed JPWSPC-
Sub method. The proposed method was almost two times as fast
as the classical JPWSPC method of Zhu et al. (2011) for large
networks.

Appendix. Linearization of Saint Venant Equations

The discretized form of the continuity equation given in Eq. (5) can be rewritten as follows:
 kþ1  kþ1   
hkþ1 − hki hkþ1 − hkiþ1 v þ vkþ1 hiþ1 − hkþ1 vk þ vki hkiþ1 − hki
i
þ iþ1 þ α iþ1 i i
− iþ1
2Δt 2Δt 2 Δx 2 Δx
 kþ1 kþ1  kþ1 kþ1  k k k   k k  k   k  
h þ hi viþ1 − vi h þ hi viþ1 − vi
k
v þ vi hiþ1 − hki h þ hki vkiþ1 − vki
þ α iþ1 − iþ1 þ iþ1 þ iþ1 ¼ 0 ð36Þ
2 Δx 2 Δx 2 Δx 2 Δx

where vkþ1
i ¼ vki þ Δvi ; hkþ1
i ¼ hki þ Δhi ; vkþ1
iþ1 ¼ viþ1 þ Δviþ1 ; and hiþ1 ¼ hiþ1 þ Δhiþ1 .
k kþ1 k

Eq. (36) may be linearized as follows:

     kþ1   kþ1 
1 vkþ1 1 vkþ1 2hi h 2Δviþ1 Δhiþ1
− 2α i Δhi þ þ 2α iþ1 Δhiþ1 − α Δvi þ α 2 iþ1 Δviþ1 − α
2Δt 2Δx 2Δt 2Δx 2Δx 2Δx 2Δx
 k k  k k  k k  k k
2Δvi Δhi v þ vi hiþ1 − hi h þ hi viþ1 − vi
þα þ iþ1 þ iþ1 ¼0 ð37Þ
2Δx 2 Δx 2 Δx

© ASCE 04020012-12 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 Neglecting higher order terms in Eq. (37), the linearized form of Continuity equation can be expressed as follows:
 kþ1     kþ1   
2hi 1 vkþ1 hiþ1 1 vkþ1
−α Δvi þ − 2α i
Δhi þ α 2 Δviþ1 þ þ 2α iþ1
Δhiþ1
2Δx 2Δt 2Δx 2Δx 2Δt 2Δx
 k     
v þ vki hki − hkiþ1 hk þ hki vki − vkiþ1
¼ iþ1 þ iþ1 ð38Þ
2 Δx 2 Δx

Eq. (38) is the expanded form of the Eq. (17), illustrating the details of coefficients and constant terms of the linearized continuity equation.
A similar method of linearization is employed for the momentum equation. The steps for linearization are as follows:
 kþ1   kþ1   k  
Δvi Δviþ1 2vi 2viþ1 viþ1 þ vki vkiþ1 − vki
þ þα Δvi þ α Δviþ1 þ
2Δt 2Δt 2Δx 2Δx 2 Δx
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

 k k      k 
g g hiþ1 − hi gα gα Sf i þ Sf kiþ1
þα Δhiþ1 − α Δhi þ · g − gSo þ · ΔSf i þ
kþ1
ΔSf iþ1 þ g
kþ1
¼0 ð39Þ
Δx Δx Δx 2 2 2

The change in resistance to flow between time levels can be represented in terms of partial derivate for any node as shown below

∂Sf ∂Sf
ΔSf ¼ Δh þ kþ1 Δv ð40Þ
∂hkþ1 ∂v

where

∂Sf 4 n2 ðvkþ1 Þ2
¼− ð41Þ
∂h kþ1 3 ðhkþ1 Þ7=3

∂Sf n2 vkþ1
¼ 2 kþ1 4=3 ð42Þ
∂vkþ1
ðh Þ

Substituting Eq. (40) in Eq. (39)

 kþ1   kþ1   
Δvi Δviþ1 2vi 2viþ1 g g gα ∂Sf i
þ −α Δvi þ α Δviþ1 þ α Δhiþ1 − α Δhi þ Δhi
2Δt 2Δt 2Δx 2Δx Δx Δx 2 ∂hikþ1
       k  
gα ∂Sf i gα ∂Sf iþ1 gα ∂Sf iþ1 viþ1 þ vki vkiþ1 − vki
þ Δvi þ Δhiþ1 þ Δviþ1 þ
2 ∂vkþ1
i 2 ∂hkþ1iþ1
2 ∂vkþ1iþ1
2 Δx
 k   
h − hki α α Sf ki þ Sf kiþ1
þ g iþ1 þ ðΔvi Þ2 − ðΔviþ1 Þ2 − gSo þ g ¼0 ð43Þ
Δx 2Δx 2Δx 2

Neglecting higher order terms, the linearized form of momentum equation may be expressed as

  kþ1       2 kþ1 2  
1 2vi gα n2 vkþ1 gα 4 n ðvi Þ g
−α þ 2 kþ1i 4=3 Δvi − þ α Δhi
2Δt 2Δx 2 ðhi Þ 2 3 ðhkþ1
i Þ7=3 Δx
  kþ1        2 kþ1 2 
1 2viþ1 gα n2 vkþ1 g gα 4 n ðviþ1 Þ
þ þα þ 2 kþ1 4=3 Δviþ1 þ α
iþ1
− 7=3
Δhiþ1
2Δt 2Δx 2 ðhiþ1 Þ Δx 2 3 ðhkþ1
iþ1 Þ
 k    k   k 
v þ vki vkiþ1 − vki h − hki Sf i þ Sf kiþ1
þ iþ1 þ g iþ1 − gSo þ g ¼0 ð44Þ
2 Δx Δx 2

Eq. (44) is the expanded form of the Eq. (18), illustrating the details of coefficients and constant terms of the linearized momentum
equation.

Data Availability Statement Acknowledgments

Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this Authors acknowledge the partial funding received from the Depart-
study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable ment of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India un-
request. der the Grant No. EMR/2017/000642 through SERB.

© ASCE 04020012-13 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 Notation Choi, G., and A. Molinas. 1993. “Simultaneous solution algorithm for
channel network modeling.” Water Resour. Res. 29 (2): 321–328.
The following symbols are used in this paper: https://doi.org/10.1029/92WR01949.
A = flow area; Cunge, J. A., F. M. Holly, and A. Verwey. 1980. Practicalaspects of com-
putational river hydraulics. London: Pitman Publishers.
B = channel width;
Durbin, T., and D. Delemos. 2007. “Adaptive underrelaxation of Picard
Dh = hydraulic depth; iterations in groundwater models.” Ground Water 45 (5): 648–651.
Dt = larger time step; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00329.x.
dt = computational time step; El-Amin, M. F., J. Kou, and S. Sun. 2018. “Discrete-fracture-model of
g = acceleration due to gravity; multi-scale time-splitting two-phase flow including nanoparticles trans-
port in fractured porous media.” J. Comput. Appl. Math. 333 (May):
h = depth of flow;
327–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2017.11.008.
J = Jacobian matrix; Fread, D. L. 1973. “Technique of implicit dynamic routing in rivers with
L = length of channel; tributaries.” Water Resour. Res. 9 (4): 918–926. https://doi.org/10.1029
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

n = Manning’s roughness; /WR009i004p00918.

Q = discharge; Islam, A., N. S. Raghuwanshi, R. Singh, and D. J. Sen. 2005. “Comparison
of gradually varied flow computation algorithms for open-channel net-
qo = base flow per unit width;
work.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 131 (5): 457–465. https://doi.org/10.1061
qp = peak flow per unit width; /(ASCE)0733-9437(2005)131:5(457).
qu = discharge per unit width; Janicke, L., and A. Kost. 1998. “Convergence properties of the Newton–
R = hydraulic radius; Raphson method for nonlinear problems.” IEEE Trans. Magn. 34 (5):
S = recurrence coefficient of double sweep algorithm; 2505–2508. https://doi.org/10.1109/20.717577.
Joliffe, I. B. 1984. “Computation of dynamic waves in channel networks.”
So = channel bed slope; J. Hydraul. Eng. 110 (10): 1358–1370. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
Sf = friction slope; 0733-9429(1984)110:10(1358).
T = recurrence coefficient of double sweep algorithm; Larson, C. L., T. C. Wei, and C. E. Bowers. 1971. Numerical routing of
t = time; flood hydrographs through open channel junctions, 67. Minneapolis:
tg = time to centroid; Water Resources Research Center, Univ. of Minnesota.
Li, W., and C. Wei. 2015. “An efficient finite element procedure for ana-
tp = time to peak; lyzing three-phase porous media based on the relaxed Picard method.”
v = velocity of flow; Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 101 (11): 825–846. https://doi.org/10.1002
Xo = variables at unknown time level; /nme.4830.
X1 = variables at known time level; Liao, H. S., P. V. Sampath, Z. K. Curtis, and S. G. Li. 2015. “Hierarchical
α = weighting coefficient; modeling and parameter estimation for a coupled groundwater-lake
system.” J. Hydrol. Eng. 20 (11): 196–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
β = adjustable parameter for updatingjunction; .jhydrol.2015.04.057.
γ = underrelaxation factor; Misra, C., S. T. Manikandan, S. M. Bhallamudi, and S. Panday. 2012.
γ min = minimum value of the underrelaxation factor; “Dynamic subtiming-based implicit nonoscillating scheme for contam-
δ = maximum value of increments between two iterations; inant transport modeling.” J. Hydrol. Eng. 17 (6): 694–703. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000507.
ε = convergence criterion; and
Naidu, B. J., S. M. Bhallamudi, and S. Narasimhan. 1997. “GVF compu-
ρ = shape factor for under relaxation function; and tation in tree-type networks.” J. Hydraul. Eng. 123 (8): 700–708.
ф = downscaling factor for under relaxation function. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1997)123:8(700).
Nakata, T., N. Takahashi, K. Fujiwara, O. Okamoto, and K. Muramatsu.
1992. “Improvements of convergence characteristics of Newton-
Subscript Raphson method for nonlinear magnetic field analysis.” IEEE Trans.
Magn. 28 (2): 1048–1051. https://doi.org/10.1109/20.123861.
i = grid point;
Nguyen, Q. K., and H. Kawano. 1995. “Simultaneous solution of flood
iþ1 = next grid point; routing in channel networks.” J. Hydraul. Eng. 121 (10): 744–750.
i−1 = previous grid point; https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1995)121:10(744).
in = inflow; and Reddy, H. P., and S. M. Bhallamudi. 2004. “Gradually varied flow compu-
o = outflow. tation in cyclic looped channel networks.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 130 (5):
424–431. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2004)130:5(424).
Ren, F., G. W. Ma, Y. Wang, and L. F. Fan. 2016. “Pipe network model
Superscript for unconfined seepage analysis in fractured rock masses.” Int. J. Rock
Mech. Min. Sci. 88 (10): 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms
j = junction iteration level; .2016.07.023.
k = known time level; Santiago-Collazo, F. L., and W. F. Silva-Araya. 2019. “Computational
kþ1 = unknown time level; and model for gradually varied flow in channel networks with hydraulic
structures.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 145 (6): 04019007. https://doi.org/10
p = channel iteration level. .1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001388.
Schulte, A. M., and M. H. Chaudhry. 1987. “Gradually-varied flow in
open-channel networks.” J. Hydraul. Res. 25 (3): 357–371. https://doi
References .org/10.1080/00221688709499276.
Sen, D. J., and N. K. Garg. 2002. “Efficient algorithm for gradually varied
Bhallamudi, S. M., S. Panday, and P. S. Huyakorn. 2003. “Sub-timing flows in channel networks.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 128 (6): 351–357.
in fluid flow and transport simulations.” Adv. Water Resour. 26 (5): https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2002)128:6(351).
477–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(03)00018-6. Singh, V., and S. Bhallamudi. 1997. “Complete hydrodynamic border-strip
Chaudhry, M. H. 2007. Open channel flow. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- irrigation model.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 123 (6): 407–414. https://doi.org
Hall. /10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1997)123:6(407).

© ASCE 04020012-14 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012

 Swain, E. D., and D. A. Chin. 1990. “Model of flow in regulated open
channel networks.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 116 (4): 537–556. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1990)116:4(537).
Wu, W. 2008. Computational river dynamics. London: Taylor & Francis.
Zhang, M., and Y. Shen. 2007. “Study and application of steady flow
and unsteady flow mathematical model for channel networks.”
J. Hydrodyn. Ser. B 19 (5): 572–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001
-6058(07)60155-3.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 04/13/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Zhou, P., D. Lin, B. He, S. Kher, and Z. J. Cendes. 2010. “Strategies
for accelerating non-linear convergence for T-Omega formulation.”
IEEE Trans. Magn. 46 (8): 3129–3132. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG
.2010.2043508.
Zhu, D., Y. Chen, Z. Yang, and Z. Liu. 2011. “Simply robust and efficient
algorithm for gradually varied subcritical flow simulation in general
channel networks.” J. Hydraul. Eng. 137 (7): 766–774. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000356.

© ASCE 04020012-15 J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.

J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 2020, 146(6): 04020012