Dam Break Flow over Stable Bed

By: Devendra Meena

Supervisor: Prof. Pranab Mohapotra

Abstract
Dam-break flows usually propagate along rivers and floodplains, where the processes of
fluid flow, sediment transport and bed evolution are closely linked. Dam-break flows are
usually simulated by solving the shallow-water equations. However, the majority of
existing one-dimensional models used to simulate dam-break flows are only applicable to
fixed beds. In this project, we first worked on stable bed and then on mobile bed. By
using Saint Venant equations we have made a scenario to understand dam-break
hydraulics. In this project we first deal with an ideal situation and then slowly imposing
conditions one by one and then bringing it closer to desired situation. Numerical
modelling of shallow water flow in two dimensions is presented in this paper with the
results obtained in Matlab program.

Dam Break Flow over Stable Bed

Introduction: - Flooding due to dam failure can cause a lot damage to properties and
lives. For the last decade, a lot of efforts have been put on understanding dam-break
hydraulics.
Compared to the fixed-bed case, the simulation of dam-break flow over movable beds is
much more challenging and has just emerged in recent years.
One of the problems in movable-bed modeling is that under dam-break flow conditions
the sediment concentration is so high and the bed varies so rapidly that their effects on
the flow cannot be ignored.
The other problem is that the sediment transport in the region of high shear is little
understood. In such region, the sediment transport might be strongly non-equilibrium,
and the assumption of local equilibrium sediment transport capacity is no longer valid
(Wu et al. 2004).

Real-time field measurements are prohibitively difficult, the majority of dam-break

studies have been carried out in laboratories. However, that physical experiments are
largely constrained by the comparatively small spatial scales that can be realistically
accommodated in laboratories, and thus may not be able to fully reveal the long-term
mechanism of the flow.

Mathematically Formulation
Governing Equations (St. Venant equations):
The assumptions that were made in deriving the governing equations are:
1. The pressure distribution is hydrostatic. This is valid assumption if the stream
lines do not have sharp curvatures.
2. The channels bottom slope is so small that the flow depth measured normal to the
channel bottom or measured vertically are approximately same.
3. The flow velocity over entire channel cross section is uniform.
4. The channel is prismatic, i.e., the channel cross-section and the channel bottom
slope do not change with distance.
5. The head losses in unsteady flow may be simulated by using the steady- state
resistance laws, such as Manning or Chezy equation, i.e. head losses for a given
flow velocity during unsteady flow are the same as that during steady flow.
We choose 2 easy and convenient equations to solve for the unknowns. The
continuity and the momentum equation that is chosen.
We have chosen Flow Velocity (v) and Flow Depth (y) as our Flow parameters.
Numerical scheme:Continuity Equation:

=0

(1)

Momentum Equation:
vy

f =

(v2 +

(mcv)2
(y)2/3

2
2

) = (0)

(Mannings equation)

(2)
(3)

Notations:
0 = Channel bottom Slope and considered positive sloping downwards.
= Slope of energy grade line or friction slope
mc = Mannings coefficient
g = acceleration due to gravity.
c = Courants number

MacCormack Scheme:
There are a lot of schemes present but we choose Mac Cormack scheme to solve our
governing equations numerically, because it gives a reliably good solution with lesser
computations. The MacCormack scheme is a two-step predictor-corrector scheme [Anderson
et al., 1984].

It has 2 alternatives, and anything can be chosen. The general recommended

procedure is to use them alternatively in each iteration and some recent studies
show that best results are obtained if the direction of differencing is same as the
direction of the flow. The following is the scheme followed by us.
Spatial
Backward difference
Forward difference

Predictor step
Corrector step

Time
Forward difference
Backward difference

Predictor Step:

=
=
=
=

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

Corrector Step:

=
=
=
=

+1

(8)

(9)

+1

(10)

(11)

Now, applying the above Mac Cormack scheme to the St. Venant equations and then
simplifying, we get,

Continuity equation:
Predictor step:

Corrector step:

=
=

Momentum equation:

+ ( 1
( 1
)

( ( 1
)
+ (+1

(12)

(13)

Predictor step:
= t
Corrector step:

= t ( )

+ 1
)
( 1

( (+1
) + (+1
))

+1 =

+1 =

(16)

( + )

(17)

(14)

(15)

An asterisk (*) indicates the values at the end of the predictor part and (**) refers to the
values at the end of the corrector part.
We cannot compute the result just by using the above method because in most of the
cases, it results in unstable solution i.e. solution may blow up to infinity or we may get an
imaginary number. Therefore to ensure a proper stable solution, we impose additional
condition called stability condition on our model.

Stability Condition:
t

u + (g )

We compute its value in each and every iteration to get the value of so that we get a
solution which is stable.
x
t = c (
)
(18)
u +(g )

We choose the value of from the above equation and choose the minimum out of all
the s.

We have applied all the equations on numerical scheme on a case where the
length of the river bed is 100 meters and water level is 1 meter for the first 40
meters and it is 0.3 meters for the next 60 meters, the Dam breaks at time t = 0s.

Results and Conclusions:Effects of : - Practically it is impossible to work on a long river, so for our computing we
have divided our experimental river length into small-small partitions. We are considering some
critical points, which will help us to get the results same as realistic with less computing power.

No.

Partitions

Time(sec.)

1
2
3

10
100
1000

10
10
10

Courant
Number
.5
.5
.5

Manning
Coefficient
0
0
0

(m)
10
1
.1

Colour
Red
Blue
Green

Table 1 Data points for change in x

Figure 1 Change in x

From above figure 1 we can see that as we increase number of partitions or reduce the length
interval, the oscillation increases, but the size of oscillation decreases w

Effects of Courant number: - The courant number is a necessary constant for stability
condition. After x it is the most important parameter because it helps us to choose an
appropriate time step for a given mesh. It should be less than 1 and positive.
From the figure 2 we can see that as we increase the value of Courant number the variation in
our graph gets reduce. Increment of Courant number leads to higher time steps and it needs more
computing power.
No.

Partitions

Time(sec.)

1
2
3

1000
1000
1000

10
10
10

Courant
Number
.2
.3
.4

Mannings
Coefficient
0
0
0

Colour
Red
Blue
Green

Table 2 Data points for change in Courant Number

Figure 2 Change in Courant Number

Effect of Roughness (Mannings coefficient): - The mannings coefficient (the roughness

coefficient) is also a very important parameter. We know in reality there is no model is without
friction, so mannings coefficient helps us to bring our model close to reality. It depends upon to
a greater level on roughness of the surface, amount of vegetation on the surface, and channel
irregularity and slightly on deposition and channel alignment.

No.

Partitions

Time (sec.)

1
2
3

1000
1000
1000

10
10
10

Courant
Number
.5
.5
.5

Mannings
Coefficient
0
.05
.0013

Table 3 Data points for change in Roughness

Colour
Red
Blue
Green
8

Figure 3 Change in Roughness

From the figure-3 we can see that small values of the roughness coefficient dont have
much effect on our model. But if we increase the coefficient value then it brings a tilt in
the flow depth graph and it is because, the friction reduces the downstream velocity and
as the flow velocity decreases the upstream side has comparatively higher flow depth.
Effect of slope of riverbed: - The fundamental characteristics of the riverbed slope is
suddenly transform the dam-break wave and strongly change the shape of hydrographs
observed locally. Dam failure generates a sudden rise in water level and a temporary
increase in the rate of flow to the receiving watercourse.
No.

Partitions

Time
(sec.)

Courant
Number

Mannings
Coefficient

Slope of
Riverbed

Colour

1000

10

.5

Red

1000

10

.5

0.001

Blue

1000

10

.5

0.0001

Green

Table 4 Data points for change in Riverbed slope

Figure 4 Change in Riverbed slope

As we decrease the slope, the water level height at initial point gets reduced by some points.

Effect of Downstream flow depth: - It is a very important parameter. It decides the flow
direction of water. In our model we vary the level of downstream depth from 0.5m. to 0.1m. .
No.

Partitions

Time (sec.)

Courant
Number

Mannings
Coefficient

Downstream Colour
Depth (m.)

1000

10

.5

.5

Red

1000

10

.5

.3

Blue

1000

10

.5

.1

Green

Table 5 Data points for change in Downstream Flow Depth

10

Figure 5 Change in Downstream flow depth

As we decrease water level depth we start to get less variation at the critical point (where high
level of water & low level of water meets) and as the water strike on the ground, the variation
gets increase.
Dry Downstream Bed: - We want to check our model how it will behave on a dry surface. To
make it realistic we have chosen a minimum value .000001m.(Values lesser than 1x10-6 we get
the same results.). Comparitively It got less variation than figure 5, because we are assuming it is
hitting a dry surface. So as the water falls on the ground without creating much variation it starts
to move ahead.

11

Figure 6 Dry downstream bed

References
1. Zhixian Cao, Gareth Pender, Steve Wallis and Paul Carling (2004) Computational
Dam-Break Hydraulics over Erodible Sediment Bed.
2. P. Brufau and P. Garcia-Navarro, Two-dimensional dam break flow simulation
3. M. Hanif Chaudhary, Open Channel Flow 2nd edi.
4. Weiming Wu, M. and Sam S. Y. Wang, One-Dimensional Modeling of Dam-Break
Flow over Movable Beds

12