LOCALLY ADAPTED TIME STEPS FOR OPEN CHANNEL FLOW

WITH TRANSITIONS

N.G. WRIGHT

Lecturer, School of Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham, UK

C.D. WHITLOW

Independent Consultant, Bristol,

A.J. CROSSLEY

Graduate Student, School of Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham, UK

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Wright at:

School of Civil Engineering
University of Nottingham
Nottingham
NG7 2RD
UK
Tel. +44-115-951-3899
Fax. +44-115-951-3898
E-mail Nigel.Wright@nottingham.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
This paper presents two different methods for using local timesteps in the solution of
open channel flows. These should be particularly advantageous when combined
with spatial adaptivity. The methods are demonstrated in the context of a Riemann
solver based method for the time dependent one-dimensional St. Venant equations.
The resulting algorithm is applied to three test cases to show that run times are
reduced with no significant loss of accuracy. The test cases cover steady and
unsteady cases and the effects of varying bed slope, friction and consequent flow
transitions.
INTRODUCTION
Modern computational hydraulic models can provide river engineers with a large
amount of understanding regarding channel flows and water levels. These models
translate rainfall data into information on flood extents and volumes and
consequently they have great value in the evaluation of proposed developments
where flooding/drainage is an issue. River modelling is used extensively by the UK
Environment Agency and their consultants and it is estimated there are over 200
operational models of river systems in the UK alone, ranging from small drainage
ditches through to large rivers such as the River Thames.
A weakness of most 1-D modelling packages is that a small area of a model with
closely spaced sections will cause instability in unsteady flow computations if a
relatively large timestep is used. Practical experience of river shows that despite
implicit methods being unconditionally stable for linear problems, they often fail at
large timesteps in the non-linear channel problems. If the timestep is consequently
significantly reduced, run times are greatly increased due only to this small region of
the entire model. In many cases it is necessary to use a very small global timestep
due to the need to have closely spaced nodes between a small portion of the total
number of cross-sections and only at times of low discharge. In view of this efficient
globally adaptive time stepping strategies have been developed which can yield large
reductions in run times1,2. One such strategy has been implemented in the ISIS
software package and achieved up to a 600% reduction in run-times1 for a model of
the Orange River in South Africa
As the use of computational river modelling continues to widen it poses increasing
difficulties for the associated numerical methods. On the one hand models are
becoming catchment wide and on the other, models are being constructed for very
small-scale watercourses. The former bring problems of long solution times due to
the large number of cross-sections and the need to satisfy continuity conditions at
many junctions. The latter leads to small depths, problems with resolving small-scale
features and the increased likelihood of flow transitions.
The phenomena occurring in these more complicated cases have even greater
differences in length and time scales. One way to address this difficulty is to use
adaptive discretisation for both space and time. A number of papers2,3 have
presented work on the former whereas this paper concentrates on the latter. It
employs techniques developed for the Euler equations of compressible gas dynamics
and amends them for use for the St. Venant equations. This local timestepping
technique is implemented and it is demonstrated that not only does this lead to
reduced model run times, but it also gives increased error knowledge and in many
cases more accurate solutions. Although the work presented here is based on a
Riemannsolver to model discontinuities accurately, it may be possible to adapt the
techniques for other solvers including, for example, the Preissmann scheme.

METHODOLOGY
In order to use a Riemann-based approach the St. Venant equations are formulated
in terms of fluxes:
∂U ∂F(U )
+ =S
∂t ∂x
where
 Q 
 A
U =  , F(U ) =  Q 2 , S(U) =  0 

 + gI1   gI + gA( S − S )  ,
Q  A   2 o f 

and A is cross-section area, Q is discharge, So is bottom slope, Sf is a friction term

modelled by Manning’s or Chezy’s Equation, I1 is the hydrostatic pressure term and I2
accounts for the pressure force exerted by walls in a nonprismatic channel.
In this work the above equations are solved by the use of Riemann based methods.
Roe’s Riemann solver is used as this has been found to work in a wide range of
circumstances. It is possible to implement a flux limiter with this technique, but this
has not been done, as the main intention is to demonstrate temporal adaptivity.
Two particular methods have been implemented for variable local timestepping and
both are based on work with the Euler equations. Zhang et al proposed the first4 and
by Kleb, Batina and Williams the second5. The two techniques will be described here
as ‘ Flux Calculation Elimination” (FCE) and the “Interpolated Value Method” (IVM).

FLUX CALCULATION ELIMINATION (FCE)

This methods endeavours to update the fluxes at cell interfaces only where
necessary, that is, where a local maximum time step has been reached. If a solution
is known at a time level, n, a maximum timestep can be calculated for each cell
based on the Courant-Friedrichs-Levy (CFL) condition. This gives a set of local
maximum allowable timesteps. In a non-adaptive method the minimum of all these
allowable timesteps is found and the solution advanced by this time step at all cells.
This adaptive method adopts this approach, but only updates the flux calculations for
cells where the local maximum time step has been reached. By eliminating the
calculation of the flux term much computational effort is saved, as this is the most
costly calculation. This technique has the advantage of continuing to update all
variables at each timestep. This makes for easy implementation within existing
algorithms. Cells are grouped together with others with similar local timesteps. Care
must be taken when updating cells at the interfaces of these groups and for greater
detail the reader is referred to a more comprehensive paper6.

INTERPOLATED VALUE METHOD (IVM)

As for the FCE approach, this method establishes a local maximum timestep for each
cell. It also calculates a local timestep to be used that is a multiple of the minimum
local maximum timestep. It then integrates all cells forward by the amount of the
amended local timestep in an explicit manner. This obviously yields a set of new
values that are at different time levels. The next step is to integrate forward the cells
that lag behind due to their smaller local timesteps. In doing this a cell may require
values from adjacent cells that have been advanced to a higher time level and in
these cases linear interpolation is used. The order of integration of the cells has to
be set up so that intermediate, interpolated values are available when needed by
adjacent cells.
This method has the advantage that it eliminates all calculations at intermediate
timesteps as opposed to only the flux terms for the FCE approach. It has the
disadvantage of being more complex and therefore the conversion of existing
algorithms needs more thought.

TEST CASES
Both of the above methods were applied to the following test cases:

a) A steady state case from the set of problems proposed by MacDonald7. This
consists of a prismatic, trapezoidal channel with bed slope and friction effects.
The boundary conditions are a subcritical input and a supercritical output, which
gives a hydraulic jump. This case is run until a convergence test is satisfied for all
methods.
b) A dambreak in a rectangular prismatic channel of length 1000m and a upstream
reservoir:tailwater depth ration of 100:1. This is simulated from 0s to 10s.
c) A dambreak in a channel with constant slope and a sudden width expansion
proposed by Savic and Holly8. This is simulated from 0s to 4000s.
Source terms are implemented by the upwinding approach of Bermódez and
V«zquez9.

RESULTS
From Figure 1 it can be seen that the results for global timestepping and both the
local timestepping methods are practically identical. This would be expected for a
steady state method where timestepping is effectively being used as a form of
iteration. Figure 2 shows that not only does a local timestepping method give
answers similar to the global timestepping, but also in some cases it gives better
answers. This is due to the use of more optimal courant numbers in the local time
stepping method. A global timestepping method will be using very low courant
numbers, which is known to cause an increase in net dissipation. Figure 3 further
demonstrates that local timestepping does give results very similar to global
timestepping. In fact in this more complicated case the results are almost identical.
Having demonstrated that there are no disadvantages in terms of accuracy in using
local timestepping, it is necessary to examine whether there is any advantage in time
saving. Results for computer time and percentage savings are given in Table 1. For
each test case the local timestepping results in reduced computer times, even for the
short times shown here. The greatest savings are for the third case with up to a 21%
reduction. This demonstrates that the local time stepping is particularly
advantageous for more complicated cases and suggests that implementation for
practical rivers should be of great use.
The other result of note is in the difference between the two different methods of local
timestepping. The second method clearly produces shorter run times. However, the
first method may still be more feasible in some cases due to its greater simplicity and
less need for amendment for implementation in existing codes.

Test case GTS LTS1 LTS2 % gain % gain

time time time for LTS1 for LTS2
Steady state 7.534 6.807 6.708 9.65 10.96
Uniform dambreak 0.0559 0.05487 0.05169 1.84 7.53
Non-uniform dambreak 0.2127 0.1812 0.168 14.81 21.02

Table 1: comparison of run times for global timestepping and the two versions of local
timestepping.

CONCLUSIONS
It has been shown that locally adapted time steps can be implemented for open
channel flows including those where transition occurs. This gives the following
benefits:

• Reduced run times

• An approximately equally distributed error throughout the domain
• More accurate solutions

Of the two methods used the IVM is preferable where feasible. However the FCE
approach is more easily implemented.

Further work is in progress on:

• Incorporating spatial adaptivity with temporal adaptivity.
• Implementing the strategies with other solution algorithms such as Preissmann.
• Implementing the methods for 2D solvers.
• Using the methods with time integrators that establish time steps automatically
such as Runge-Kutta.

REFERENCES
1. Application of Internet Technology in a Real-Time Hydraulic Model of the Orange
River, CD Whitlow, RS McKenzie and KA Fair, HydroInformatics 98,
Copenhagen, 1998.

2. The NWS DAMBRK Model: Theoretical Background/User Documentation,

National Weather Service, USA, 1988.
3. Investigation of the Effect of Different Discretisations in River Models and a
Comparison of Non-Conservative and Conservative Formulation of the de St
Venant Equations, C D Whitlow, A J Merrick and D W Knight', in the Proceedings
of the Second International Conference on Hydraulic and Environmental
Modelling of Coastal Estuarine and River Waters, 1992

4. Time-accurate Local Time Stepping Method Based on Flux Updating, Zhang X D,

Trepanier J Y, Reggio M and Camarero R, AIAA Journal, 32, 9, 1926-1929, 1994.

5. Temporal Adaptive Euler/Navier-Stokes Algorithm Involving Unstructured

Dynamic Meshes, Kleb WL, Batina JT and Williams MH, AIAA Journal, 30, 8,
1980-1985, 1992.

6. Local Temporal Adaptivity for the Numerical Solution of Unsteady Open Channel
Flows, AJ Crossley and NG Wright, submitted to J. of Hyd. Res., 1998.

7. Analytic Benchmark Solutions for Open-channel Flows, MacDonald I, Baines M J,

Nichols N K and Samuels P G, J of Hyd. Eng., 123, 11, 1041-1045, 1997.

8. Dambreak Flood Waves Computed by Modified Godunov Method, L J Savic and

F M Holly, J. of Hyd. Res, 31, 2, 187-204, 1993 (non-uniform dam-break)

9. Upwind Methods for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws with Source Terms, A

Bermódez and M E V«zquez, Computers and Fluids, 23, 8, 1049-1071, 1994.