Đang chuẩn bị nút TẢI XUỐNG, xin hãy chờ
Tải xuống
Tham khảo tài liệu 'chl - a finite element scheme for shock capturing_5', kỹ thuật - công nghệ, cơ khí - chế tạo máy phục vụ nhu cầu học tập, nghiên cứu và làm việc hiệu quả | Simpo PDF Merge and Split Unregistered Version - http www.simpopdf.com Station 8 Flume 0.25 0.2 a 5 0.15 Q 0.1 0.05 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Time sec nnnDOũũDanooDAũooũoũaaocoaũoo _Q a 0 Inner wave Outer wave OQ Station 8 Numerical Model at 1.0 0.25 0.2 a 0.15 Q 0.1 0.05 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Time sec Station 8 Numerical Model 0.2 a OOHOOaOODOOOCOODOOOOO a 0 Inner wave Outer wave DO 1 1 I 1 I I .7-------- 0.05 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Time sec Figure 26. Flume and numerical model depth histories for station 8 39 Chapter 3 Testing Simpo PDF Merge and Split Unregistered Version - http www.simpopdf.com With this in mind stations 4 and 8 match fairly closely between flume and numerical model. Station 4 in the flume would still have a greater difference between outer and inner wave than that predicted by the model. The difference might be a manifestation of a three-dimensional effect that the model cannot mimic. The overall timing and height comparisons are good. Figure 27 shows the spatial profile of the outer wall water surface elevation of the numerical model versus distance downstream from the dam. These distance measurements are in terms of the center-line distance. The two conditions are for ttj of 1.0 and 1.5 i.e. first- and second-order temporal derivative. Outer Wall Water Surface Elevations Channel Center Line Distance m Figure 27. Dam break case water surface elevations comparison of temporal representation for time of 3.5 sec The nodes are delineated by the symbols along the lines. The overshoot of the second-order scheme and the damping of the first-order is obvious. Again it is probable that the overshoot is a numerical artifact even though this is much like what the flume would show. Case 3 2-D Lateral Transition This is the most geometrically general case that we test. The numerical model is compared to flume results. The flume data was reported in Ippen and Dawson 1951 . The tests were conducted for an approach Froude number of 4 upstream depth of 0.1 .
