2014
DOI: 10.1080/00221686.2013.857365
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On dam-break wave propagation and its implication to sediment erosion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
4
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Twelve different scenarios of simulations were tested by combining different upstream water levels (M) of the reservoir (0.10, 0.20 and 0.40 m), and downstream water levels (J) in the flume (0, 0.02, 0.04 and 0.08 m). As mentioned, the ratio (r) of downstream (J) and upstream (M) water depths was used as the scaling, non-dimensional parameter (Equation 2) (Stansby et al, 1998;Jánosi et al, 2004;Bukreev & Gusev, 2005;Hsu et al, 2014):…”
Section: Experimental Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Twelve different scenarios of simulations were tested by combining different upstream water levels (M) of the reservoir (0.10, 0.20 and 0.40 m), and downstream water levels (J) in the flume (0, 0.02, 0.04 and 0.08 m). As mentioned, the ratio (r) of downstream (J) and upstream (M) water depths was used as the scaling, non-dimensional parameter (Equation 2) (Stansby et al, 1998;Jánosi et al, 2004;Bukreev & Gusev, 2005;Hsu et al, 2014):…”
Section: Experimental Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The classification, generation and propagation of dambreak waves define the evolution of the phenomenon, principally the impacts and consequences of the flow in downstream locations. Over the years, experimental observations and measurements aided the characterization of flows in their initial stages and the temporal and spatial evolution, including jet types, wave height, water level changes (peaks), and the relevant kinematic parameters such as wave front velocity, acceleration or deceleration (Stansby et al, 1998;Jánosi et al, 2004;Bukreev & Gusev, 2005;Leal et al, 2006;Soares-Frazão & Zech, 2007, 2008Ozmen-Cagatay & Kocaman, 2010;Khankandi et al, 2012;Hsu et al, 2014;Elkholy et al, 2016;Liu & Liu, 2017;Espartel, 2015;Stolle et al, 2019;Von Häfen et al, 2019). However, experimental data are lacking in the literature combining jet flows and break shapes, including maximum values of dam-break waves with spatial and temporal evolution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial water height of the reservoir is primarily responsible for the scattering of experimental results [15]. The wave front velocity increases with decreasing water depth ratio before and after the gate [16]. With a wet-bed downstream condition, water leaps are formed downstream of the gate [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The removal time in their experiment was estimated to be between 0.06 and 0.08 s, thus confirming that their dam-break test satisfied the criteria. Hsu et al [16] used an automatic gate system with an air compressor, which enabled them to uplift the gate at a constant speed of approximately 1.5 m/s. Ritter [11] derived the theory of the dam-break problem based on simplified Saint-Venant equations, excluding the effects of frictional and turbulent resistance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was seen that the model application for the study of sediment transport processes was inadequate. Hsu et al [38] presented an experimental and numerical investigation of dam-break driven flow over a horizontal smooth bed for different downstream-to-upstream water depth ratio. The numerical model COBRAS [39,40] based on the 2D vertical RANS equations, with a ke turbulence closure was adopted to simulate the complex hydrodynamics induced by dam-breaking.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%