Water Resources Management

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-020-02558-9

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over

Ogee Spillway

Öznur Kocaer 1 & Alpaslan Yarar 2

Received: 23 December 2019 / Accepted: 8 May 2020/

# Springer Nature B.V. 2020

Abstract
Ogee type spillway is one of the most preferred sluice types due to its functional
suitability and high safety factor. It is used for controlling the flow rates and water levels
in reservoirs, such as lowering the water level in emergency situations, maintaining
normal river functions and discharging excess water. The main aim of this study is to
investigate the flow over ogee type spillway by performing experiments in an open
channel flume in the laboratory and simulating with numerical model. The numerical
model having the same dimensions with the physical model is modeled with two different
programs of ANSYS-Fluent and OpenFOAM. The flow depths of the models were
measured at four points, H1, H2, H3, H4. In the numerical analysis, two different
turbulence models, K-ε and K-ω SST turbulence model were used in order to investigate
the accuracy of the turbulence models in the open channel. According to the results, R2
values, obtained from ANSYS- Fluent for the each measurement points where H1, H2, H3,
H4, are 0.9776, 0.9859, 0.9701, 0.9916 and obtained from OpenFOAM for the each
measurement points 0.9920, 0.9687, 0.9855, 0.9926 respectively. The findings show that
the numerical tools have been sufficiently developed to simulate flow depths and water
surface profiles.

Keywords Ogee spillway . Open channel . Numerical modeling . Ansys-Fluent . OpenFoam

1 Introduction

Spillways are defined as structures that pass the excess water coming to the reservoir from
upstream to downstream. In the design process of spillways, in order to obtain hydraulically

* Alpaslan Yarar
ayarar@ktun.edu.tr

1
Bartın University, Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Design, Civil Engineering Department,
Bartın, Turkey
2
Konya Technical University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Civil Engineering
Department, Konya, Turkey
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

and statically stability many different variations should be taken into consideration, such as the
location of the water structure on the river and the location of the spillway in the water
structure. In addition, because the spillways are structures that are used to discharge excess
water from the dam, it must be strong enough as it endangers the dam safety if the water cannot
be controlled. Experimental studies and supporting numerical studies are carried out on
spillways as mistakes that may occur in spillways in any wrong design can cause large and
irreversible results. Experimental studies and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) studies
have recently been seen as two supporting parts. In order to increase the reliability of the
results, numerical modeling is also used besides experimental design. In order to provide the
most accurate results of the numerical models, appropriate optimizations should be made and
the appropriate turbulence model should be determined. Savage and Johnson (2001) compared
the flow parameters over a standard ogee-crested spillway using a physical model, numerical
model, and existing literature. It was shown that there is reasonably good agreement between
the physical and numerical models for both pressures and discharges. Song and Zhou (1999)
developed a numerical model that may be applied to analyze the 3D flow pattern of the tunnel
or chute spillways, particularly the inlet geometry effect on flow condition. Zhenghua et. al.
(2016) numerically investigated the appropriate CFD models for simulating flow around spur
dike group, the flow fields around non-submerged and submerged spur dike groups with
selected CFD models and validated based on corresponding flume test. Attari and Sarfaraz
(2012) set a stepped spillway model and emphasized that there should be a transition zone
between the ogee crest and the steps in the model. They simulated both cases with and without
transition regions and showed that numerical modeling in spillway design gives quick and easy
results. Han et al. (2014) determined the effectiveness of a Surface Flow Constructed Wetlands
(SFCWs) in removing suspended solids based on the predicted flow characteristics and
distribution of suspended solids in the wetland. This study indicates that the 3D model is an
effective tool to support the management and operation of field SFCWs. Andersson et al.
(2013) modeled the flow of water from the reservoir of complex geometry in three dimensions
and used two different turbulence models, standard k-ε and SSG. The results were compared
with laboratory experiments. As a result of the comparisons, numerical consistency was
observed. Fadaei-Kermani and Barani (2014) simulated the flow through the spillway with a
numerical model and obtained velocity and pressure measurements for four different points.
The maximum difference for the velocity values between experimental and numerical results
was measured as 5.47%, while the difference between the pressure values was measured as
7.97%. Kumcu (2017) studied on 1/50 scaled physical model of Kavsak Dam and
Hydroelectric Power Plant. They recorded flow depth, discharge and pressure data for
different flow conditions. They made a comparative study using CFD and physical
modeling to evaluate the capability of the computational fluid dynamics on modeling
spillway flow. It was shown that there is reasonably good agreement between the physical
and numerical models in flow characteristics. Usta (2014) investigated the hydraulic charac-
teristics of the Laleli dam spillway numerically and compared the results with experimental
data. In the modeling of the spillway, the pressure distribution, the effect of air intake to the
flow and the cavitations were investigated. They stated that numerical modeling by CFD is
beneficial in terms of speed and design safety and the results of the model are very similar with
the data of the pressure distribution recorded on the spillway. Kanyanujınja (2015) included an
ogee profile spillway in his study and mentioned the purposes of its use. They investigated the
effect of different turbulence models on ANSYS-Fluent flow parameters and recorded water
levels for nine different discharges from the experimental setup. As a result of the study, it is
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

stated that 3D model gives better results than 2D model, but close values cannot be obtained in
pressure graphs. Date et al. (2017) modeled the ogee profiled spillway using the CFD methods
with the MMF model and compared the obtained data with the experimental data. As a result
of the study, it is stated that using RNG turbulence model with VOF model gives better results
than MMF model to simulate flow in ogee type spillway. Rad (2016) conducted numerical
modeling on 3 different spillway types. They stated that hydraulic structures can be designed
the most efficiently by examining the parameters such as pressure and energy loss and flow
area predicted by numerical modeling. They stated that VOF method and Realizable k – ε
combination is the most suitable model in the physical model. Kalita et al. (2019) studied to
simulate the flow behavior over crump and ogee type of weirs by experimental and numerical
models. It is stated that the numerical results obtained are found to be almost exactly matching
with the experimental results. Hu et al. (2018) used a numerical model to analyze performance
of piano key weirs. According to results of numerical model, some new formulas are driven by
him to improve accuracy of the design and structural optimization of piano key weirs. Fathi-
moghaddam et al. (2018) conducted some studies on gabion weirs which attracted the attention
of many researchers in recent years. Hydraulic parameters of flow on gabion weirs are
investigated by using a numerical model. Also they validate results of numerical model by
using data get from laboratory experiments.
When the literature researches are examined, spillway modeling is not common by using
open source programs such as OpenFoam program. Kızılaslan and Demirel (2015) modeled
round nose shapes as 2D for different R/P ratios on broad crested weir and evaluated the effect
to the length of the recirculation zone under the different discharge values. Jiang et al. (2018)
created the broad crest weir at different angles on the upstream with two different turbulence
models using the interFoam solver in OpenFoam. In order to measure the accuracy of the
results, they made evaluations using RMSE and MAPE methods. Imanian and Mohammadian
(2019) investigated the discharges on ogee spillways for heads significantly greater than the
design head. Their studies were made using OpenFoam with 5 different turbulence models. It
was concluded that increasing the head ratio up to 5 leads to an increase in the discharge
coefficient due to the decrease of the pressure immediately after the separation zone and flow
suction.
The main purpose of this study is to compare the hydraulic behaviors of numerical and
experimental models. The water depths, measured at certain points in the experimental setup,
were compared with 3D numerical models and the consistency of the results was investigated.
In addition, it is aimed to draw attention to the superior aspects of the programs by giving
comparative information about two different programs used in numerical modeling.

2 Physical Modeling

Designing Ogee spillways depends on the shape of water flow over a sharp crested weir. Ogee
type spillways have almost maximum efficiency with compared to the other kind of spillway
shapes by having high safety factor, functional suitability and flood control capacity. Ogee
type spillway body consists of two profiles, downstream and upstream of the crest. Standard
profile of the Ogee profile suggested by United States Bureau of Reclamination (USBR) is
given in Fig. 1.
Spillway design is of great importance in order to pass flow from upstream to downstream
efficiently. If the water level over the Ogee spillway is increased, for example over the design
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

Fig. 1 Standard crest profile of an overflow spillway (USBR 1987)

head, the pressure on the crest decreases below the air pressure to form a negative pressure.
This leads to cavitations. Therefore, today, the design is done by experimental and numerical
methods. In the Ogee spillway, the discharge formula has a similar use as the sharp crested
weir formula shown in Eq. 1.
pffiffiffiffiffi
Q ¼ C 2gLH3=2 ð1Þ

Where Q is the discharge (m3.s− 1), C is the discharge coefficient, g is the gravity, L is the
effective crest length and H is the head on the spillway.
In this study, an Ogee spillway having the height of P = 0.28 m, placed in an open channel
having 0.3 m wide, 6.5 m long and 0.5 m high, was used. Ogee profile was made using
plexiglass material considering USBR standards. For the design, H0 value 14.4 cm, K value
0.5, n value 1.85, C0 value 2.17 was selected. In addition, a bend, having 0.1 m high and 0.6 m
wide was placed in the open channel for the formation of submerged hydraulic jump. The
experimental set up including a large and a small tank connected with the pumps is shown in
Fig. 2.
Water depths were measured at four different points as shown in Fig. 3 for 71 different
discharges.
Flow measurements were taken from the flowmeter added to the system by obtaining
different flow rates by means of frequency changer control panel and the water depths
corresponding to the flow value were measured using a limnimeter.

3 Numerical Modeling

Fluid structure interactions and fluid movements have been widely studied with numerical
modeling. In this study, numerical modeling was carried out by 2 two different programs
which are Ansys-Fluent and Open Foam.
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

Fig. 2 Experimental setup, plan view (a) and experimental study (b)

3.1 Modeling with Ansys Fluent

Modeling with Ansys-Fluent was carried out in the following order.

& Determination of the purpose of simulation.
& Creating the flow area for simulation.
& Transferring the created area for solution.
& Creating the mesh network of the physical model.
& Introduction of boundary and initial conditions.
& Performing the solution process.
& Evaluation of the results.

Fig. 3 Measurement points in the channel

 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

In the preliminary stage, the solution area, mesh grid area, appropriate mesh type and
appropriate methods to determine the free surface are determined, respectively. Later on, mesh
independence analysis was performed in order to determine the most accurate grid area after
modeling in 3D. Trials were conducted on a model made up of tetrahedral mesh and
hexahedral to determine the mesh type when creating the mesh geometry. Since flow geometry
has a simple geometry, hexahedral mesh was preferred because the results made with
hexahedral mesh gave positive results (Fig. 4).
In the model, mesh dimensions in x, y and z directions are all selected as 0.008 m. There are
a total of 1770000 mesh cells in the simulation for 3D analysis.

Fig. 4 Model setup (a) Mesh Geometry (b) Created by Ansys Fluent
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

3.1.1 Turbulence model

Turbulence models are used to solve turbulent flow in open channel flow. While setting up the
model the k-ε turbulence model, which is widely used and generally gives positive results in
open channel flows, is used. Classical turbulence models make solutions based on Reynolds
Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations. The K-ε turbulence model is a preferred model
because it is very simple to implement, easily stabilizes the flows and gives reasonable results,
especially in open channel flows. The K-ε model focuses on the K-value that affects turbulent
kinetic energy. In the K-ε model, turbulence kinetic energy and kinetic energy dissipation rate
are shown in Eq. 2 and Eq. 3.
  
d d d μ dk
ðρkÞ þ ðρkvx Þ ¼ μþ t þ Gk þ Gb−ρε−Ym þ Sk ð2Þ
dt dtxx dxy σk dxy

  
d d d μ dk ϵ2 ϵ
ðρϵ Þ þ ðρkυx Þ ¼ μþ t þ ρC 1ϵ −ρC 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ C 1ϵ þ C 3ϵ ð3Þ
dt dxx dxy σx dxy k þ υγϵ k

Where, k turbulence kinetic energy (m.s-2), ε kinetic energy dissipation rate (m.s-3), ρ density
(kg.m-3), t time (s), µ kinetic viscosity (m2.s-1), Gk represents the generation of turbulence
kinetic energy caused by the mean velocity gradients, Gb generation of turbulence kinetic
energy due to buoyancy, Ym dissipation rate and Sk and Sε kinetic energy and dissipation
source terms respectively.
The default values for the constants, determined from experiments for fundamental turbulent
flows, given by Launder and Spalding (1972) are used as C1ε = 1.44, C2ε = 1.92, k = 1 and σε = 1.3.

3.1.2 Volume of Fluid (VOF) Method

The VOF model is a method proposed by Hirt and Nichols (1981) which can be used to
determine the interface between liquid and gas or two different liquids. This model can model
the behavior of two or more immiscible fluids. VOF method has become the preferred method
in modeling due to its superior interface capture ability compared to other methods. The
number of variables used for the volume fraction can be defined as n. ∝ is defined as the
fullness of the cell. ∝ = 0 represents the cell is empty, ∝ = 1 represents the cell is full, 0 <∝ <1
represents the interface between water and air. The composition of the fluid is dependent on (F
(x, y, z, t)) for VOF function (Hirt and Nichols 1981). Each function given in Eqs. 4, 5 and 6
represents the liquid per unit volume. Where ρ is fluid density, VF is fractional volume of flow,
RSOR is mass source, RDIF is a turbulent diffusion term. (u, v, w) refers to the velocity
components in the coordinate direction (x, y, z) or (r, RSOR, z).
 
dF 1 d d   d FAxu
þ ð FAxu Þ þ R FAyv þ ð FAzw Þ þ ξ ¼ F DI F þ F SOR ð4Þ
dt V F dx dY dz x

     
1 d dF d dF d dF FAX F
F DI F ¼ V F Ax þR V F Ay R þ V F Az þξ ð5Þ
VF dx dx dy dy dz dz x
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

dp d d  d ρ
VF þ ðρuAx Þ þ R ρv Ay þ ðρw Az Þ þ ξ uAx ¼ RDI F þ RSOR ð6Þ
dt dx dy dz x

Figure 5 shows the separation of air and water phases in 3D. The region indicated by blue
represents 0, as the air, while the region indicated by red represents 1, as the water.

3.2 Modeling with OpenFoam

Open Field Operation And Manipulation (OpenFOAM) is an open source CFD program that
solves various problems using the finite volume method. Thanks to its open source, in addition
to the pre-built software, users can write new solvents and additional utilities to the program.
Being a free program is one of the biggest advantages of OpenFOAM. The program works
with C + + programming language and the architecture and the source of the program are
available to all users at no cost for development. OpenFOAM is a solver that can solve two-
phase water-air interactions using Navier-Stokes equations for non-compressible flows using
the InterFoam VOF method in its library. The solver uses the volumetric separation method in
common grids for the solution of these two-phase and incompressible currents. RANS or
Large Eddy Simulation (LES) libraries are used in InterFoam to model turbulent flow. In this
study, two-phase water-air interaction on open channel was investigated and flow modeling
was performed using InterFoam library. There are three main stages in modeling.

1 Pre-Processing.
2 Solving.
3 Post-Processing.

Three-dimensional simulations created with the help of OpenFoam were performed assuming
an unstable, turbulent, incompressible flow. In the preparation stage for simulation, determi-
nation of solution area, dimensioning of mesh grid area and deciding the appropriate mesh type
follow each other. In order to find the free surface, VOF method, which is a method designed

Fig. 5 Water-air phases

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

for two immiscible liquids, was modeled using InterFoam solver. The InterFoam solver is a
solver capable of accurately analyzing air entrainment and various fluid phenomena. When
analyzing within the InterFoam folder, fluid motion is defined with RANS equations. This
study is the first application of the solver to investigate flow characteristics using the ogee type
spillway. The geometry created in the simulation is 4 m long, 0.5 m high and 0.3 cm wide.
Model geometry was created by specifying the boundary conditions of the flow. The calcu-
lation area includes 6 different boundary conditions: inlet, outlet, right, left and bottom wall
and air for the top of the channel. In this study, two different methods were used to create
model geometry. The first is BlockMeshDict and the other is SnappyHexMesh, which is used
to transfer the model to the system in complex geometries. Only hexahedral mesh layout was
used in this modeling and the model geometry has 1775000 mesh (Fig. 6.).

Fig. 6 Model set up (a) Mesh geometry (b) Created by OpenFoam

 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

The VOF model for the two-phase incompressible fluid and the k-ω SST turbulence model
for turbulent flow were used in the simulation.

3.2.1 Turbulence model

There are many different turbulence models that predict flow using the RANS method. In this
study, the average volume k-ω SST turbulence model is used for the analysis of turbulent flow.

3.2.2 k-ω SST turbulence model

While the K-ε turbulence model is seen as the superior model for modeling boundary layer flow,
the k-ω model is seen as a model that excels in the modeling of free flow. The K-ω SST model is
a turbulence model developed for combining both turbulence models to achieve optimal results.
The turbulence distribution ratio is shown in Eq. 7 and the turbulence kinetic energy in Eq. 8.
 
d d d dk
ðρkÞþ ðρkui Þ¼ Γk þGk −Y k þ S k ð7Þ
dt dxi dxj dxj

 
d d d dω
ðρωui Þþ ðρωui Þ¼ Γω þ Gω −Y ω þ S ω þ Dω ð8Þ
dt dxi dxj dxj

Where, Gk is the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to mean velocity gradients, Gω
is the generation of ω, Γk and Γω are the effective diffusivity of k and ω respectively, Yk and
Yω are the dissipation of k and ω due to turbulence, Dω is the cross diffusion term, Sk and
Sω are user defined source terms in Eq. 9.
The effective diffusivities for SST k-ω are given below.
μt μ
Γk ¼ μ þ Γω ¼ μ þ t ð9Þ
σt σω
Where, µt is turbulent viscosity and σ k and σ ω are the turbulent Prandtl numbers.

3.2.3 OpenFoam VOF method

Similar to the Ansys Fluent program, the VOF approach in OpenFoam provides solutions as a single
momentum equation and a continuum field. For the volume of fluids found, the volume of the cell of
each fluid is calculated based on the volume fractions. For the VOF model, the momentum equation
between liquid and gas is shown in Eq. 10, and the continuity equation in Eq. 11.
∂ρu
þ ∇  ðρuuÞ ¼ −∇p þ ∇  τ þ ρg F s ð10Þ
∂t

∇:U ¼ 0 ð11Þ

Where ρ is the density, µ is the dynamic viscosity, p is the static pressure, and finally g and F
are the gravitational forces and the external forces, respectively.
Since the surface tension force only affects the interface between the two phases, the
surface tension is calculated in Ansys Fluent to obtain the interface. The surface tension is
calculated using the formula shown in Eq. 12.
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

Fs ¼ σKðxÞn ð12Þ

In the equation, K (x) represents the curvature of the interface and n represents the surface unit
vector. When determining the interface in a cell, ∝ = 1 if the cell is full, and ∝ = 0 if the cell is
empty and 0 <∝ <1 represents the interface between water and air. OpenFoam is very similar to
the Ansys Fluent package program by the interface detection method in cells. Equation 13 is
used to determine the amount of liquid in the cell.
Fvoln ¼ αn Vcell ð13Þ

In this equation Vcell represents the volume of cells. The OpenFoam program uses a separate
equation in Eq. 14, in addition to the equations used in the VOF method. This equation relates
only to the interface.
∂γ
þ ∇ðγ:uÞ þ ðuc γð1−γÞÞ ¼ 0 ð14Þ
∂t
In this equation, u represents the velocity vector γ represents the ratio of the volume of liquid
in the cell. uc is the coefficient representing the compression ratio at the interface. In the VOF
method, there is no analysis between liquid and gas for each cell.

4 Results

4.1 Experimental Results

Flow parameters were investigated in where the points H1, H2, H3 and H4 along the channel.
Hydraulic jump occurs in H2, which is one of the measurement points. Therefore, the
reliability of the results obtained is considered to be lower than the measurements at the other
point. The surface profile results according to the measured discharges are shown in Fig. 7. In
50 35
Flow Rate (l/sn)
45 H1
30
40 H2
H3
35 25
H4
Water depth(mm)
Flow Rate (L/sn)

30
20
25
15
20

15 10

10
5
5

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Number of measurements
Fig. 7 Experimental results of Discharge-Water Depth
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

1.2

0.8
H/Hmax

0.6

0.4
Qexperimental

0.2 Qfluent3d
Qopenfoam3d
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Q/Qmax
Fig. 8 Comparison of Ansys Fluent 3D-OpenFoam 3D numerical model results for H1 point

Fig. 7 it is shown that the discharges at H1, H2, H3 and H4 can be interpreted according to the
discharge obtained in each measurement.

4.2 Comparison of Experimental and Numerical Model Results

The comparison of the experimental results with the numerical results is shown in Figs. 8, 9,
10 and 11.

1.2

0.8
H/Hmax

0.6

0.4
Qexperimental

0.2 Qfluent3d
Qopenfoam3d
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Q/Qmax
Fig. 9 Comparison of Ansys Fluent 3D-OpenFoam 3D numerical model results for H2 point
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

1.2

0.8
H/Hmax

0.6

0.4
Qexperimental

0.2 Qfluent3d
Qopenfoam3d
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Q/Qmax
Fig. 10 Comparison of Ansys Fluent 3D-OpenFoam 3D numerical model results for H3 point

According to the results obtained at the points H1 and H3, it can be concluded that
experimental and numerical solutions are in reasonable agreement. Since there is no turbulent
flow at H1 and H3 points, very close results have been obtained from numerical models and
experimental results. However, the results at H2 and H4 were not very close in certain regions,
the high probability of errors in measuring the experimental results at turbulent points can be a
strong reason for the results not to be close. Turbulent flow is observed at H2. Results obtained
from experiments and numerical model show good consistency with each other when dis-
charge is high. However consistency is reduced between physical and numerical model at
lower discharges due to continuity is provided at higher discharge values. Another reason for

1.2

0.8
H/Hmax

0.6

0.4

Qexperimental
0.2 Qfluent3d
Qopenfoam3d
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Q/Qmax
Fig. 11 Comparison of Ansys Fluent 3D-OpenFoam 3D numerical model results for H4 point
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

30
Qexperimental-Qansys3d
Qexperimental-Qopenfoam3d
25
R² = 0.9776
Simulation Result

20

15

10 R² = 0.992

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Test Results
Fig. 12 R2 results for H1 point

this is considered to be the use of different turbulence models in the 3D models. According to
the comparative results obtained, the consistency of the results is quite high for the high
discharges values. The increase in water depth decreases as the discharge increases in the Ogee
type spillway profile. This is considered to be the proof of the similarity of the results as the
discharges change from small to large. It is observed that measurement of the head by 3D
numerical models give similar results in many discharges. In the turbulent zone, the k-ε
turbulence model and the 3D model created in Ansys Fluent gave closer values to the

30
Qexperimental-Qansys3d
Qexperimental-Qopenfoam3d
25 R² = 0.9859
Simulation Result

20
R² = 0.9687
15

10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Test Result
Fig. 13 R2 results for H2 point
 Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

35
Qexperimental-Qansys3d
Qexperimental-Qopenfoam3d
30 R² = 0.9701

25
Simulation Result

R² = 0.9855

20

15

10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Test Results
Fig. 14 R2 results for H3 point

experimental results. Despite the use of different turbulence models as the discharge increases
in H2 region, there is a great deal of siiarities in between the experimental results and the results
obtained from the two numerical models. On the other hand, the k-ω SST turbulence model
created in OpenFoam showed quite different results, especially at low discharges in the
turbulent zone. Therefore, in the open channel study, it can be said that the k-ε turbulence
model obtained more successful results between the two models. In the measurements taken at
H3 point, which has no turbulent, it was observed that all models gave results close to the

16
Qexperimental-Qansys3d
R² = 0.9916
14 Qexperimental-Qopenfoam3d

12
Simulation Result

R² = 0.9929
10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Test Results
Fig. 15 R2 results for H3 point
 Kocaer Ö., Yarar A.

experimental model. This can be considered as proof that numerical models are constructed
close to the experimental model and have high reliability. For the H4 point, Ansys fluent
yielded very close results with the experimental model, while the results obtained with the
openfoam program yielded higher results than the experimental model The critical depth at
point H4 is thought to have changed position. According to the data obtained, the difference in
the results measured at H4 point can be explained accordingly.

5 Conclusions

In this study, verified comparative results proved that CFD techniques can be used for design
and control tool for hydraulic structures with experimental studies., Flow parameters such as
pressure, flows velocity, surface profile can be easily obtained by numerical simulations by
CFD tools Thus, the numerical model has the advantage of validating the authenticity of
experimental studies. In addition, in this study, the reliability of the study was increased by
using the experimental methods used for the test before CFD techniques were used. R2 results
of numerical models and experimental model are shown graphically in Figs. 12, 13, 14 and 15.
According to the results of R2, the model which was created with OpenFoam program was
the numerical model which gave the closest results to the experimental model except the H2
point which is turbulent zone. On the other hand Ansys Fluent model is the numerical model
which gives the closest result to the experimental model at H2 point. The results showed that
the k-ω SST turbulence model used in the OpenFoam program was an unsuccessful turbu-
lence model for the open channel turbulent flow, while the k-ε turbulence model used in Ansys
Fluent was a suitable model for the open channel turbulent flow. In addition, the high rate of
similarity between the OpenFoam program and the experimental model at non-turbulent H1,
H2 and H3 points proves that a successful model is obtained by correctly calibrating.

Acknowledgements This study is based on Öznur Kocaer’s Master Thesis (2019).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

Andersson A, Andreasson P, Lundström T (2013) CFD modelling and validation of free surface flow during
spilling of reservoir in down-scale model. Eng Appl Comp Fluid 7(1):159–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19942060.2013.11015461
Attari J, Sarfaraz M (2012) Transitional Steps Zone in Steeply Sloping Stepped Spillways, International Congress
on Civil Engineering, May 8–10, 2012, Isfahan, Iran
Date V, Dey T, Joshi S (2017) Numerical modeling of flow over an ogee crested spillway under radial gate, VOF
and MMF model. J Appl Mech Eng 6(5):287. https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9873.1000287
Fadaei-Kermani E, Barani GA (2014) Numerical simulation of flow over spillway based on the CFD method. Sci
Iran A 21(1):91–97
Fathi-moghaddam M, Tavakol MT, Rahmanshahi M (2018) Numerical simulation of the hydraulic performance
of triangular and trapezoidal gabion weirs in free flow condition. Flow Meas Instrum 62:93–104. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2018.05.005
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Flow Over Ogee Spillway

Han SS, Chen Z, Zhou FY, Lu XQ (2014) Assessment of suspended solid removal in a surface flow constructed
wetland using a three-dimensional numerical model. Water Resour Manag 28:3111–3125. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11269-014-0658-3
Hirt CW, Nichols BD (1981) Volume of fluid (VOF) method for dynamics of free boundaries. J Comput Phys
39(1):201–225
Hu H, Qian Z, Yang W, Hou D, Du L (2018) Numerical study of characteristic and discharge capacity of piano
key weirs. Flow Meas Instrum 62:27–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2018.05.004
Imanian H, Mohammadian A (2019) Numerical simulation of flow over ogee crested spillways under high
hydraulic head ratio. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 13(1):983–1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.
2019.1661014
Jiang L, Diao M, Sun H, Ren Y (2018) Numerical modeling of flow over a rectangular broad-crested weir with a
sloped upstream face. Water 10(11):1663. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111663
Kalita HM, Das R, Hajong A, Kumar N, Kharnaior D, Dkhar HC (2019) Experimental and numerical flow
simulation over weirs. Water Resour 46(6):934–943. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807819060083
Kanyanujınja NP (2015) CFD Modeling of Ogee Spillway Hydraulics and Comparasion with Physcal Model
Tests, Dissertation, MS Graduate of Civil Engineering, Stellenboch University
Kızılaslan MA, Demirel E (2015) Numerical Investigation of the Recirculation Zone Length Upstream of the
Round-Nosed Broad Crested Weir. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Urban Design,
Transportation, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey, 8–10 September 2017
Kocaer O (2019) Experımental And Numerıcal Modelıng Of Flow On Ogee Spıllway, Master Dissertation,
Institute of Graduate Studies, Konya Technical University
Kumcu Y (2017) Investigation of flow over spillway modeling and comparasion between experimental data and
CFD analysis. KSCE J Civ Eng 21(3):994–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-1257-z
Launder B, Spalding DB (1972) Lectures in mathematical models of turbulence. Academic Press Inc
Rad IN (2016) Application of numerical methods in design of hydraulic structures. Commun Adv Comput Sci
Appl 2016(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.5899/2016/cacsa-00050
Savage BM, Johnson MC (2001) Flow over ogee spillway: physical and numerical model case study. J Hydraul
Eng ASCE 127(8):640–649. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2001)127:8(640)
Song C, Zhou F (1999) Simulation of free surface flow over spillway. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 125(9):959–967.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1999)125:9(959)
USBR (1987) Design of small dams, third edition. Water Resources Technical Publication, Washington
Usta E (2014) Numerical Investigation of hydraulic charactetistics of Laleli Dam Spillway and Comparasion
With Physical Model Study, Dissertation, MS Graduate of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical
Universty, Ankara
Zhenghua G, Xiaomeng C, Yueteng J, Wei-Zhen L (2016) Appropriate CFD Models for Simulating Flow around
Spur Dike Group along Urban Riverways. Water Resour Manag 30:4559–4570. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11269-016-1436-1

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.