Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering Vol.7 No.

4: 323—332

DOI: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2019.04.003

Numerical investigation of hydraulic characteristics and

prediction of cavitation number in Shahid Madani Dam's
Spillway
Babak Ghazi1, Rasoul Daneshfaraz2*, Esmaeil Jeihouni3
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Sofian Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sofian, Iran.
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Maragheh, Maragheh, Iran.
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Sofian Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sofian, Iran.

Abstract: The prediction of the probability of cavitation occurrence to prevent serious

damages in the spillways is the major concern for hydraulic engineers. In this research,
the three-dimensional model of Shahid Madani Dam's spillway was simulated with the
Flow 3D software and by the comparison of numerical model results with the experi-
mental data, the probability of occurrence of the cavitation phenomenon has been
investigated. The flow parameters including pressure, velocity, and water depth were
calculated for three different flow rates of 495 m3/s, 705 m3/s and 2 205 m3/s respectively.
The Renormalization Group (RNG) turbulence model was used to simulate current turbu-
lence. Comparison of simulation results for pressure, velocity and water depth with the
results of the experimental model with two statistical indices Root Mean Square Error
(RMSE) and Coefficient of Determination (R2) showed that the numerical simulation
results are in good consistency with experimental model. However, simulation results indi-
cated that at any flow rates with a return period of 1 000 years, probable maximum flood
and designed flow rates, the cavitation number is not lower than the critical cavitation
number. Therefore, it is predicted that the cavitation phenomenon in Shahid Madani
Dam's spillway will not happen.

Keywords: Spillway; Cavitation index; Velocity; Water depth; Pressure distribution

Received: 28 Jun 2019/ Accepted: 19 Aug 2019

Introduction red to spillways of Glen Canyon, Blue Mesa,

Cavitation is one of the most complicated and
destructive phenomena that occur in the spillways.
Increasing velocity due to flow passage through
the spillway could lead to low pressure and it may
cause cavitation, leading damage of surface con-
crete in the spillway (Falvey Henry T, 1990).
It is well documented that there are examples
of cavitation damage in dam spillways in the
world. For instance, cavitation damage that occur-
*
Corresponding author: daneshfaraz@yahoo.com
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
Yellowtail and Hoover dams in the United States
as well as the concrete surface of the Shahid
Abbaspour Dam's spillway in Iran has worn out
due to cavitation. Since the cavitation phenomena
may heavily damage the spillway, it can be a
major threat to dam safety. Therefore, it is very
important to prevent the occurrence of hydraulic
cavitation in the spillways.
The prediction and simulation of the cavitation
phenomenon in the spillways have a significant
impact on the optimal designing and protecting in
the spillway. Nevertheless, the prediction of cavita-
323
Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
tion in spillways is difficult due to uncertain condi-
tions on the structure, complexity of this pheno-
menon and its various flow conditions combining
with the reaction of the surface material (Dular
Matevž et al. 2006).
Generally, engineers use prototype and experi-
mental models to forecast cavitation. Since experi-
mental and prototype models are an expensive and
time-consuming process, with the development of
various Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD)
models, using numerical models to predict and
investigate hydraulic characteristics and cavitation
phenomenon is a reasonable method (Johnson
Michael C and Bruce M Savage, 2006).
Over the past years, numerous experimental
and numerical studies were conducted on spill-
ways, among which the most important researches
are as follows. Olsen et al. (1998) used 2D and 3D
numerical models to predict water flow and spill-
way capacity over ogee spillway. Reynolds Ave-
raged Navier Stokes (RANS) Equations were
solved with the K-epsilon (k-ε) Turbulence Model
in Flow 3D software. Results of numerical models
compared with the experimental study showed that
there was a good agreement on discharge coe-
fficient and the pressure distribution on the spill-
way and numerical models results were close to
the physical model results. Savage et al. (2001)
investigated flow parameters over a standard ogee-
crested spillway by applying once, the experimen-
tal model and then with the numerical simulation.
In the experimental model, they recorded the flow
and pressure for different flow conditions. Then,
simulation of flow over ogee spillway in the Flow
3D software with the volume of fluid (VOF) and
fractional area-volume obstacle representation
(Favor) models were examined in the pressure.
The study shows that numerical tools were suffi-
ciently advanced to calculate discharge and pre-
ssure on the spillway. Chatila et al. (2004) mo-
deled the water flow over ogee spillway with k- ε
model in ADINA software which is a Finite Ele-
ment Fluid Mechanics simulation. The results indi-
cate that the ADINA software has an acceptable
performance on simulation of hydraulic characte-
ristics, and the compared numerical model has a
good agreement with experimental results. Aydin
et al. (2009) used k-ε and RNG models in Fluent
software and empirical Equations and previous
studies to investigate the effect of aeration on the
324
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
spillway. The result of simulation for aeration in
spillway shows that there is a suitable agreement
between Fluent software and experimental data
which proves the aeration simulation results in the
numerical models by comparing with experimen-
tal models are acceptable. Vosoughifar et al.
(2013), by using a CFD code-named V-Flow in
MATLAB software, investigatied unstable flow
over spillway. The simulation results of MATLAB
V-flow code for velocity, static pressure, and total
pressure were validated by Fluent software results,
then by comparing results of two numerical mo-
dels with the experimental model, indicating that
there is reasonable agreement between V-flow,
fluent and experimental model. Daneshfaraz R et
al. (2014) studied two numerical models of flow
over ogee and stepped spillways in Fluent soft-
ware with Finite Volume method and ADINA
software with the Finite Element method. The con-
ducted simulation results for ADINA and Fluent
software show that there are good agreements
between two numerical models and experimental
model. However, in some stations of the spillway,
the accuracy of Finite Volume method of Fluent
software results is more acceptable than the Finite
Element of ADINA software results. Parsaie et al.
(2016) conducted flow parameters and cavitation
phenomenon along with the spillway's flip bucket
of the Balaroud Dam by simulation Flow 3D nu-
merical model and experimental model. Flow 3D
model results shows that the RNG model has been
a suitable performance for hydraulic parameters
and cavitation index. Bayon et al. (2018) studied
with numerical modeling of water flow in stepped
spillway without aeration by Flow 3D and Open-
Foam models. They used RNG and k-ε methods to
simulation turbulent flow. It was found that the
result of the k-ε method was very similar to experi-
mental model results and there was only a 3%
difference between RNG method and experimental
model. WAN Wu-yi et al. (2018) studied a nu-
merical simulation over ogee spillway in Fluent
software. The comparison of Fluent model results
with experimental model results stated that Fluent
software is able to predict cavitation number in
spillways and it has an economical approach and it
is also a cost-effective option. Furthermore, Fluent
could give complete information about the prob-
ability of cavitation phenomenon in different sec-
tions of the spillway.
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
 Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
According to literatures, results from studies
which employed Flow 3D for modeling of various
spillways indicate good agreement with data
obtained from experimental model studies. Simul-
taneously, Flow 3D can successfully model water
surface profile, flow velocity and pressure distri-
bution for a variety of headwater levels and diffe-
rent gate openings as compared to physical model
testing in spillways (Chanel Paul Guy, 2009). The
advantage of the Flow 3D model in comparison
with other models in computational fluid dyna-
mics is that it has a user-friendly and powerful
graphical interface (Taghavi Mehdi and Hesam
Ghodousi, 2015). Therefore, in present research,
the hydraulic parameters and cavitation number in
the Shahid Madani Dam's spillway were simulated
Table 1 Features of Shahid Madani Dam
Dam type Height (m)
Earth-fill dam with silt-clay core 44
Fig. 1 Geographical position of Shahid Madani Dam
The experimental model of Shahid Madani
Dam's spillway was designed and constructed in
Water Resources Research Institute of the Mini-
stry of Energy on the scale of 1:40. Fig. 2 illustra-
tes the scaled experimental models. In the experi-
mental model, the values of pressure, velocity, and
water depth were measured in numerous sections.
The velocity of the spillway was measured using a
pitot tube and measurement accuracy was ± 0.14
m/s. A precise limn meter was used to measure the
water depth with an accuracy of ± 0.1 mm and
values of pressure measurement were performed
by a piezometer with the accuracy of ± 0.1 mm
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
by utilizing Flow 3D software.
1 Material and methods
The Shahid Madani Dam is an earth-fill dam
with clay core located at Vaniyar city, 8 km far
from Tabriz (East-Azerbaijan Province) in Iran.
The Shahid Madani Dam has an ogee spillway
which 1 000 years, designed and the probable
maximum flood flow rates are 495 m3/s, 705 m3/s
and 2 205 m3/s respectively. The general features
and geographical position of Shahid Madani Dam
are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1 (Iranian Water
Research Institute, 2009).
Length (m) Crest width (m) Reservoir capacity (m3)
257 10 363
(Iranian Water Research Institute, 2009).
In this research, Flow 3D software was used to
investigate the hydraulic characteristics and cavita-
tion number in Shahid Madani Dam's spillway.
First, the hydraulic parameters of flow over the
spillway were calculated by numerical simulation.
The numerical simulation results were compared
and validated by experimental model results. Then
the cavitation number will be predicted on the
spillway.
After numerical simulation of flow over the
spillway, the measurements of water depth, velo-
city, and pressure were calculated at eight sections
325
Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering Vol.7 No.4: 323—332

Fig. 2 Experimental models of Shahid Madani Dam's spillway (Iranian Water Research Institute, 2009)

over the spillway. The locations of the selected sections are presented in Fig. 3 and Table 2.

Fig. 3 Locations of the selected sections

Table 2 Features of selected sections

Section name A B C D E F G H
Distance from spillway crest (m) 147.0 157.1 169.7 182.8 195.6 211.6 218.0 224.4

2 Numerical model ∂w
∂t
+
1
VF ( uA x
∂w
∂x
+ vA y
∂w
∂y
+ wA z
∂w
∂z
= )
The Flow 3D is one of the most complete, 1 ∂k
- + Gz + fz (4)
powerful and practical CFD softwares for simula- ρ ∂z
tion various flows. The software for solving three- The Equations are written for the fluid velocity
dimensional Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes in three Cartesian coordinate systems, where
Equations utilizes the finite volume method (Flow- A: The fractional areas associated with the
Science, 2014). In the three Cartesian coordinate flow. G: Local accelerations of the fluid. f: Fric-
systems, these Equations can be written as follows: tional forces in the respective directions. ρ: Signi-
∂ρ ∂ (ρuA x ) ∂ (ρvA y ) ∂ (ρwA z ) fies the fluid density. k: Local pressure.
VF + + + = R SOR
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z The Flow 3D software uses Volume of Fluid
(1) for the free surface flow models and Favor techni-
∂u
∂t
+
1
VF( uA x
∂u
∂x
+ vA y
∂u
∂y
+ wA z
∂u
∂z
= ) que utilizes for models with complex geometry
(Flow-Science, 2014). This method is showed as
1 ∂k follows:

(
- + Gx + fx (2)
ρ ∂x ∂F 1 ∂ ∂
+ ( FuA x ) + (FvA y ) +
∂v
∂t
+
1
VF (
uA x
∂v
∂x
+ vA y
∂v
∂y
+ wA z
∂v
∂z
= ) ∂t V f ∂x
∂
(FwA z ) = 0)
∂y

(5)
1 ∂k ∂z
- + Gy + fy (3)
ρ ∂y where F is the fraction function, F=0 when no
326 http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
 Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
water inside and F=1 when the cell is full of water.
There are various well-known models in Flow
3D software for simulation turbulence flows such
as k- ε, RNG and large eddy simulation model
(Daneshfaraz Rasoul et al. 2019). In this research,
the RNG model was used to simulate the Shahid
Madani Dam's spillway. The base of this model is
k-ε which was developed by Jones W P and Brian
Edward Launder (1972), and Launder Brian Ed-
ward and Dudley Brian Spalding (1972). The final
adjustment was presented by Yakhot VSASTBCG
et al. (1992). The geometry of spillway was
created in AutoCAD 3D 2013 software then STL
file format was imported to Flow 3D.
Fig. 4 Applied boundary condition in the Flow 3D
Table 3 Detail of boundary condition in Flow 3D
Software Upstream boundary Downstream boundary
FLOW 3D Volume flow rate Out flow
The determination of suitable type and size of
the grid has a significant impact on simulation
results. The grid with large sizes gives an inappro-
priate result. By increasing the number of meshes,
the time of simulation will be increased but the
simulation results will be close to experimental
results. However, after a certain amount of mesh
number, the result will not be changed by mesh
size. In this research, four different mesh models
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
3 Boundary conditions
In order to define the boundary conditions, in
the inflow point (Ymin) volume flow rate, in the
sides of the spillway (Xmin, Xmax) and bed wall con-
dition, on the upper border (Zmax) symmetry condi-
tion and in the outflow section of the spillway,
outflow condition was used. The boundary condi-
tions of Shahid Madani Dam's spillway in the
Flow 3D software were shown in Fig. 4 and Table
3 respectively.
Free surface Lateral
Floor boundary
boundary boundary
Symmetry Wall Wall
were analyzed at pressure in the 2 205 m3/s flow
rates to determine appropriate mesh models. Fig. 5
shows different mesh models for Shahid Madani
Dam's spillway in Flow 3D software.
According to the compared different mesh
models in Fig. 5. The results of mesh Types 3 and
4 are close to experimental model results. Never-
theless, the time of simulation in Type 3 is more
appropriate than that of Type 4, so Type 3 has
327
Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
Fig. 5 Different mesh models based on pressure
been chosen for simulation and all numerical re-
sults were presented by this mesh type. The num-
ber of cells for different mesh types is shown in
Table 4.
Table 4 Mesh type and the number of cells
Mesh model namel Number of cell
Type 1 442 000
Type 2 584 000
Type 3 830 000
Type 4 1 096 000
4 Results and discussion
By numerical simulation in Flow 3D, hydrau-
lic characteristics, including flow depth, velocity,
and pressure for three flow rates 495 m3/s, 705
m3/s and 2 205 m3/s were calculated and compared
with experimental models results respectively. The
results of computed numerical models were com-
pared with the experimental model results for flow
depth, the pressure, and velocity of Shahid Madani
Dam's spillway and shown in Fig. 6-Fig. 8.
Given that the spillway has the longitudinal
slope, as shown in Fig. 6, the velocity increases
along the path and it reaches to the highest amount
328
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
at G and H points. The highest velocity at Shahid
Madani Dam's spillway is 25.3 m/s, 28.4 m/s and
28.8 m/s for the three flow rates of 495 m3/s, 705
m3/s and 2 205 m3/s respectively. It can be seen
that, with an increases in flow rate, the amount of
velocity increase over the spillway. The simulation
results for the pressure indicate that the pressure
values reduce over the spillway and the lowest
amount of pressure over the spillway occurs at 495
m3/s flow rates, which is 0.4 m. However, the
numerical values for the water depth also indicate
that the water depth in 2 205 m3/s flow rates peaks
at 8.4 m, which is the maximum water depth in all
three flow rates. Finally, the minimum water depth
appears in 495 m3/s flow rates at 0.7 m.
To determine the difference between the expe-
rimental model and numerical model, Root Mean
Square Error (RMSE) and the Coefficient of Deter-
mination (R2) were used. For a reasonable fit
between numerical models and experimental ones,
the amount of R2 should be close to 1, and the
values of RMSE close to zero. The amount of
RMSE and R2 for different hydraulic parameters in
Shahid Madani Dam's spillway shows that there is
acceptable precision for the numerical and experi-
mental model results. The values of RMSE and R2
are shown in Table 5.
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
 Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering Vol.7 No.4: 323—332

Fig. 6 Numerical and experimental model results for velocity

Fig. 7 Numerical and experimental model results for water depth

Table 5 Result of RMSE and R2 5 Cavitation number

Statistical indices Flow depth Velocity Pressure
RMSE 0.0564 0.0342 0.0769 The occurrence of cavitation on the spillway
can be obtained by using a unit which is called
R2 0.891 0.976 0.981
cavitation number (Equation 6). To prevent spill-
way from cavitation damage, it is necessary to the
keep cavitation number more than the critical

http://gwse.iheg.org.cn 329
Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering Vol.7 No.4: 323—332

Fig. 8 Numerical and experimental model results for pressure

cavitation number. However, it is predicted that cavitation damage in

P - Pv
σ=
V2 (6)
ρ
2 Fig. 9 presents the cavitation number for 495 m3/s,
where: P is a reference for pressure; Pv is water
vapor pressure and ρ is water density.
To predict cavitation damage in spillways,
there are four different levels which considered the
risk of cavitation on a spillway (Falvey Henry T,
1990), as shown in Table 6.
Table 6 Level of cavitation damage
Cavitation
Level Damage risk
number
1 σ>0.2 No cavitation damage
2 σ˂0.2 Possible cavitation damage
3 0.1˂σ˂0.2 The aeration system is necessary
Spillway should be designed
4 σ˂0.1
again
According to the result for cavitation number
for three flow rates of 495 m3/s, 705 m3/s and
2 205 m3/s, the lowest amounts for cavitation num-
ber are 0.31, 0.29 and 0.326 respectively. With
regards to Table 6 the result of cavitation number
for Shahid Madani Dam's spillway indicates that,
in non-sections of spillway, cavitation numbers are
not lower than the critical cavitation number (0.1).
Shahid Madani Dam's spillway will not occur and
the spillway is not required to the aeration system.
705 m3/s and 2 205 m3/s flow rates. The results of
the experimental model and numerical model of
Shahid Madani Dam's spillway are investigated
and compared. As regards the several years of
exploitation of the Dam and the spillway of the
Shahid Madani, so far the cavitation phenomenon
has not occurred in the spillway of the Shahid
Madani Dam. Therefore, the investigation of nu-
merical and experimental models confirms what
had happened in the real Shahid Madani Dam's
spillway. Unfortunately, the results of real Shahid
Madani Dam's project are not available for more
investigation.
6 Conclusions
In this research, the flow over the Shahid
Madani Dam's spillway was simulated by using
Flow 3D software. The flow depth, velocity, and
pressure for three different flow rates were calcu-
lated. Computing results of RMSE and R2 indicate
that the numerical model is consistent with the ex-
perimental model, so the Flow 3D software can

330 http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
 Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
Fig. 9 Cavitation number for Shahid Madani Dam's spillway
accurately simulate the hydraulic characteristics
and cavitation number.
The obtained cavitation numbers for the 495
m /s, 705 m3/s and 2 205 m3/s flow rates by velo-
3 volume and finite element methods. Journal
city and pressure distribution show that the cavita-
tion numbers are higher than the critical cavitation
number in the specified sections, so it is estimated
that cavitation phenomenon in Shahid Madani
Dam's spillway will not occur for the three men-
tioned flow rates.
References
Aydin M Cihan, Mualla Ozturk. 2009. Verification
and validation of a computational fluid dy‐
namics (CFD) model for air entrainment at
spillway aerators. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 36(5): 826-836.
Bayon Arnau, Juan Pablo Toro, Fabián A Bom‐
bardelli, et al. 2018. Influence of VOF tech‐
nique, turbulence model and discretization
scheme on the numerical simulation of the
non-aerated, skimming flow in stepped spill‐
ways. Journal of Hydroenvironment Re‐
search, 19:137-149.
Chanel Paul Guy. 2009. An evaluation of computa‐
tional fluid dynamics for spillway modeling.
Chatila Jean, Mazen Tabbara. 2004. Computation‐
al modeling of flow over an ogee spillway.
Computers & Structures, 82(22): 1805-1812.
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
Daneshfaraz R, B Kaya, S Sadeghfam, et al. 2014.
Simulation of flow over ogee and stepped
spillways and comparison of finite element
of Water Resource and Hydraulic Engineer‐
ing, 3(2): 37-47.
Daneshfaraz Rasoul, Omar Minaei, John Abra‐
ham, et al. 2019. 3-D numerical simulation of
water flow over a broad-crested weir with
openings. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineer‐
ing: 1-9.
Dular Matevž, Bernd Stoffel, Brane Širok. 2006.
Development of a cavitation erosion model.
Wear, 261(5-6): 642-655.
Falvey Henry T. 1990. Cavitation in chutes and
spillways. Engineering Monograph 42. Water
Resources Technical Publication. US Printing
Office. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver.
Flow-Science. 2014. FLOW-3D user manual, ver‐
sion 11. In: Flow Science Santa Fe, NM.
Iranian Water Research Institute. 2009. Shahid
Madani Dam's spillway final report. Ministry
of Energy (Tehran Iran): C8202-PR.
Johnson Michael C, Bruce M Savage. 2006. Physi‐
cal and numerical comparison of flow over
ogee spillway in the presence of tailwater.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 132(12):
1353-1357.
331
Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering
Jones W P, Brian Edward Launder. 1972. The pre‐
diction of laminarization with a two-equation
model of turbulence. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, 15(2): 301-314.
Launder Brian Edward, Dudley Brian Spalding.
1972. Mathematical models of turbulence
(Academic Press).
Olsen Nils R B, Hilde M Kjellesvig. 1998. Three-
dimensional numerical flow modelling for es‐
timation of spillway capacity. Journal of Hy‐
draulic Research, 36(5): 775-784.
Parsaie Abbas, Sadegh Dehdar-Behbahani, Amir
Hamzeh Haghiabi. 2016. Numerical model‐
ing of cavitation on spillway's flip bucket.
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering,
10(4): 438-444.
Savage Bruce M, Michael C Johnson. 2001. Flow
over ogee spillway: Physical and numerical
model case study. Journal of Hydraulic Engi‐
neering, 127(8): 640-649.
332
Vol.7 No.4: 323—332
Taghavi Mehdi, Hesam Ghodousi. 2015. Simula‐
tion of flow suspended load in weirs by using
flow 3D model. Civil Engineering Journal, 1
(1): 37-49.
Vosoughifar Hamid Reza, Azarri Dolatshah, Seyed
Kazem Sadat Shokouhi, et al. 2013. Evalua‐
tion of fluid flow over stepped spillways us‐
ing the finite volume method as a novel ap‐
proach. Strojniski Vestnik/ Journal of Me‐
chanical Engineering, 59(5): 301-310.
WAN Wu-yi, LIU Bin, Awais Raza. 2018. Numeri‐
cal prediction and risk analysis of hydraulic
cavitation damage in a High-Speed-Flow
spillway. Shock and Vibration.
Yakhot VSASTBCG, SA Orszag, S Thangam, et
al. 1992. Development of turbulence models
for shear flows by a double expansion tech‐
nique. Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, 4
(7): 1510-1520.
http://gwse.iheg.org.cn