Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-018-1100-1 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)

TECHNICAL PAPER

Numerical simulation of 3D unsteady turbulent free surface flows

using j -- e model and ADBQUICKEST scheme
F. A. Kurokawa1 • L. Corrêa2 • R. A. B. de Queiroz3

Received: 19 July 2017 / Accepted: 22 February 2018 / Published online: 22 March 2018
 The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Abstract
This work deals with the development of a numerical technique to simulate 3D complex turbulent free surface flows. This
technique is based on the finite-difference GENSMAC methodology coupled with high Reynolds j  e turbulence model
and the ADBQUICKEST upwind scheme to deal with the advective terms. The computations are performed using the 3D
version of the Freeflow simulation system, in which the effectiveness of the numerical technique is analyzed for the dam-
break flow and a turbulent jet impinging orthogonally onto a flat surface. The numerical results are compared with existing
analytical and experimental data. To demonstrate applicability of the Freeflow-3D simulation system for solving complex
free surface flows at high Reynolds numbers, a case of the fluid–structure interaction was simulated.

Keywords Finite-difference method  Reynolds average Navier–Stokes equations  High-order upwind scheme 
Turbulent free surface flow  Numerical simulation

1 Introduction computational technology, numerical techniques for mod-

Most of the fluid dynamic problems, mainly these of
interest in engineering, are characterized by possessing
strong convection phenomena, especially those in turbulent
regime. Hence, for industrial and technological applica-
tions, such as liquid jets [45, 50], spillways [5], dam-break
flood [9, 53, 54], wind–structure interaction [6] among
others, it is instrumental to achieve an accurate modeling of
turbulent flows. Nowadays, with the advent of
Technical Editor: Jader Barbosa Jr.
& F. A. Kurokawa
fernando.kurokawa@usp.br
L. Corrêa
laiscorrea@ufgd.edu.br
R. A. B. de Queiroz
rafael.bonfim@ice.ufjf.br
1
Departamento de Engenharia de Construção Civil, Escola
Politécnica, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Faculdade de Ciências Exatas e Tecnologias, Universidade
Federal da Grande Dourados, Dourados, Brazil
3
Departamento de Ciência da Computação, Instituto de
Ciências Exatas, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora,
Juiz de Fora, Brazil
eling and simulation have become an essential tool for
problems connected to turbulent flows. For these types of
problems, in principle, the calculation of incompressible
turbulent flows can be solved by the direct numerical
integration of Navier–Stokes equations. Nevertheless, this
technique is limited to flows at low and moderate Reynolds
number, because it requires a large computational effort. In
computations of real-world applications the Unsteady
Reynolds average Navier–Stokes (URANS) equations
using high Reynolds j  e turbulence model represents a
good alternative to Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS)
[8, 38, 41]. However, the performance of this modeling
requires an efficient, robust, and accurate numerical
method to approximate the non-linear advective terms to
guarantee an oscillation-free solution without introducing
excessive artificial dissipation.
Over the last years, a large variety of schemes have been
proposed to approximate the non-linear advective terms.
The class of high-order upwind schemes is the most pop-
ular in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for the treat-
ment of advection. Among these, the technique based on
the combination of Normalized Variables Diagram (NVD)
restriction [31], the Total Variation Diminishing (TVD)
restriction [23], and Convection Boundedness Criterion
(CBC) condition [20] has been the most widely used. The

123
202 Page 2 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

basic idea behind these schemes is to maintain stability of Sect. 6. The application related to fluid–structure interac-
the numerical solution, to resolve discontinuities or shocks, tion is depicted in Sect. 7. Finally, some concluding
and to be computationally simple, economical, and con- remarks and brief discussion on future directions for
vergent. In particular, the schemes WACEB [43], research are outlined in Sect. 8.
CUBISTA [1], ADBQUICKEST [25], and TOPUS [39]
have been applied in a wide range of problems. Among
them, the ADBQUICKEST scheme is the most flexible, 2 Mathematical description
since it takes into consideration the local Courant number
in its formulation. Furthermore, the previous works Let us consider Newtonian incompressible turbulent flows
[14–16, 29] have shown that this scheme is successful at that, in this paper, are modeled by mass conservation
solving a variety of complex problems, such as: (a) 1D equation, 3D unsteady Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes
advection of scalars and 1D Euler equation; (b) 2D/3D equations, and two transport equations of the standard j 
incompressible free surface flows; and (c) 2D incom- e model. In non-dimensional forms and Einstein’s notation,
pressible turbulent free surface flows. these equations, omitting averaging symbols, can be writ-
In this context, our motivation in the present work is to ten as
investigate the combination of the ADBQUICKEST oui
upwind scheme with j  e turbulence model to simulate ¼ 0; ð1Þ
oxi
3D incompressible turbulent free surface flows at high  
Reynolds numbers. This paper presents an extension of the oui oðui uj Þ ope 1 o oui 1 1 oðmt Sij Þ
þ ¼ þ þ 2 gi þ ;
previous work of Ferreira et al. [14] for 3D case. The ot oxj oxi Re oxj oxj Fr Re oxj
computations are performed by the 3D code of Castelo ð2Þ
 
et al. [7], known as Freeflow, which solves the URANS oj oðuj jÞ 1 o mt  oj
equations using the finite-difference GENSMAC-3D þ ¼ 1þ þ P  e; ð3Þ
ot oxj Re oxj rj oxj
methodology on a staggered grid arrangement [47]. The  
application of this methodology coupled with high Rey- oe oðuj eÞ 1 o  mt  oe e e2
þ ¼ 1þ þ C1 P  C2e ;
nolds j  e turbulence model and the ADBQUICKEST ot oxj Re oxj re oxj j j
upwind scheme has been little investigated in the literature ð4Þ
for turbulent free surface flows. The numerical technique is
an adaptation of the finite-difference GENSMAC-3D where t is the time, ui are the mean velocity components in
methodology for calculating free surface fluid flows at high the xi directions ði ¼ 1; 2; 3), j is the turbulent kinetic
Reynolds number. To the best of our knowledge, no results energy, e is the turbulence dissipation rate of j, pe ¼
using this methodology coupled with j  e turbulence p þ 23 Re
1
j is the effective pressure, gi are the gravitational
model and ADBQUICKEST for 3D turbulent free surface acceleration components, and Sij is the rate of deformation
flows is found in the literature. tensor given by
The effectiveness of the numerical method for turbulent  
oui ouj
flows was analyzed in two problems, such as the dam-break Sij ¼ þ :
problem and jet impinging orthogonally onto a flat surface. oxj oxi
These problems were selected, because there are analytical Furthermore, the eddy viscosity mt and turbulent shear
and experimental data available in the literature. As stress production P are, respectively, given by
example of application, it is performed the numerical
simulation of a case of the fluid–structure interaction. The j2
mt ¼ Cl ; ð5Þ
simulation results confirm the ability of the Freeflow-3D e
simulation system, coupled with high Reynolds j  e oui
P ¼ mt Sij : ð6Þ
model and the ADBQUICKEST scheme, for solving oxj
complex free surface flow problems.
The organization of this work is as follows. In Sect. 2, The non-dimensional parameters Re ¼ ðLUÞ=m and Fr ¼
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the mathematical setting for incompressible turbulent flows U=ð LjgjÞ denote, respectively, the Reynolds and Froude
and the initial and boundary conditions adopted for solving numbers of the flow, in which, L is length scale of the flow,
these equations are described. The computational method U is characteristic velocity scale, and m is the kinematic
for solving URANS equations is summarized in Sect. 3. viscosity of the fluid.
The ADBQUICKEST scheme and finite-difference method The model constants are considered as Cl ¼ 0:09,
are described, respectively, in Sects. 4 and 5. Numerical C1e ¼ 1:44, C2e ¼ 1:92, rj ¼ 1:0 and re ¼ 1:3 (see Ref.
results for 3D test cases are presented and discussed in

123
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202 Page 3 of 16 202

[24]), in which they were obtained from experimental t1i  ðrij  nj Þ ¼ 0; ð9Þ
results.
Equations (1–6) were non-dimensionalized according to t2i  ðrij  nj Þ ¼ 0; ð10Þ
L where ni ¼ ðnx ; ny ; nz Þ is unit normal vector to the free
ui ¼ ui U; xi ¼ xi L; t ¼ t ; pe ¼ pe U 2 ;
U surface and t1i ¼ ðt1x ; t1y ; t1z Þ and t2i ¼ ðt2x ; t2y ; t2z Þ are unit
mjU meU2 tangential vectors and rij is the well-known Cauchy stress
gi ¼ gi jgj; j ¼ ; e ¼ 2 ; mt ¼ mt m;
L L tensor given by
 
where variables with a bar indicate their corresponding ð1 þ mt Þ oui ouj
dimensional variables. rij ¼ pe dij þ þ ; ð11Þ
Re oxj oxi

2.1 Initial and boundary conditions where dij denotes the Kronecker delta. By substituting the
Cauchy stress tensor rij given by Eq. (11) into Eqs. (8–10),
To simulate the turbulent flow using j  e model, it is we obtain for the three-dimensional case the following
necessary to solve the system of equations represented by equations:
(1–5), subject to appropriate initial and boundary condi-   
2 ou 2 ov 2 ow 2 ou ov
tions. This system of partial differential equations is solved pe  ð1 þ mt Þ n þ n þ n þ þ n x ny
Re ox x oy y oz z oy ox
using the finite-difference scheme implemented in the 3D     
ou ow ov ow
version of the Freeflow system [7]. A usual strategy in this þ þ nx nz þ þ ny nz ¼ 0;
method is to employ a staggered grid arrangement of the oz ox oz oy
unknowns [22]. Thus, j, e and pe are stored at cell center, ð12Þ
while the velocity components u, v, and w are placed at the 
ð1 þ mt Þ ou ov ow
center of cell faces. Moreover, effective pressure boundary 2 t1x nx þ 2 t1y ny þ 2 t1z nz
Re ox oy oz
conditions are not needed using this grid system. In this  
ou ov
work, the initial and boundary conditions are specified in a þ þ ðt1x ny þ t1y nx Þ:
oy ox
similar way as in the turbulent 2D case (see Ferreira et al.     
ou ow ov ow
[14]). þ þ ðt1x nz þ t1z nx Þ þ ðt1y nz þ t1z ny Þ ¼ 0
oz ox oz oy
The initial conditions for pe , u, v, and w are prescribed.
In the case of the j  e model, it is also necessary to ð13Þ
specify values for the turbulent variables. The initial con- and
ditions for j and e are estimated in the same way as it is 
done in several works in the literature [34, 40, 52]. In ð1 þ mt Þ ou ov ow
2 t2x nx þ 2 t2y ny þ 2 t2z nz
summary, the values of j and e, in non-dimensional form, Re ox oy oz
 
can be given as ou ov
þ þ ðt2x ny þ t2y nx Þ:
 3 1=2 oy ox
j     
j ¼ IRe and e ¼ 0:33  102 ; ð7Þ ou ow ov ow
Re þ þ ðt2x nz þ t2z nx Þ þ þ ðt2y nz þ t2z ny Þ ¼ 0:
oz ox oz oy
where I ¼ 8:0  102 was employed. ð14Þ
In this work, we considered four types of boundary
The conditions (12–14) plus the mass conservation equa-
conditions, namely: inlet, outlet, solid walls, and free sur-
tion (1) are approximated by accurate local finite-differ-
faces. At the inlet section (fluid entrance), the normal
ence method on the free surface. Thus, the effective
velocity is prescribed, while the two tangential velocities
pressure is determined from Eq. (12) and the velocities at
are set to zero. Furthermore, the values of the turbulent
the free surface are obtained from Eqs. (13) and (14). The
variables are adopted in such a way that they are consistent
boundary conditions for j and e in free surface of the fluid
with the initial conditions (7). At outlet section (fluid exit),
are specified in the same way as in the turbulent 2D case,
we imposed homogeneous Neumann (fully developed
that is, the conditions
flow) conditions for all variables.
At a free surface, if we neglect surface tension forces, oj oe
¼0 and ¼0 ð15Þ
then the appropriate boundary conditions are given by (see, on on
for example, Batchelor [4]): are imposed for the turbulent variables. The derivatives in
ni  ðrij  nj Þ ¼ 0; ð8Þ Eq. (15) are discretized by first-order finite-difference
schemes.

123
202 Page 4 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

Due to a singularity in the near-wall region when tur- 3 Computational approach for Reynolds
bulent kinetic energy j tends to zero, Eqs. (3–4) cannot be average Navier–Stokes equations
imposed as the calculation approaches a rigid wall. Thus,
the boundary conditions in this region are based on the wall The system of partial differential equations (1–4) is solved in a
function. In this case, the turbulent variables in the near- partly segregated manner using an extension of the finite-
wall region are determined in two ways. In the inertial difference GENSMAC-3D method of Tomé et al. [47] for
sublayer, the values of j and e are, respectively, specified turbulent flow fields. This methodology is based on the pro-
by the well-known relations (see details in Anderson et al. jection method proposed by Chorin [11]. We solve Eqs. (1–4)
[2] and Ferziger and Perić [17]): uncoupling them by the Helmholtz–Hodge decomposition
u2s us 3 [13]. This theorem, which is also known as Ladyzhenskaja
j ¼ Re pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi and e ¼ Re ; ð16Þ Theorem [30], plays a fundamental role in projection methods
Cl Ky
that are used in the computational solution of the Navier–
where K = 0.41 is the von Kármán constant [37] and us is Stokes equations for incompressible flows.
the friction velocity. In the viscous sublayer, the turbulent Suppose that the velocity field ui ðxk ; tn Þ is known and
variables are based on the strategy of Sondak and Pletcher boundary conditions for the effective pressure, velocities,
[42] given by and turbulent variables are specified. The new velocity
 2 rffiffiffiffiffiffi field, the effective pressure and the turbulent variables, at
us 2 y þ 1 j3=2 the new time level tnþ1 ¼ tn þ dt, are obtained by the fol-
j ¼ Re pffiffiffiffiffiffi þ and e ¼ ; ð17Þ
C l yc Re l lowing sequence steps:
Step 1: Consider pe ðxk ; tn Þ ¼ p~e ðxk ; tn Þ be an arbitrary
where l denotes the length scale introduced by Norris and
pressure field that satisfies the correct pressure condition on
Reynolds [36], yþ is defined by yþ ¼ us y=m and yþ c repre-
the free surface. This pressure field is calculated from
sents the critical value of yþ which separates the viscous
Eq. (12) and velocity fields at the free surface are explicitly
sublayer from the inertial sublayer. The friction velocity is
computed using Eqs. (13–14).
defined by [51]
Step 2: With the viscosity mt obtained from Eq. (5),
u2s ¼ sx ; ð18Þ calculate the auxiliary velocity field u~i ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ from the
discretization in time using the explicit Euler method:
where sx is the wall friction obtained solving the  
o~
ui pe oðui uj Þ 1 o oui
o~ 1 1 oðmt Sij Þ
expression: ¼   þ þ 2 gi þ ;
ot oxi oxj Re oxj oxj Fr Re oxj
u
 yþ ¼ 0 ð19Þ ð22Þ
us
where u~i ðxk ; tn Þ ¼ ui ðxk ; tn Þ.
or
Step 3: Solve the Poisson equation for the potential
u 1 function Uðxk ; tnþ1 Þ:
Fðus Þ ¼  ln ðyþ Þ  B ¼ 0; ð20Þ
us K
o2 Uðxk ; tnþ1 Þ u~j ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ
¼ ; ð23Þ
depending on the local Reynolds number yþ . When yþ is oxj oxj oxj
less than yþc , we employ (19); otherwise, we solve (20).
Thus, with us calculated from expression (19) or (20), yþ subject to homogeneous Neumann condition on rigid
can be obtained and it is used to determine in which of boundaries and inlets (oU
on ¼ 0), and homogeneous Dirichlet
the viscous or inertial sublayer region the point lays. To condition on free surfaces and outlets (U ¼ 0).
obtain us from (20), it was used the Newton–Raphson Step 4: Calculate the final velocity field:
method: oUðxk ; tnþ1 Þ
2 3 ui ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ ¼ u~i ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ  : ð24Þ
ðsÞ oxi
4Fðu s Þ 5; s ¼ 0; 1; 2; . . .
uðsþ1Þ
s ¼ uðsÞ
s þ ðsÞ ð21Þ Step 5: Calculate the effective pressure field from (see
dFðus Þ
dus Tomé and McKee [46]):
ð0Þ
with us ¼ 11:60 as initial condition and B ¼ 5:0 (empir- Uðxk ; tnþ1 Þ
ical constant) was adopted in this work. pe ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ ¼ p~e ðxk ; tn Þ þ :
dt
Step 6: Calculate the kinetic energy j from an explicit
finite-difference approximation of Eq. (3).
Step 7: Calculate the dissipation rate e from an explicit
finite-difference approximation of Eq. (4).

123
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202 Page 5 of 16 202

Step 8: Update the turbulent viscosity, mt , from Eq. (5).
Step 9: Update the positions of the marker particles. The
last step in the calculation is to move the markers to their
new positions by solving the differential equations:
dxi
¼ ui ðxk ; tnþ1 Þ
dt
for each particle using Euler’s method. This provides a
discrete particle, convected in a Lagrangian manner, with
its new coordinates, allowing us to determine whether or
not it has moved into a new computational cell, or if it has
left the containment region through an outlet boundary.
Details of particle movement are given in Castelo et al. [7]
and Tomé et al. [47].
Kaibara et al. [25]. This scheme was proposed for solving
transient convection–diffusion problems. It is a bounded
high-order upwind scheme based on unsteady analysis of
the 1D advection equation which retains the local Courant
number as a free parameter h in its formulation. Fur-
thermore, the ADBQUICKEST scheme is derived in the
context of the NVD that satisfy TVD restriction and CBC
condition. This derivation was adopted to combine accu-
racy and monotonicity while ensuring flexibility, i.e., it
depends on a free parameter h (for details, see Ferreira
et al. [16]). In summary, the ADBQUICKEST scheme is
given by

8 ^ ^ 62 ½0; 1;
>
> w U if w U
>
>
>
< ^
ð2  hÞw if 0\w ^ \a;
U U
^ ¼
w 1 ð27Þ
f
>
> ^ þ ð1  jhjÞð1  w
w ^ Þ  1 ð1  h2 Þð1  2w
^ Þ if ^  b;
aw
>
> U
2 U
6 U U
>
:
^
1  h þ hw if ^ \1;
b\w
U U

3.1 Time-step procedure ^ ¼ wf wR and w

where w ^ ¼ wU wR are the Leonard’s
f w w D R
U w w D R

normalized variables [32], in which D (downstream),

A time-stepping procedure for determining the appropriate
U (upstream), and R (Remote-upstream) represent the
time-step size for every cycle is employed. The explicit
neighboring points of the variable w referring at f face.
solution of the momentum equation leads to the following
The position of these points is defined according to a
conditions on the time step dt:
convective velocity, Vf , on the f face, where the variable
 
Re 1 1 1 1 w is being approximated. If Vf [ 0, then the neighboring
dtvisc \ þ þ ð25Þ
2 dx2 dy2 dz2 points D, U, and R are defined, as shown in Fig. 1a.
Otherwise, these points are shown in Fig. 1b. The
and advantage of using the Leonard’s normalized variable is
dx dy dz ^ depends on w
that the value w ^ only, since w ^ ¼ 1 and
dtcfl \ min ; ; : ð26Þ f U D
j~
uj j~
vj jwj
~ ^
w ¼ 0.
R
The time-step size selected is given by A free parameter h is the local Courant number (or CFL)
dt ¼ smin s1 dtvisc ; s2 dtcfl , where 0\s; s1 ; s2 \1. given by h ¼ Vf  dt=dx, where dt and dx are, respectively,
Inequality (25) is the usual viscous restriction, while the time step and the cell size. The constants a and b in
inequality (26) represents the Courant–Fredrich–Lewy Eq. (27) are given by
(CFL) condition. Details of the implementation of these 2  3jhj þ h2 4 þ 6h  3jhj þ h2
a¼ and b¼ :
inequalities can be found in Tomé et al. [47]. 7  6h  3jhj þ 2h2 5 þ 6h  3jhj þ 2h2

The generic variable w can represent one of the variables u,

4 The ADBQUICKEST scheme
As in the turbulent flow regime, momentum equation (2)
and the two transport Eqs. (3)–(4) are dominated by
convection, the treatment of the advective terms is a key
issue. In this work, the discretization of these terms in
equations is made using the ADBQUICKEST scheme of
v, w, j, or e. The philosophy of the ADBQUICKEST
scheme to approximate the non-linear advective terms is to
guarantee an oscillation-free solution in the vicinity of
discontinuities. Ferreira et al. [15] showed that this
scheme can be the second or third order accurate in the
smooth parts of the solution, but only first order near
regions with large gradients. Furthermore, it is free from

123
202 Page 6 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
Fig. 1 Neighboring points D, U,
and R of the f face used for the
ADBQUICKEST scheme
spurious oscillations around discontinuities and sharp
gradients.
5 Discretization of the equations
To carry out Steps 1–9 of the solution procedure described
in the previous section, the differential equations are dis-
cretized using a finite-difference scheme on a uniform
staggered grid arrangement. Effective pressure pe , j, e, and
mt unknowns are associated at a cell center, while the
components of the velocity field u, v, and w unknowns are
associated by a translation of dx=2, dy=2, and dz=2,
respectively. A typical cell of dimensions dx  dy  dz
showing the physical positions at which these dependent
variables are defined is illustrated in Fig. 2.
The x-, y-, and z-components of the momentum equation
 
(22) are discretized at position i þ 12 ; j; k , i; j þ 12 ; k and
 ox
i; j; k þ 12 of the 3D computational mesh, respectively.
The temporal derivatives are discretized by the explicit
Euler method (first-order forward difference), while the
spatial derivatives are discretized by standard second-order
Fig. 2 Arrangements of the dependent variables in the staggered grid
cell. The variable / can be pe , j, e or mt
123
central differences. For the kinetic energy equation (3) and
dissipation rate equation (4), the discretization is made in a
similar manner to the momentum equation, but applied
now at cell center. The production of turbulence and the
eddy viscosity are discretized on the cell center and at time
level n. The non-linear terms appearing in the momentum
and transport equations refer to the advection terms, that in
our method will be discretized using the ADBQUICKEST
scheme.
For simplicity, only the discretization of the non-linear
terms in u component of the momentum equation will be
presented. The other non-linear terms in v- and w-compo-
nents and the non-linear terms of j and e equations are

discretized in a similar way. In the face f ¼ i þ 12 ; j; k of
the control volume, the non-linear terms in u-component of
the momentum equation are approximated as follows:
 
oðuuÞ oðuvÞ oðuwÞ
þ þ
oy oz iþ1;j;k
2
uiþ1;j;k uiþ1;j;k  ui;j;k ui;j;k

dx ð28Þ
viþ12;jþ12;k uiþ12;jþ12;k  viþ12;j12;k uiþ12;j12;k
þ
dy
w iþ12;j;kþ12 uiþ12;j;kþ12  wiþ12;j;k12 uiþ12;j;k12
þ ;
dz
where the advection velocities uiþ1;j;k , ui;j;k , viþ12;jþ12;k ,
viþ12;j12;k , w
iþ12;j;kþ12 and wiþ12;j;k12 are obtained by averaging.
For instance, viþ12;j12;k is approximate by
viþ12;j12;k  0:5ðvi;j12;k þ viþ1;j12;k Þ.
Using the ADBQUICKEST scheme, the velocities ui;j;k
and uiþ1;j;k in Eq. (28) are determined by
Fig. 3 Geometrical configuration for a 3D collapse of a fluid column
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202 Page 7 of 16 202

Fig. 4 Free surface flow for the

3D broken dam problem

u u
• When uiþ1;j;k [ 0 and u^iþ12;j;k ¼ uiþð1=2Þ;j;k ið1=2Þ;j;k
iþð3=2Þ;j;k uið1=2Þ;j;k
, then
8
>
> uiþ12;j;k if u^iþ12;j;k 62 ½0; 1;
>
>
< ð2  hÞuiþ1=2;j;k  ð1  hÞui1=2;j;k if uiþ12;j;k \a;
0\^
uiþ1;j;k ¼
>
> aD uiþ3=2;j;k þ aU uiþ1=2;j;k þ aR ui1=2;j;k if a  u^iþ12;j;k  b;
>
>
: ð1  hÞu þ hu if uiþ12;j;k \1;
b\^
iþ3=2;j;k iþ1=2;j;k

uiþð3=2Þ;j;k uiþð5=2Þ;j;k;
• When uiþ1;j;k \0 and u^iþ32;j;k ¼ uiþð1=2Þ;j;k uiþð5=2Þ;j;k , then
8
>
> uiþ32;j;k if u^iþ32;j;k 62 ½0; 1;
>
>
< ð2  hÞuiþ3=2;j;k  ð1  hÞuiþ5=2;j;k if uiþ32;j;k \a;
0\^
uiþ1;j;k ¼
>
> aD uiþ1=2;j;k þ aU uiþ3=2;j;k þ aR uiþ5=2;j;k if a  u^iþ32;j;k  b;
>
>
: ð1  hÞu þ hu if uiþ32;j;k \1;
b\^
iþ1=2;j;k iþ3=2;j;k

where
Fig. 5 Comparison between the numerical solution on four meshes 1 1
and experimental data for the surge from position Xmax aD ¼ ðh2  jhj þ 2Þ; aU ¼ ð2h2 þ 3jhj þ 5Þ;
6 6
1
• When ui;j;k [ 0 and u^i12;j;k ¼ uið1=2Þ;j;k
u u
ið3=2Þ;j;k
, then aR ¼ ð1  h2 Þ:
iþð1=2Þ;j;k uið3=2Þ;j;k 6
8
>
> ui12;j;k if u^i12;j;k 62 ½0; 1;
>
>
< ð2  hÞui1=2;j;k  ð1  hÞui3=2;j;k
The other velocities, uiþ12;jþ12;k , uiþ12;j12;k , uiþ12;j;kþ12 and
if 0\^ ui12;j;k \a;
ui;j;k ¼ uiþ12;j;k12 , are calculated in a similar manner.
>
> aD uiþ1=2;j;k þ aU ui1=2;j;k þ aR ui3=2;j;k if a  u^i12;j;k  b;
>
>
: ð1  hÞu þ hu if ui12;j;k \1;
b\^
iþ1=2;j;k i1=2;j;k

6 Numerical results
uiþð1=2Þ;j;k uiþð3=2Þ;j;k
• When ui;j;k \0 and u^iþ12;j;k ¼ uið1=2Þ;j;k uiþð3=2Þ;j;k , then
8
To validate our numerical methodology coupled with high
>
> uiþ12;j;k if u^iþ12;j;k 62 ½0; 1; Reynolds j  e model and ADBQUICKEST scheme, we
>
>
< ð2  hÞuiþ1=2;j;k  ð1  hÞuiþ3=2;j;k if 0\^ uiþ12;j;k \a; simulate the dam-break problem and a jet impinging onto a
ui;j;k ¼
>
> aD ui1=2;j;k þ aU uiþ1=2;j;k þ aR uiþ3=2;j;k if a  u^iþ12;j;k  b; rigid surface. These problems were selected, because there
>
>
: ð1  hÞu þ hu if uiþ12;j;k \1;
b\^
i1=2;j;k iþ1=2;j;k are analytical and experimental data available in the
literature.

123
202 Page 8 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

Fig. 6 3D view of pressure and velocities for the dam-break flow

6.1 Dam-break flows
Dam-break (or broken dam) flow refers to the collapse of
fluid block under the effect of gravity. This collapse rep-
resents an important practical problem in civil engineering
in which can generate extensive debris or encounter float-
ing debris in the valley downstream of the dam and trigger
the formation of surges and shock waves [3, 9]. This free
surface flow problem was first investigated experimentally
by Martin and Moyce [35] to study the falling rate and the
spreading velocity of water columns. Since then, various
researchers have investigated experimentally (for example,
[19, 28, 44]) and numerically (for example,
[10, 26, 27, 39]), this problem is as a benchmark test free
surface flow numerical methods. Furthermore, Violeau and
Issa [49] used this problem to check the performance of

Fig. 7 2D Schematic
configuration and geometry of a
free jet impinging onto a rigid
surface

123
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
Fig. 8 Comparison on three meshes between analytical solution of
Watson and numerical solutions
their gridless smoothed particle hydrodynamics j  e tur-
bulence model.
Using j  e turbulence model and the ADBQUICKEST
scheme implemented into the 3D version of the Freeflow
simulation system [7], we performed numerical simulation
of this unsteady free surface flow. The geometry of this
problem is described as follows.
A tank of 0.3 m long, 0.10 m wide, and 0.16 m high
contains a fluid block of 0.05 m long by 0.10 m wide by 0.1
m high in hydrostatic equilibrium confined between four
vertical walls. At the beginning, the right wall (a dam for
instance) is instantaneously removed and the fluid is sub-
ject to vertical gravity. Figure 3 depicts this problem in the
3D case.
A free-slip boundary condition was applied to correctly
the model this flow at solid boundaries to compare with the
experimental data of Martin and Moyce [35] and Koshi-
zuka and Oka [28]. Based on the characteristic length L =
0.1 m (height of water column), the characteristic velocity
Page 9 of 16 202
Fig. 9 3D view of the numerical simulation of a jet impinging
orthogonally onto a rigid wall
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
U ¼ Ljgj ¼ 0:99045444 ms1 and kinematic viscosity
m ¼ 1:0  106 m2 s1 , the Reynolds number is
Re ¼ LU=m ¼ 99; 045:444. Gravity was considered to be
acting in the z-direction with jgj ¼ 9:81 ms2 . The result-
ing motion of the water volume, as it collapses under
gravity, is simulated. Figure 4 exhibits snapshots of this run
at selected times.
Computations on four different meshes, 60  20  32
(dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:005 m), 75  25  40 (dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼
0:004 m), 150  50  80 (dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:002 m) and
300  100  160 (dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:001 m) computational
cells, were performed to study convergence.
Figure 5 shows a comparison between the numerical
solutions (on four meshes) and experimental data for the
position of the fluid front (Xmax ) versus time. The numer-
ical solutions were obtained by a cutting plane at position
y = 0.05 m. It can be seen from this figure that our
numerical results agree fairly well with the experimental
data, specially in the comparison with the results of Martin
and Moyce. Thus, we feel confidence in the numerical
solutions obtained by our method using the ADBQUICK-
EST scheme and j  e model, to solve turbulent free sur-
face flows.
Figure 6 presents the pressure and velocities contours at,
respectively, t = 0.10 and 0.20 s.
6.2 Turbulent jet impinging orthogonally
onto a flat surface
A jet impinging orthogonally onto a flat surface is used in a
wide variety of industrial applications due to their inherent
high heat transfer rate, for example, cooling of heated
components in gas turbine engines and electronic instru-
ments. It is also employed in mass transfer applications,
such as mine ventilation, tunneling operations, paint
spraying, and cavitation drilling. This free surface flow at
high Reynolds number represents an important test case for
the development and validation of mathematical models of
turbulent flow from a turbulence modeling perspective. It
was chosen, because there is an approximated analytical
123
202 Page 10 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

Fig. 10 2D view of pressure and velocities obtained from a cutting plane at position y = 0.05 m of the 3D calculation

Fig. 11 2D view of pressure and

velocities obtained from a
cutting plane at position x =
0.05 m of the 3D calculation

solution (see Ref. [50]) for the total thickness of the fluid arbitrarily moving boundary. In summary, for turbulent
layer flowing on a flat rigid wall, h. For this problem, the regime, analytical solution is given by
free surface boundary conditions must be specified on an

123
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202 Page 11 of 16 202

Fig. 12 Dimensions and initial

configuration of dam-break
problem with a rigid structure at
the two different positions, and
with two rigid structures

8  9=4 
> 9k 1=4 x þ l9=4 numerical solutions were obtained from cutting planes xz at
>
> ð14pAÞ ; if x x0 ;
< position y = 0.05 m and yz at position x = 0.05 m of the 3D
200 x
hðxÞ ¼   calculation. We can see from this figure that the numerical
>
> 1 kA
>
: þ d; if x\x0 ; solutions obtained from the fine mesh is generally in good
2x k
agreement with the analytical solution, showing, in some
ð29Þ regions, small differences. We believe that most of this
where difference may be attributed to insufficient grid points used
   near to the rigid wall. Furthermore, from this same picture,
2 4=5 it can be seen that, as the mesh is refined, the numerical
d ¼ 80 A  kð7pÞ1=5 x4=5 ;
9 solution converges to a solution very close to the analytical
   solution.
1=9 5=9 2 4=9 The resulting numerical simulation is presented in
x0 ¼ ð7pÞ ð2AÞ 80 A  ;
9 Fig. 9. The pressure and the u- and w-velocities from a
l ¼ 20ð1  2AÞð14pÞ1=4 A5=4 : cutting plane xz and yz at the time t = 4.0 s are illustrated,
respectively, in Figs. 10 and 11.
In Eq. (29), k ¼ 0:260 and A ¼ 0:239 (see [50] for details).
Using the Freeflow-3D simulation system, coupled with
the ADBQUICKEST scheme and j  e model, we simulate 7 Application: fluid–structure interaction
this free surface flow problem at Re ¼ 5:0  104 in which,
Re ¼ pUD2m , by setting U = 2.0 m/s as the maximum velocity
In this section, as an example of application, we present the
and D = 0.01 m as diameter of the inlet, in domain of size numerical simulation of a case of fluid–structure interac-
0:1 m  0:1 m  0:02 m. The schematic configuration of tion. The aim here is to show that the Freeflow-3D code
this problem is represented in Fig. 7. coupled with the ADBQUICKEST scheme and j  e
Computation on three meshes, namely, the coarse mesh model can solve the interaction of a large-scale wave with
(50  50  10 computational cells, dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:002 structures.
m); the medium mesh (100  100  20 computational The fluid–structure interaction is an important topic in
cells, dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:001 m); and the fine mesh many engineering fields, for example, the study of the
(200  200  40 computational cells, dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ interaction between waves and structures [12, 18], the
0:0005 m) were performed to study the convergence simulation of wave breaking [33], among others. A simple
behavior. example of fluid–structure interaction is the dam-break
Figure 8 displays a comparison made between the free problem with rigid obstacles, in which is the combined
surface height (the total thickness of the layer), obtained effect of the free surface and fluid viscosity, such as
from our numerical solutions on these three meshes and interaction of a free surface wave with an obstacle (see Ref.
from the analytical viscous solution of Watson. The [21]). This example is a useful test for validating numerical
simulation codes and is of practical importance in terms of

123
202 Page 12 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
Fig. 13 3D numerical
simulation of dam-break
problem with a rigid structure
(Case I) at different times
functional and structural design of hydraulic structures.
The geometry of this problem is described as follows.
A tank of 1.6 m long, 0.6 m wide, and 0.6 m high
contains two water blocks in hydrostatic equilibrium and a
rigid obstacle of 0:12 m  0:12 m  0:6 m . The
dimensions of the first water block are 0.3 m long, 0.6 m
wide, and 0.3 m high, and of the second, 1.3 m long, 0.6 m
wide, and 0.03 m high. The rigid structure is placed on the
bottom of the tank at the two different positions (Cases I
and II), and also, it is considered a third case with two rigid
structures (Case III), as illustrated in Fig. 12.
123
In this problem, the non-dimensional parameters are: Re
= 514,655.223 and Fr = 1.0. The scaling parameters are:
characteristic length L = 0.30 m (height of water column),
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the characteristic velocity U ¼ Ljgj ¼ 1:715517 ms1 ,
and kinematic viscosity m ¼ 1:0  106 m2 s1 . Gravity
was considered to be acting in the z-direction with
jgj ¼ 9:81 ms2 . The mesh used in this example was 170 
70  70 (dx ¼ dy ¼ dz ¼ 0:010 m) computational cells.
The Freeflow-3D code solved this high Reynolds number
problem with the above input data. Figures 13, 14 and 15
exhibit snapshots of this run at selected times, respectively,
for Cases I, II, and III. Surface tension has been neglected.
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
Fig. 14 3D numerical
simulation of dam-break
problem with a rigid structure
(Case II) at different times
Basically, for the three cases, the initial configuration is
illustrated in the first frame from Figs. 13, 14 and 15. At
time equal to zero, the gate is instantaneously removed and
gravity sets the fluid in motion toward the structures. The
wave generated by the dam break collides with the struc-
ture(s) at t = 0.40 s and rides up its upstream face. At t =
0.50 s, the wave wraps around the structure, rejoins in its
wake at t = 0.60 s, and continues moving toward the
downstream wall of the tank. A swirl effect is observed in
the wake of the structure, with indicative of strong scour-
ing. The difference between the three cases results is in the
intensity and shape of this effect. It can be seen from
Figs. 13, 14, and 15 that the effect is more intensive in
Page 13 of 16 202
Cases II and III than in Case I. Furthermore, two swirls of
different shapes and intensities are observed in Case III.
One can see from these figures that the numerical technique
using GENSMAC-3D methodology coupled with the
ADBQUICKEST scheme and j  e model is able to sim-
ulate fluid–structure interaction problems.
8 Concluding remarks
This work has presented a numerical technique for solving
3D incompressible turbulent free surface flows. Funda-
mentally, the numerical method described herein is based
123
202 Page 14 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202

Fig. 15 3D numerical
simulation of dam-break
problem with two rigid
structures (Case III) at different
times

on finite difference on a staggered grid and uses the orig-
inal high Reynolds j  e turbulence model and the
ADBQUICKEST upwind scheme for the non-linear con-
vection terms. The numerical method developed in this
work was included into the Freeflow-3D simulation system
which has been applied to simulate two problems, namely,
dam-break flow and a turbulent free jet impinging onto a
flat rigid wall. The numerical results were compared with
experimental and analytical data available in the literature,
and, in general, demonstrated good agreement. To illustrate
the robustness and applicability of the Freeflow-3D code
for solving the interaction of a large-scale wave with
structures at high Reynolds numbers, the numerical tech-
nique was applied to solve the dam-break problem with
rigid structure.
It is intended that future research will consider: (a) an
investigation of the performance of the ADBQUICKEST
scheme for solving 2D/3D non-Newtonian fluid flows of
type Bingham plastic, Herschel–Bulkley model, and the
Casson model and (b) adaptations for the renormalization

123
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
group method (RNG) and the realizable j  e model to
incorporate more physics in the modeling.
Acknowledgements Support for this research was provided by the
Brazilian agency FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do
Estado de São Paulo) under Grants 05/51458-0, 06/05910-1, and
10/16865-2.
References
1. Alves MA, Oliveira PJ, Pinho FT (2003) A convergent and
universally bounded interpolation scheme for the treatment of
advection. Int J Numer Methods Fluid 41:47–75
2. Anderson DA, Tannehill JC, Pletcher RH (1984) Computational
fluid mechanics and heat transfer. Hemisphere Publishing Cor-
poration, New York
3. Ataie-Ashtiani B, Farhadi L (2006) A stable moving-particle
semi-implicit method for free surface flows. Fluid Dyn Res
38:241–256
4. Batchelor GK (1967) An introduction of fluid dynamics. Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge
5. Bhajantri MR, Eldho TI, Deolalikar PB (2007) Numerical mod-
elling of turbulent flow through spillway with gated operation. Int
J Numer Methods Eng 72:221–243
6. Braun AL, Awruch AM (2003) Numerical simulation of the wind
action on a long-span bridge deck. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng
25(4):352–363
7. Castello AF, Tomé MF, César CNL, McKee S, Cuminato JA
(2000) Freeflow: an integrated simulation system for three-di-
mensional free surface flows. Comput Vis Sci 2:199–210
8. Ozmen-Cagatay H, Kocaman S (2010) Dam-break flows during
initial stage using SWE and RANS approaches. J Hydraul Res
48(5):603–611
9. Ozmen-Cagatay H, Kocaman S (2011) Dam-break flow in the
presence of obstacle: experiment and CFD simulation. Eng Appl
Comput Fluid Mech 5(4):541–552
10. Choi DS, Lee SS, Im YT (2005) Fringe element reconstruction
for front tracking for three-dimensional incompressible flow
analysis. Int J Numer Methods Fluid 48:631–648
11. Chorin AJ (1968) Numerical solution of the Navier–Stokes
equations. Math Comput 22:745–761
12. Dalrymple RA, Knio O, Cox DT, Gesteira M, Zou S (2002)
Using a Lagrangian particle method for deck overtopping. Proc
Waves 2001. ASCE, Reston, VA, 1082–1091
13. Denaro FM (2003) On the applications of the Helmoltz–Hodge
decomposition in projection methods for incompressible flows
with general boundary conditions. Int J Numer Methods Fluid
43:43–69
14. Ferreira VG, Brandi AC, Kurokawa FA, Seleghim P Jr, Castello
AF, Cuminato JA (2007) Incompressible turbulent flow simula-
tion using the j  e model and upwind schemes. Math Probl Eng
12741:1–26
15. Ferreira VG, Kurokawa FA, Oishi CM, Kaibara MK, Castello
AF, Cuminato JA (2009) Evaluation of a bounded high order
upwind scheme for 3D incompressible free surface flow com-
putations. Math Comput Simul 23:419–445
16. Ferreira VG, Kurokawa FA, Queiroz RAB, Kaibara MK, Oishi
CM, Cuminato JA, Castello AF, Tomé MF, McKee S (2009)
Assessment of a high-order finite difference upwind scheme for
the simulation of convection-diffusion problems. Int J Numer
Methods Fluid 60:1–26
17. Ferziger JA, Perić M (1984) Computational methods for fluid
dynamics. Springer, Germany
Page 15 of 16 202
18. Fontaine E, Landrini M, Tulin M (2000) Breaking: splashing and
ploughing phases. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on
Waterwaves and Floating Bodies, pp 34–38
19. Fraccarollo L, Toro EF (1995) Experimental and numerical
assessment of the shallow water model for two-dimensional dam-
break problems. J Hydraul Res 33:843–864
20. Gaskell PH, Lau AKC (1988) Curvature-compensated convective
transport: SMART, a new boundedness preserving transport
algorithm. Int J Numer Method Fluid 8:617–641
21. Gómez-Gesteira M, Dalrymple RA (2004) Using a three-di-
mensional smoothed particle hydrodynamics method for wave
impact on at all structure. J Waterway Port Coast Ocean Eng
130:63–69
22. Harlow FH, Welch JE (1965) Numerical calculation of time-
dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface.
Phys Fluids 8:2182–2189
23. Harten A (1983) High resolution schemes for hyperbolic con-
servation laws. J Comput Phys 49:357–393
24. Jones W, Launder B (1972) The prediction of laminarization with
a two-equation model of turbulence. Int J Heat Mass Transf
15:301–314
25. Kaibara MK, Ferreira VG, Navarro HA, Cuminato JA, Castelo
AF, Tomé MF (2005) Upwinding schemes for convection dom-
inated problems. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Con-
gress of Mechanical Engineering, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil
26. Kelecy FJ, Pletcher RH (1997) The development of a free surface
capturing approach for multidimensional free surface flows in
closed containers. J Comput Phys 138:939–980
27. Kim MS, Lee W (2003) A new VOF-based numerical scheme for
the simulation of fluid with free surface. Part I. Int J Numer
Methods Fluid 42:765–790
28. Koshizuka S, Oka Y (1996) Moving-particle semi-implicit
method for fragmentation of incompressible fluids. Nucl Sci Eng
123:421–434
29. Kurokawa FA, Ferreira VG, Oishi CM, Kaibara MK (2007) A
comparison of high order upwind schemes for solving strong
convection problems. Proceedings of Iberian Latin American
Congress on Computational Methods in Engineering, Porto
30. Ladyzhenskaja OA (1963) The mathematical theory of viscous
incompressible flow. Gordon and Breach, New York
31. Leonard BP (1980) The QUICK algorithm: a uniformly third-
order finite-difference method for highly convective flows.
Comput Methods Fluids 1:159–195
32. Leonard BP (1988) Simple high-accuracy resolution program for
convective modeling of discontinuities. Int J Numer Method
Fluid 8:1291–1318
33. Löhner R, Yang C, Onate E (2007) Simulation of flows with
violent free surface motion and moving objects using unstruc-
tured grids. Int J Numer Methods Fluid 53:1315–1338
34. Manouzi H, Fortin M (1991) A treatment of wall boundaries for
turbulent flows by the use of a transmission finite element
method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 31:113–126
35. Martin JC, Moyce WJ (1952) An experimental study of the
collapse of liquid columns on a rigid horizontal plate. Phil Trans
Math Phys Eng Sci 244:312–324
36. Norris HL, Reynolds WC (1975) Turbulent channel flow with a
moving wavy boundary, Stanford Univ. Dept Mech Eng. TR TF-
7
37. Patel VC (1998) Perspective: flow at high Reynolds number and
over rough surfaces-Achilles Heel of CFD. J Fluids Eng
120:434–444
38. Quecedo M, Pastor M, Herreros MI, Merodo JAF, Zhang Q
(2005) Comparison of two mathematical models for solving the
dam break problem using the FEM method. Comput Method
Appl M 194(9):3984–4005
123
202 Page 16 of 16 Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2018) 40:202
39. Queiroz RAB, Kurokawa FA, Candezano MAC, Corrêa L (2017)
Numerical investigations of turbulent free surface flows using
TOPUS scheme. Comp Appl Math 36:1145–1160
40. Robinson DI, Hassan HA (1998) Two-equation turbulence clo-
sure model for wall bounded and free shear flows. AIAA J
115:147–152
41. Shigematsu T, Liu PLF, Oda K (2004) Numerical modelling of
the initial stages of dam-break waves. J Hydraul Res
42(2):183–195
42. Sondak DL, Pletcher RH (1995) Application of wall functions to
generalized nonorthogonal curvilinear coordinate systems. AIAA
J 33:33–41
43. Song B, Liu GR, Lam KY, Amano RS (2000) On a higher-order
bounded discretization scheme. Int J Numer Methods Fluid
32:881–897
44. Stansby PK, Chegini A, Barnes TCD (1998) The initial stages of
dam-break flow. J Fluid Mech 374:407–424
45. Tang Z, Wan D (2015) Numerical simulation of impinging jet
flows by modified MPS method. Eng Comput 32:1153–1171
46. Tomé MF, McKee S (1994) GENSMAC: a computational marker
and cell method for free surface flows in general domains.
J Comput Phys 110:171–186
47. Tomé MF, Castelo AF, Cuminato JA, Mangiavacchi N, McKee S
(2001) GENSMAC3D: a numerical method for solving unsteady
123
three-dimensional free surface flows. Int J Numer Methods Fluid
37:747–796
48. Varonos A, Bergeles G (1998) Development and assessment of a
variable-order non-oscillatory scheme for convection term dis-
cretization. Int J Numer Methods Fluid 26:1–16
49. Violeau D, Issa R (2007) Numerical modeling of complex tur-
bulent free-surface flows with the SPH method: an overview. Int J
Numer Methods Fluid 53:277–304
50. Watson EJ (1964) The radial spread of a liquid jet over a hori-
zontal plane. J Fluid Mech 20:481–499
51. Wilcox DC (1988) Reassessment of the scale-determining
equation for advanced turbulence models. AIAA J 26:1299–1310
52. Wilcox DC (1993) Turbulence modeling for CFD. DCW Indus-
tries, California
53. Ying X, Jorgeson J, Wang SSY (2009) Modeling dam-break
flows using finite volume method on unstructured grid. Eng Appl
Comput Fluid Mech 3(2):184–194
54. Zhou JG, Causon DM, Mingham CG, Ingram DM (2004)
Numerical prediction of dam-break flows in general geometries
with complex bed topography. J Hydraul Res 130(4):332–40