Proceedings of 2013 IAHR World Congress

Water Surface Profiles in a Tunnel Bend with High Velocity

Bo Wang
Associate Professor, State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering, Sichuan
University, Chengdu 610065, China. Email: wangbo@scu.edu.cn
Ping Wu
Lecturer, Institute of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.
E-mail: 21569288@qq.com
Yun-liang Chen
Associate Professor, State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering, Sichuan
University, Chengdu 610065, China. Email: liangyunchen@163.com
Chao Wu
Professor, State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering, Sichuan University,
Chengdu 610065, China. Email: wuchao_w@163.com
Qin Zhou
Ph.D. Student, State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering, Sichuan University,
Chengdu 610065, China.
Southwestern Hydraulic Engineering Institute for Water Transport, Chongqing Jiaotong University,
Chongqing, 400016 China. Email:zhouqinysy@126.com

ABSTRACT: It is widely believed that a bend in horizontal plane is not suitable for a free-surface tunnel.
It is also a strict rule in Specification for Design of Hydraulic Tunnel (SL279-2002) that a horizontal
curve should not be adopted in the free-surface tunnel with high velocity. Due to the high veloctiy and
large Froude Number, the bend in free-surface tunnels is hardly used in hydraulic engineering; and the
hydraulic characteristics of which rarely is investigated intensively. The bend in free-surface tunnels has
outstanding features different from that of spillways and rivers. In this article, the flow regimes of the
bend and its downstream reach were observed in a physical model at the approach Froude Number 4-8,
and the water surfaces were obtained. The following findings are concluded from the experimental results,
which may be helpful for dealing with the problems produced by the tunnel bend.The water depth on both
banks is essentially equal upstream the entrance of the bend. The flow moves ahead both in the tangential
direction and in the transverse direction from the inner to the outer wall. The surface along the inner wall
drops while the one along the outer wall climbs. The flow on the inner bank finally becomes a water-layer.
The flow on the outer bank exceeding the vertical wall will cling to the arch and continue the tangential
movement. The directon of the tranverse motion becomes from the outer wall to the other. The
wall-attached flow will slip down the vertical wall on the inner bank as it passes the apex of arch, forming
a waterfall and supplementing the flow on the inner bank. The flow upstream of the bend entrance
characterises two-dimensional, and becomes a swirling flow containing an air cavity in the bend. The
hollow swirling flow out from the bend develops into a shock wave with a fluctuating surface in the
straight tunnel because of the boundary change. The crest of surface along both walls alternately arises.

KEY WORDS: Free-surface tunnel flow, Bend, High velocity, Hollow swirling flow, Supercritical flow.

1 INTRODUCTION
A tunnel is used extensively to discharge flood in hydraulic engineering. The axis of tunnel can not
be a line in some hydraulic projects due to the narrow valley and unfavorable geology. Nevertheless, it is
widely believed that a bend in horizontal plane is not suitable for a free-surface tunnel. It is also a strict
rule in Specification for Design of Hydraulic Tunnel (SL279-2002) that a horizontal curve should not be
adopted in the free-surface tunnel with high velocity. The bend flow in a free-surface tunnel has been a
challenge in the hydraulic scope.
The bend flow in a channel has been entensively studied in the past. The analytical relationships for
the extremum wave heights and locations were proposed by von Karman (1938), Knapp (1951), Ippen
(1938), and Ghaeini Hessaroeyeh and Tahershamsi (2009). Ellis (1985) obtained the difference between
the inner and outer wall wave profiles. Tian (1991) gave the two-dimensional analytical solution for the
supercritical flow in a bend with a slope. Miller and Chaudhry (1989) and Frazão and Zech (2002)
investigated experimentally the flood routing in a 180° and 90° bend, respectively. The shear stress fields
in a channel bend were given in laboratory studies by Hicks et al. (1990) and Fares (1995). Reinauer and
Hager (1997) conducted experiments on the bend wave for large bend numbers. Weber et al. (2001) gave
the three-dimensional velocity distribution of a bend. Numerical models for a bend flow were developed
(Wilson 1973, Kikkawa et al. 1976, Kalkwijk and De Vriend 1980, Falcon-Ascanio and Kennedy 1983,
Odgaard 1986a, 1986b, Dammuller et al. 1989, and Jin et al. 1993). Leschziner and Rodi (1979)
suggested that a certain difference between numerical and physical models was produced in a bend with a
large curvature due to the assumption of the rigid lid. The velocity field was numerically simulated by Ye
and McCorquodale (1998), Morvan et al. (2002), Khosronejad et al. (2007), Fu and Lian (2007), and Liu
and Shen (2009).
The formation and hydraulic characteristics of a bend flow mainly relate to the boundaries. In a
channel bend, the flow is impacted by the inner and outer walls and the bottom. In a free-surface tunnel
bend, the arch of tunnel may affect the flow besides the above three boundaries. Complicated boundaries
contribute to the complex bend flow. As a result, the bend of a free-surface tunnel is hardly used in
practice; and few studies are conducted on this issue. It was observed in the model tests of Shibianyu
hydraulic engineering that the approach Froude number of bend is up to 3.84; and the flow surface
fluctuates intensely (Chen et al. 1995). In this paper, the free surface in a tunnel bend with high velocity
was investigated systematically on a scale physical model for one hydraulic project.

2 TUNNEL DESIGN PROFILE

The tunnel profile is composed of an ogee, a 51.16º bend with a radius of 50 m and a straight reach,
as shown in Figure 1. A bottom slope of 1% is used for the curved and straight reaches (Figure 2). The
tunnel width is 5.00 m, the height of the vertical wall equals 6.13 and the total height of tunnel is 6.40 m.

Figure 1 Plan layout of the tunnel

2
 1.27
663.60
y y
y y

y
y

y
y

6.13
y
y

y
611.50 x

y
5.00

0m

y
30.77°

y
R5

y
y
y y y y

576.20
y y=x2/250 i=1:100

Station 0+000.00

Station 0+040.00

Station 0+167.05

Station 0+211.70

Station 0+469.70
(Bend outlet)
(Bend inlet)
Figure 2 Longitudinal sketch of the tunnel

3 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Froude similarity criteria define the model/prototype scale relationships since gravity forces
dominate. Bureau of Reclamation recommends that large hydraulic models should be constructed to scale
ratios between 1: 30 and 1: 100; and medium-size hydraulic models not be smaller than a 1: 60 scale. In
order to obtain fully hydraulic characteristics of bend flow as far as possible, a 1: 25 scale was used in this
study. The unit discharge ranges from 0.08 to 0.80 m2/s in the model, corresponding to the range of
10-100 m2/s in the prototype. The Manning’s n during 0.013-0.015 in the prototype requires a range of
0.007-0.009 in the model. This requirement was satisfied by the use of plexiglas for making the tunnel
wall and bottom. The tunnel frame is complicated in space, several camera sites were arranged for
obtaining the flow pattern of the whole tunnel (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Arrangement of camera sites in experiments

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Flow Pattern

The flow discharges smoothly along the ogee reach. An obvious difference between left and right
bank depths was not observed (Figure 4). When the flow enters the bend, it moves ahead both in the
tangential direction and in the transverse direction from the inner to the outer wall. The surface along the
inner wall drops and the one on the other wall climbs. The flow on the convex bank finally becomes a
water-layer. The flow on the concave bank above the vertical wall of the tunnel will cling to the arch and
continue the tangential movement. The directon of the tranverse motion becomes from the concave bank
to the other. The wall-attached flow will slip down the vertical wall on the convex bank as it passes the
apex of arch, forming a waterfall and supplementing the flow on the convex bank. The flow upstream the
bend inlet characterises two-dimensional, and becomes a swirling flow containing an air cavity in the
bend (Figures 5 and 6).
Compared to the bend, the change of the boundary in the straight tunnel downstream breaks the

3
condition in which the hollow swirling flow exists. As a result, the hollow swirling flow develops into a
wave with a fluctuating surface, as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 4 Flow pattern in the ogee reach at Site 2.

Figure 5 Flow pattern in the bend at Site 3.

Figure 6 Flow pattern in the bend at Site 4.

Figure 7 Flow pattern in the straight tunnel at Site 5.

4
4.2 Free Surface Profiles
In order to capture the variation of the free surface, sixteen depth measurements were made at
equally spaced intervals from the inlet to the outlet of bend; and forty-three depth measurements were
made at equally spaced intervals along the straight tunnel. The wave profiles along the inner and outer
walls are shown in Figure 8.
When the outer wall wave exceeds the vertical wall, the wall-attached flow is developed below the
arch of tunnel. Under this circumstance, the height of the vertical wall was recorded as the outer depth in
tests. It was observed that the location corresponding to the outer depth equal to the vertical wall height
was closer to the bend inlet; and the reach in which the outer depth equaled or exceeded the vertical wall
height was longer when the unit discharges were larger. The contrary is the case for smaller discharges. In
particular, the maximum depth did not reach the vertical wall height when the unit discharge were very
small (i.e. q = 10, 20 m2/s); and the wave profiles were not effected by the arch of tunnel.
Reinauer and Hager (1997) investigated experimentally the supercritical flow in bends and gave the
empirical expression for the extremum wave heights and the wave configuration as the following:

YM = 
(
 1 + 0.40B 2 2 ) B ≤ 1.5
(1)
 (1 + 0.60B )2 B > 1.5

h − ho
= [sin(θ θ M )]
1.5
0 ≤ θ θ M < 1.25 (2)
hM − ho

F ρ Fo ρ a ≤ 0.35
tan θ M =  o a (3)
 0.60(Fo ρ a )
12
Fo ρ a > 0.35
where YM = h/ho = ratio of the maximum flow depth h to the approach flow depth ho, B = Foρa1/2 = bend
number, Fo =Vo/(gho) 1/2 = approach Froude number, Vo = approach velocity, g = the acceleration due to
gravity, ρa = b/Ra = relative radius of curvature, ρa = 0.1 in the present study, θ = angular location, θM =
location of first wave crest.
Table 1 shows the hydraulic parameters in the tunnel bend, in which YM and θM calculated
respectively by Eqs. (1) and (3) were contained. The approach Froude number ranges from 4.24 to 7.36
within the investigated flow conditions. The outer wall wave profiles calculated with Eq. (2) are also
plotted in Figure 8. The outer wall wave profiles below the vertical wall are reproduced well. The
predictions are in agreement with the measurements with the maximum relative error equal to 15%
(Figure 9).

Table 1 Hydraulic parameters in the tunnel bend (prototype dimensions)

2
q (m /s) ho (m) Fo Foρo B YM θM (°)

100 3.84 4.24 0.424 1.34 2.96 21.35

90 3.36 4.67 0.467 1.48 3.50 22.29
80 3.12 4.63 0.463 1.47 3.46 22.22
70 2.34 6.24 0.624 1.97 4.77 25.37
60 2.16 6.03 0.603 1.91 4.60 24.99
50 1.89 6.14 0.614 1.94 4.69 25.19
40 1.60 6.31 0.631 2.00 4.83 25.48
30 1.30 6.46 0.646 2.04 4.96 25.75
20 0.91 7.36 0.736 2.33 5.74 27.23
10 0.65 6.09 0.609 1.93 4.65 25.09

5
 Left (outer) wall wave profiles Right (inner) wall wave profiles
Eq. (2)
1.0
h/hwall
0.5
q=100 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=90 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=80 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=70 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=60 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=50 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=40 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=30 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=20 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=10 m2/s
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
θ (°)
Figure 8 Surface profiles along: (□) left (outer); (■) right (inner) bend walls.

6
 1.0
+15%
q=10 m2/s
0.8
q=20 m2/s

h/hwall-experimental
-15% q=30 m2/s
0.6 q=40 m2/s
q=50 m2/s
q=60 m2/s
0.4
q=70 m2/s
q=80 m2/s
0.2 q=90 m2/s
q=100 m2/s

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
h/hwall-calculated
Figure 9 Comparison among experimental water depth and predictions with Eq. (2).

The waves in the bend become the source inducing the surface fluctuation in the reach downstream
of the bend. Figure 10 shows the free surfaces on both left and right walls in the straight tunnel. It was
observed that the locations of wave crests on one bank mainly correspond to those of wave troughs on the
other bank; and the surface fluctuation decayed down the straight tunnel. It is found that the period of
surface fluctuations is longer and the amplitude is larger when the unit discharge is larger. The contrary is
the case for smaller discharges.

5 CONCLUSIONS
The formation and hydraulic characteristics of a bend flow mainly relate to the boundaries.
Complicated boundaries contribute to the complex bend flow. In a free-surface tunnel, the bend flow is
impacted by the inner and outer walls, the bed and the tunnel arch. In this study, the free surface profiles
along the tunnel bend and the downstream straight reach were observed in a 1:25 scale physical model at
the approach Froude Number 4-8. The water depth on both banks is essentially equal upstream of the
bend entrance. The flow moves ahead both in the tangential direction and in the transverse direction
from the inner to the outer bank. Along the inner wall, the water surface drops; and the flow finally
becomes a water-layer. Along the outer wall, the water surface climbs; and the flow exceeding the
vertical wall will cling to the arch and continue the tangential movement. The directon of the tranverse
motion becomes from the outer wall to the other. The wall-attached flow will slip down the vertical wall
on the convex bank as it passes the apex of arch, forming a waterfall and supplementing the flow on the
convex bank. The oberved outer wall wave profiles compare well to the predictions by Reinauer and
Hager (1997). The flow upstream of the bend inlet characterises two-dimensional, and becomes a
swirling flow containing an air cavity in the bend.
Compared to the bend, the change of the boundary in the straight tunnel downstream breaks the
condition in which the hollow swirling flow exists. As a result, the hollow swirling flow develops into a
shock wave with a fluctuating surface. The crest of surface along both walls alternately arises. Intensive
understanding the hydraulics of the bend flow with high velocity is helpful for dealing with the problems
produced by the tunnel bend. The study is a preliminary work in this field; and further tests are being
conducted to find the solution for those problems.

7
 Left wall wave profiles Right wall wave profiles
1.0
h/hwall
0.5
q=100 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=90 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=80 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=70 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=60 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=50 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=40 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=30 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=20 m2/s
0.0
h/hwall

0.5
q=10 m2/s
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
L/Ra

Figure 10 Free surface profiles along: (□) left; (■) right walls in the straight tunnel.

8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51209155 and
51109149) and the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China
(20110181120093).

References
Chen, Y.L., Li S.Y., and Dai Z.L., 1995. The study on the alignment of tunnel spillway of Shibianyu reservoir. Journal
of Hydraulic Engineering, 2, 35-39. (in Chinese)
Dammuller, D.C., Bhallamudi, S. Murty, and Chaudhry, M. Hanif., 1989. Modeling of unsteady flow in curved
channel. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 115(11), 1479-1501.
Ellis, J., 1985. Numerical analysis of Kielder dam spillway. Journal of the Institution of Water Engineers and
Scientists, 39(3), 254-270.
Falcon-Ascanio, M., and Kennedy, J. F., 1983. Flow in alluvial river curves. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 133, 1-16.
Fares, Y. R., 1995. Boundary shear in curved channel with side overflow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 121(1),
2-14.
Frazão, S.S., and Zech, Y., 2002. Dam Break in Channels with 90° Bend. Journal of Hydraulic Division, 128(11),
956-968.
Fu, C.J., and Lian, J.J., 2007. Three-dimensional numerical simulation of dam-break flow in complicated river
sections. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 38(10), 1151-1157. (in Chinese)
Ghaeini Hessaroeyeh, M., and Tahershamsi, A., 2009. Analytical model of supercritical flow in rectangular chute
bends. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 47(7), 566-773.
Hicks, F. E., Jin, Y. C., and Steffler, P. M. Flow near sloped bank in curved channel. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 1990, 116(1): 55–70.
Ippen, A.T., 1951. Mechanics of Supercritical Flow. Transactions, 116, 268-295.
Jin, Yee-Chung，Steiffer, and Peter, M., 1993. Predicting flow in curved open channels by depth-averaged method.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 119(1), 109-124.
Knapp, R.T., 1951. Design of channel curves for supercritical flow. Transactions, 116, 296-325.
Kikkawa, H., Kitagawa, A., and Ikeda, S., 1976. Flow and bed topography in curved open channels. Journal of
Hydraulic Division, 102(9), 1324-1342.
Kalkwijk, J. P.Th., and De Vriend, H. J., 1980. Computation of the flow in Shallow River bends. Journal of Hydraulic
Research, 18(4), 327-340.
Khosronejad, A., Rennie, C. D., Salehi Neyshabouri, S. A. A., and Townsend, R. D., 2007. 3D Numerical Modeling
of Flow and Sediment Transport in Laboratory Channel Bends. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 133(10),
1123-1134.
Leschziner, M. A. and Rodi, W., 1979. Calculation of Strongly curved open channel flow. Journal of Hydraulic
Division, 105(10), 1297-1314.
Liu, C., and Shen, Y.M., 2009. A 3D modeling of water-sediment two-phase movement in flat-bed channel bends.
Chinese Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 41(3), 318-328. (in Chinese)
Miller, S.D., and Chaudhry, M. H., 1989. Dam break flows in curved channel. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
115(11), 1465-1478.
Morvan, H., Pender, G., Wright, N. G., and Ervine, D. A., 2002. Three-dimensional hydrodynamics of meandering
compound channels. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 128(7), 674–682.
Odgaard, A. J., 1986. Meander flow model I: development. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 112(12), 1117-1136.
Odgaard, A. J., 1986. Meander flow model Ⅱ: application. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 112(12), 1137-1150.
Reinauer, R., and Hager, W. H., 1997. Supercritical bend flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 123(3), 208-218.
Tian J.N., 1991.The Two—dimensional Analytical Solution of Bend Torrent with Longitudinal Slope. Journal of
Xi’an University of Technology, 7(3), 181-189. (in Chinese)
von Karman, Theodor., 1938. Eine praktische Anwendung des Analogie zwischen Überschallströmung in Gasen und
überkritischer Strömung in offenen Gerinnen. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 18(1), 49-56.
Wilson, I. G., 1973. Equilibrium cross-section of meandering and braided rivers. Nature, 241(9), 393-394.
Weber, L. J., Schumate, E. D., and Mawer, N., 2001. Experiments on flow at 90° open-channel junction. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 127(5), 340–350.
Ye, J., and McCorquodale, J. A., 1998. Simulation of curved open channel flows by 3D hydrodynamic model.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 124(7), 687–698.