1995
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9429(1995)121:12(877)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

First- and Second-Order Flux Difference Splitting Schemes for Dam-Break Problem

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
29
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Each plane section was 8 m long, with slopes of 0.02, 0.015 and 0.01 in the downstream direction. In the most difficult scenario to simulate, each section received constant lateral inflows of 389, 230 and 288 cm h − 1 respectively, for a duration of 10 s. Figure 2 shows the model-predicted outflow hydrograph compared with the experimental results produced with Dx = 0.25 m and Dt = 0.05 s. In this experiment, a shock wave is produced, which arrives at the downstream end of the cascade at approximately 25 s; the developed model reproduces these results well considering the potential experimental errors, such as non-uniform lateral inflow [25], and better than other published analytical and numerical methods [2,26,27]. Here, Manning's equation was used to compute friction slope, with a friction coefficient of 0.009.…”
Section: Comparati6e Examplesmentioning
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Each plane section was 8 m long, with slopes of 0.02, 0.015 and 0.01 in the downstream direction. In the most difficult scenario to simulate, each section received constant lateral inflows of 389, 230 and 288 cm h − 1 respectively, for a duration of 10 s. Figure 2 shows the model-predicted outflow hydrograph compared with the experimental results produced with Dx = 0.25 m and Dt = 0.05 s. In this experiment, a shock wave is produced, which arrives at the downstream end of the cascade at approximately 25 s; the developed model reproduces these results well considering the potential experimental errors, such as non-uniform lateral inflow [25], and better than other published analytical and numerical methods [2,26,27]. Here, Manning's equation was used to compute friction slope, with a friction coefficient of 0.009.…”
Section: Comparati6e Examplesmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…The one-dimensional dam break problem comprising the second comparative has been previously reported [25]. In this problem, a shock wave develops due to the instantaneous break of a 'dam' at x = 1000 m, with the height of water on one side equal to 10 m, and the height of water on the other side equal to 5 m. The channel bed is assumed to be horizontal and frictionless.…”
Section: Comparati6e Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the exact solution of the Riemann problem is less efficient. In recent years, a number of approximate Riemann solvers have been developed to solve the Riemann problem in an efficient manner, including the method of characteristics (Katopodes and Strelko 1978;Iwasaki and Inutsuka 2011), the finite difference method (Fennema and Chaudhry 1990;Jha et al 1995;Ouyang et al 2014), and the finite volume method (Zoppou and Roberts 2000;Fraccarollo et al 2003;Brufau et al 2004;Gottardi and Venutelli 2004;Toro 2009;Fayssal and Moukalled 2012). In this paper, the finite volume method and Roe's approximation scheme are used to solve the debris flow problem.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jha et al [15] reported that the RoeÕs method using the second order accurate correction fails to simulate the dambreak problem when h L /h R < 0.002. In order to overcome this problem, the flux limiter function is also set here to zero when h < 10 À5 , i.e.…”
Section: Dambreak On Dry Bedmentioning
confidence: 99%