2024/09/02 by Pablo Ouro, Luis Cea, Luís Cea +9 · 1 voice
Engineering · Environmental Science · #Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows #Hydraulic flow and structures #Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
paper · doi:10.1080/00221686.2024.2401905
crossref issued 2024/09/02 · crossref published 2024/09/02 · crossref published-print 2024/09/02 · openalex publication_date 2024/09/02 · crossref published-online 2024/10/17 · crossref created 2024/10/17 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref deposited 2025/10/16 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29 · crossref indexed 2026/08/01
Computational models in hydro-environmental engineering are diverse in their background formulation and span from two-dimensional depth-averaged shallow water models, to complex fully three-dimensional turbulence models resolving large-eddy simulation with surface capturing techniques, and to Lagrangian particle-based methods. This paper presents a first-of-its-kind comparison of six different computational hydraulics fluid dynamics models, namely Iber+, HO-SWM, GBVC, OpenFOAM (RANS), Hydro3D (LES) and DualSPHysics (SPH), in the prediction of mean velocities and free-surface dynamics in two benchmarks involving open-channel flows with symmetric lateral cavities. Results show that shallow-water models capture relatively well the main large-scale coherent structures of the in-cavity flow, with wider shear layers compared to three-dimensional models, and higher velocities in the main channel. Three-dimensional RANS, LES and SPH yield improved predictions of mean velocities compared with experimental data. Computational cost has been quantified for all models with a logarithmic growth when increasing model complexity. The transverse standing wave is captured by most models, with the shallow-water ones matching the theoretical value, while the three-dimensional models overestimate it slightly.