Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

DSD-INT 2019 Delft3D FM - validation of hydrodynamics (2D,3D)-de Goede


Published on

Presentation by Erik de Goede, Deltares, at the Delft3D - User Days (Day 2: Hydrodynamics), during Delft Software Days - Edition 2019. Tuesday, 12 November 2019, Delft.

Published in: Software
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

DSD-INT 2019 Delft3D FM - validation of hydrodynamics (2D,3D)-de Goede

  1. 1. Validation of hydrodynamics (2D, 3D) and key features of the numerical method Erik de Goede Delft Software Days 2019
  2. 2. Team ‘D-Flow FM computational kernel 1D/2D/3D’ Project leader 3D prioritizing software bugs 2D/3D Software architect 1D project Code development bugfixing Test benches EC module 1D Review, code restructuring, grids Project leader GUI Rijkswaterstaat Project leader Maintenance &Support Release coordinator Project leader 1D D-Water Quality Member Steering Group sixth generation models Team ‘D-Flow FM computational kernel 1D/2D/3D’
  3. 3. Close cooperation with GUI team (also members without photo) Meuse at Maastricht
  4. 4. Hydrodynamics (model suite+hydrodynamic module) Delft3D 4 Suite (structured grids) hydrodynamic module: Delft3D-FLOW Delft3D FM Suite (unstructured grids) hydrodynamic module: D-Flow FM
  5. 5. Purpose of validation The purpose of validation is two-fold: 1. Check the consistency of model results via testbenches per module per platform (Windows and Linux) sequentially and in parallel mode 2. Assess the quality of model results via validation documents (per module)
  6. 6. Testbenches with regression tests (for consistency) • Currently 400+ testcases for D-Flow FM stand-alone • Very strict criteria (e.g., difference in water level < 0.0001 m)
  7. 7. Validation of D-Flow FM module Current statusValidation cases For 1D/2D/3D January 2019
  8. 8. Example case: validation of bridge pillars Dimension Blockage Thanks to Jurjen de Jong Subgrid approach for bridge pillars, taken from Delft3D-FLOW: Flow current
  9. 9. Validation via scale modelling (in 2010) Froude nr. H downstream (m) H upstream (m) 0.52 0.505 0.533 0.62 0.453 0.495 0.72 0.410 0.465
  10. 10. Bridge pillars on different grids Bridge with D = 11 cm = L = 8,66 m W =1 m = Dry point
  11. 11. Model results Water levels
  12. 12. Application: St. Servaasbridge Maastricht (Meuse) Low water High water What is a representative diameter?
  13. 13. Compliments on validation from abroad! In Modelling Workshop in 2018 Paris: Existing validation test cases are scattered in the literature and not always fully documented and reproducible. The few existing examples of such effort (e.g., “doc. A”; Gerritsen et al. 2008; “doc. C” and “doc. D”) turned out to provide valuable feedback on the consequences of model formulations. (Gerritsen et al. 2008=Delft3D-FLOW validation document)
  14. 14. Delft3D 4 and Delft3D FM Suites Key numerical features w.r.t. hydrodynamics
  15. 15. Some key numerical features of Delft3D-FLOW ❑ Alternating Direction Implicit (ADI) method (Leendertse, 1967) ❑ High-order advection scheme (Stelling, 1983) ❑ Unified grid approach (rectilinear and curvilinear for Cartesian and spherical co-ordinates) ❑ Robust and accurate k- turbulence model (1995) ➢ Reasonable efficiency for high performance computing (1-32 cores) ➢ Limited barrier functionality ❑ Coupling with water quality, morphology and waves
  16. 16. Some key numerical features of D-Flow FM ❑ Large flexibility in unstructured grids ❑ Extensive functionality for barriers (like SOBEK-FLOW) ❑ High efficiency for high performance computing (1-256 cores) ❑ Good accuracy and robustness for 2D (depth-averaged) modelling ➢ Reasonable accuracy and robustness for 3D modelling; In progress; So-called “2x oscillations” can occur ❑ Coupling with water quality, morphology and waves (in 2D, 3D in progress)
  17. 17. Overview of numerics in Delft3D 4 & Delft3D FM Paper with key numerical features and historical overview w.r.t. hydrodynamics
  18. 18. Historical overview
  19. 19. Flooding in the Netherlands, February 1953 1836 human deaths 750,000 affected 100,000 evacuated 1362 km2 inundated
  20. 20. Ouderkerk aan de IJssel One of the many dike breaches
  21. 21. Eastern Scheldt Storm Surge barrier; 4 October 1986 Since 1983 based on numerical modelling (and no longer scale modelling)
  22. 22. Scale models for Delta Works at Delft Hydraulics
  23. 23. Maximally 8000 computational points! Numerical modelling for Eastern Scheldt Barrier
  24. 24. Milestones for 2D and 3D SWE modelling in NL 1967-1986: 2D hydrodynamic modelling 1986-1995: 3D hydrodynamic modelling Coupling to water quality and waves k- turbulence model Vector computing 1995-2004: High perfomance computing (multi node, domain dec.) Coupling to morphology 2004-….: “Consolidation” 2011-…: Delft3D open source 2011-…: Unstructured grid modelling
  25. 25. Concluding remarks • Validation of high importance, as well as testing and documentation Paper in Ocean Dynamics (to appear soon) with: • Insight in key numerical features of computational engines • Historical overview in the Netherlands • Comparison with international hydrodynamic codes (MIKE, POM, MIKE FM, UNTRIM, ADCIRC, …) • Reference paper for Delft3D 4 and Delft3D FM • Appearance of paper in Ocean Dynamics to be announced via Delft3D Open source forum
  26. 26. Paper complementary to other documents Delft3D-FLOW User Manual D-Flow FM User Manual Delft3D-FLOW Validation Document D-Flow FM Technical Reference Manual Historical overview of hydrodynamics NL D-Flow FM Validation Document