Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFuentes-Pérez, Juan Francisco
dc.contributor.authorQuaresma, Ana L.
dc.contributor.authorPinheiro, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorSanz-Ronda, Francisco Javier
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-15T09:41:39Z
dc.date.available2026-01-15T09:41:39Z
dc.date.issued2022-01
dc.identifier.citationEcological Engineering, January 2022, vol. 174, p. 106446es
dc.identifier.issn0925-8574es
dc.identifier.urihttps://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/81580
dc.descriptionProducción Científicaes
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this study is to make a comparison between two 3D CFD platforms: OpenFOAM (free and open-source CFD software) and FLOW-3D (closed source commercial CFD software), focusing on vertical slot fishways, one of the most widespread solutions to facilitate the fish migration through transversal obstacles in rivers. Considering previous comparative studies, our initial hypothesis is that both OpenFOAMs' multiphase solver and FLOW-3D provide good comparable results. In this study, in contrast to previous comparative studies, turbulence was addressed using LES approach and the volume of fluid method was used to model the multiphase interface (air-water). Mesh independency was assessed through LES IQ index and the numerical models' accuracies were evaluated comparing representative hydraulic variables (velocity, its components, and turbulence kinetic energy) with ADV experimental data and discussing results in previous studies. Both platform codes reproduced the scenario under study, concurred with experimental data and offered a superior performance on flow structure velocity simulation than turbulent kinetic energy. Results validate the use of the free and open platform OpenFOAM as a viable alternative to commercial ones in the domain of fishway design and assessment. While OpenFOAM provides a reliable free alternative, FLOW-3D has a faster setup and makes the simulating experience apt for beginners.es
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfes
dc.language.isospaes
dc.publisherElsevieres
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectIngeniería hidráulicaes
dc.subjectModelos matemáticoses
dc.subjectHidrodinámicaes
dc.subjectMecánica de fluidoses
dc.subjectPasos para peceses
dc.subject.classificationOpenFOAMes
dc.subject.classificationFLOW-3Des
dc.subject.classification3D hydrodynamic modellinges
dc.subject.classificationFishwayses
dc.subject.classificationLESes
dc.titleOpenFOAM vs FLOW-3D: A comparative study of vertical slot fishway modellinges
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dc.rights.holderElsevier B.V.es
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106446es
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857421003013es
dc.identifier.publicationfirstpage106446es
dc.identifier.publicationtitleEcological Engineeringes
dc.identifier.publicationvolume174es
dc.peerreviewedSIes
dc.description.projectTorres Quevedo grant PTQ2018–010162es
dc.description.projectEU H2020 project FIThydro (No. 727830)es
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersiones
dc.subject.unesco1203.26 Simulaciónes
dc.subject.unesco3313.96 Simulación CFDes
dc.subject.unesco3305.15 Ingeniería Hidráulicaes
dc.subject.unesco3105.04 Protección de Los Peceses


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record