Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 18, Issue 9, pp 3031–3040 | Cite as

Long-time 3D CFD modeling of sedimentation with dredging in a hydropower reservoir

  • Nils Reidar B. OlsenEmail author
  • Gudrun Hillebrand
Sediments, Sec 5 • Sediment Management • Research Article



The purpose of the current study was to present a 3D computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model that can be used to predict long-term (11 years) bed changes in a reservoir due to sedimentation and dredging and that can be done with a reasonable computational time (18 h) on a desktop computer.

Materials and methods

The numerical model solved the Navier-Stokes equations on a 3D non-orthogonal unstructured grid to find the water velocities and turbulence. The convection-diffusion equation for suspended sediment transport was solved to find the sediment deposition pattern. Bed changes were computed and used to adjust the grid over time. Thereby, bed elevations over time were computed. The effect of dredging was also included in the model, and how this affected the bed elevation changes. The main feature of the numerical model enabling a reasonable computational time was implicit numerical methods giving the possibility to use long time steps.

Results and discussion

The results were compared with annually measured bed elevation changes in the reservoir over 11 years. This gave 11 figures of bed elevation changes, due to the combined effect of sedimentation and dredging. Comparing the annually computed and measured bed changes, there was a fair agreement for most of the years. The main deposition patterns were reproduced. The amount of sediments removed in three dredging campaigns were also computed numerically and compared with the measured values. Parameter tests were done for the grid size, fall velocity of the sediments, cohesion, and sediment transport formula. The deviation between computed and measured dredged sediment volumes was less than 16% for all these four parameters/formulas.


The 3D CFD numerical model was able to compute water flow, sediment transport, and bed elevation changes in a hydropower reservoir over a time period of 11 years. Field measurements showed reasonable agreement with the computed bed elevation changes. The results were most sensitive to the sediment particle fall velocity and cohesion of the bed material.


Bed level changes Dredging Navier-Stokes equations Numerical modeling Reservoir Sediment transport 



The authors would like to thank the German Waterways and Shipping Administration for providing the data for the current study.


  1. Astor B, Gehres N, Hillebrand G (2014) From source to mouth, a sediment budget of the Rhine river: grain size distribution of suspended sediment samples in the Rhine and its tributaries. BfG 1798. Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde, Koblenz (in German)Google Scholar
  2. Banhold K, Frings R, Schüttrumpf H (2017) Sediment budget of the High Rhine and Upper Rhine from Konstanz to Iffezheim. In: Hillebrand G, Frings RM (eds) From source to mouth, the sediment budget of the Rhine river for the period 1991–2010. Report KHR/CHR II-22. International Commission for the Hydrology of the Rhine basin, Lelystad. pp 42–47, ISBN: 978-90-70980-39-9, DOI: (in German)
  3. Brignoli ML, Espa P, Batalla RJ (2017) Sediment transport below a small alpine reservoir desilted by controlled flushing: field assessment and one-dimensional numerical simulation. J Soils Sediments 17:2187–2201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ðorde̵vic D (2013) Numerical study of 3D flow at right-angled confluences with and without upstream planform curvature. J Hydroinf 15(4):1073–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dorfmann C, Zenz G (2013) Numerical investigations with Telemac at hydropower plants—two case studies. WasserWirtschaft 103(2):41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Engelund F, Hansen E (1967) A monograph on sediment transport in alluvial streams. Teknisk Forlag, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  7. Faghihirad S, Lin B, Falconer RA (2017) 3D layer-integrated modelling of morphodynamic processes near river regulated structures. Water Resour Manag 31:443–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fang H-W, Rodi W (2003) Three-dimensional calculations of flow and suspended sediment transport in the neighborhood of the dam for the Three Gorges Project (TGP) reservoir in the Yangtze River. J Hydraul Res 41(4):379–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Haun S, Olsen NRB (2012) Three-dimensional numerical modelling of reservoir flushing in a prototype scale. Int J River Basin Manag 10(4):341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haun S, Kjærås H, Løvfall S, Olsen NRB (2013) Three-dimensional measurements and numerical modelling of suspended sediments in a hydropower reservoir. J Hydrol 479:180–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hillebrand G (2014) Sediment analysis of drill core samples from the IKSR investigation of the reservoirs in the Upper Rhine from the years 2000 to 2002. KLIWAS-Report series, KLIWAS-56/2014, pp. 63. Federal Institute of Hydrology, Koblenz (in German)Google Scholar
  12. Hillebrand G, Otto W, Vollmer S (2012) Findings from ADCP-measured flow velocities and suspended sediment concentrations at the Upper Rhine. 2nd IAHR Europe Conference, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  13. Hillebrand, G, Otto, W, Schmegg, J, Vollmer, S, Gehres, N (2015) Upgrading the suspended sediment measurement network of the German Waterways and Shipping Administration. BfG-Report Nr. 1799, Federal Institute of Hydrology, Koblenz (in German)Google Scholar
  14. Hillebrand G, Klassen I, Olsen NRB (2017) 3D CFD modelling of velocities and sediment transport in the Iffezheim hydropower reservoir. Hydrol Res 48(1):147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jia D-D, Shao X, Zhang X, Ye Y (2013) Sedimentation patterns of fine-grained particles in the dam area of the Three Gorges project: 3D numerical simulation. J Hydraul Eng 139(6):669–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Launder BE, Sharma BI (1974) Application of the energy dissipation model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc. Lett Heat Mass Trans 1(2):131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahmood K (1987) Reservoir sedimentation: impact, extent and mitigation. World Bank Technical Paper 71, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Mirbach S, Lang U (2017) Density-driven underflows with suspended solids in Lake Constance. J Soils Sediments.
  19. Noack M, Hillebrand G, Seidenkranz U, Wieprecht S (2016) Investigation of erosion stability of cohesive sediment deposition in the spillway channel of the Iffezheim barrage at the Rhine river. Hydrol Wasserbewirtsch 60(3):164–175 (in German)Google Scholar
  20. Olsen NRB (2015) Four free surface algorithms for the 3D Navier-Stokes equations. J Hydroinf 17(6):845–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Papanicolaou AN, Elhakeep M, Krallis G, Prakash S, Edinger J (2008) Sediment transport modeling review—current and future developments. J Hydraul Eng 134(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Patankar SV (1980) Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York ISBN 9780891165224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pohlert T, Hillebrand G, Breitung V (2011) Trends of persistent organic pollutants in the suspended matter of the River Rhine. Hydrol Process 25:3803–3817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Råman Vinnå L, Wüerst A, Bouffard D (2017) Physical effects of thermal pollution in lakes. Water Resour Res 53(5):3968–3987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. van Rijn LC (1984a) Sediment transport. Part II: suspended load transport. J Hydraul Eng 110(11):1613–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van Rijn LC (1984b) Sediment transport. Part I: bed load transport. J Hydraul Eng 110(10):1431–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruether N, Singh JM, Olsen NRB, Atkinson E (2005) Three-dimensional modelling of sediment transport at water intakes. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, UK. Water Manag 158:1–7Google Scholar
  28. Schlichting H (1979) Boundary layer theory. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York ISBN 978-3-662-52919-5Google Scholar
  29. Shields A (1936) Use of dimensional analysis and turbulence research for sediment transport, Preussen Research Laboratory for Water and Marine Constructions, publication no. 26, Berlin (in German)Google Scholar
  30. Stamou A, Gkesouli A (2015) Modeling settling tanks for water treatment using computational fluid dynamics. J Hydroinf 17(5):745–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thapa BS, Dahlhaug OG, Thapa B (2017) Sediment erosion induced leakage flow from guide vane clearance gap in a low specific speed Francis turbine. Renew Energy 107:253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tritthart M, Gutknecht D (2007) 3-D computation of flood processes in sharp river bends. Proc Inst Civil Eng Water Manag 160(4):233–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vidmar J, Zuliani T, Novak P, Drinčić A, Ščančar J, Milačič R (2017) Elements in water, suspended particulate matter and sediments of the Sava River. J Soils Sediments 17:1917–1927. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Winterwerp JC, van Kesteren WGM (2004) Introduction to the physics of cohesive sediment in the marine environment. Elsevier, ISBN 978-0-444-51553-7Google Scholar
  35. Zanke U (1977) Computation of fall velocities for sediments, Mitteilungen des Franzius-Instituts für Wasserbau und Küsteningenieurwesen der TU Hannover, Vol. 46 (in German)Google Scholar
  36. Zhang Q, Hillebrand G, Hoffmann T, Hinkelmann R (2017) Estimating long-term evolution of fine sediment budget in the Iffezheim reservoir using a simplified method based on classification of boundary conditions, Geophysical Research Abstracts. Vol. 19, EGU2017-9039, EGU General Assembly 2017Google Scholar
  37. Zinke P, Olsen NRB, Bogen J (2011) 3D numerical modeling of levee depositions in a Scandinavian freshwater delta. Geomorphology 129:320–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringThe Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department M3 - Groundwater, Geology, River MorphologyFederal Institute of HydrologyKoblenzGermany

Personalised recommendations