Search

A 3D computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model is used to simulate mixing of an overflow plume within 400 m from a trailing suction hopper dredger (TSHD). The simulations are compared with new field measurements. It is the first time simulations of overflow dredging plumes are compared in such detail to field measurements this close to a TSHD. Seven cases with a large variety in overflow flux and plume characteristics are used. Measured maximum suspended sediment concentrations (SSC) vary between 30 and 500 mg/l and fluxes vary between 0.7% and 20% of the total overflow flux; the CFD model has, subject to the limitations of the field data, been shown to reproduce this in a satisfactory way. The model gives better understanding of important near field processes, which helps to assess the frequency, duration and intensity of stresses like turbidity and sedimentation needed to find the environmental impact of dredging projects.

Detailed Large Eddy Simulation (LES) results are presented on near field mixing of overflow dredging plumes generated at a Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger (TSHD). Special attention is given to the generation of a surface plume. A surface plume is that part of the dredging plume which separates from the main plume body and ends up near the free surface. A surface plume can stay suspended for hours and during this time it can be transported to ecological sensitive areas around a dredging site. Hence, for a correct environmental impact assessment of a dredging project with TSHD’s it is important to understand near field mixing and thus obtain a correct estimate for the source term of suspended sediments formed by the surface plume. The detailed LES are used to investigate systematically the influence of dredging speed, overflow location, propeller and pulsing frequency (caused by ship motions) on near field mixing of dredging plumes and the generation of a surface plume. LES results are validated with experimental results. The investigated variations have significant influence on the development of the dredging overflow plume in general and surface plume in particular. With normal dredging speed the surface plume varied between 0 and 2 % of the overflow flux with maximum time averaged prototype-SSC (suspended sediment concentration) levels of 1–31 mg/l at the free surface at a horizontal distance $$x/D\,=\,100$$ ( $$D$$ is initial plume diameter). With high dredging speed the surface plume varied between 0.2 and 18 % with maximum time averaged prototype-SSC levels of 10–352 mg/l at the free surface. The large range in surface plume percentage indicates the importance of detailed near field modelling including all significant processes for a correct estimate of the source term of suspended sediment from a dredging plume. All results are obtained without influence of a bed, hence in shallow areas the amount of surface plume could be larger.

Obtaining accurate and wiggle free Large Eddy Simulation (LES) results of high Re configurations with obstacles is a challenge, especially when the resolution is moderate. This study focusses on LES of buoyant jet in crossflow (JICF). The zone in front of the jet is sensitive for wiggle formation because the jet acts as an obstacle. Only 10 grid cells over the diameter of the jet at outflow are used in order to be able to simulate very large mixing areas with limited CPU power. The resolution increases rapidly to 30–50 cells over the diameter of the bend over jet further downstream. This study tests an artificial viscosity advection scheme with sixth order dissipation, called AV6, which dissipates wiggles adequately with almost no dissipation on physical relevant scales. This desirable behaviour is demonstrated by a Fourier analysis of the Advection-Diffusion equation and turbulent flow simulations. AV6 is a mix of, and improvement over, the artificial viscosity scheme of Jameson et al. (1981) with fourth order dissipation, here called AV4, and a fifth order upwind scheme (UPW5) of Wicker and Skamarock (Mon Weather Rev 130:2088, 2002). AV6 is a robust, simple and easy to implement advection scheme and the total computational time of a simulation with AV6 is only a few percent more than with the second order central scheme (CDS2). Three realistic turbulent flow problems, relevant for buoyant JICF, are used to compare the performance of AV6 with CDS2, AV4 and UPW5 with each other and with experiments. Different grid resolutions and sub-grid scale models are used. The three test cases are a non-buoyant JICF, a buoyant jet in weak coflow, and a buoyant JICF. Of all tested advection schemes, AV6 produces best results and is preferred for LES of buoyant JICF.

This paper presents large eddy simulations (LES) and experimental results of buoyant jets in cross-flow (JICF). Mixing behavior of buoyant JICF is governed by the velocity ratio (γ) and the jet Richardson number (Ri). Four buoyant JICF cases are studied with 0.68

Frequency, duration and intensity of stresses like turbidity and sedimentation caused by dredging must be known to determine the environmental impact of dredging projects. These stresses depend on the amount of sediment spill from a dredger and on how much of this spill still is in suspension near environmentally sensitive areas. Near-field mixing close to a dredger influences the deposition behaviour of the sediment spill. This is investigated systematically with computational fluid dynamics simulations for 136 different conditions of trailing suction hopper dredger overflow sediment plume mixing. Most important influences are found for the ambient depth and the crossflow velocity (vector sum of the dredging speed and the ambient velocity), which can result in a completely different suspended sediment source flux behind the dredger. The simulation results are translated into mathematical relations to predict the suspended sediment source flux without computational effort.