Home Driftwood blocking sensitivity on sluice gate flow
Article Open Access

Driftwood blocking sensitivity on sluice gate flow

  • Ahmed Y. Mohammed EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: December 31, 2022
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Hydraulic structures such as sluice gates are more sensible of driftwood that is transported by a river; all this debris, like a trunk, deadwood, and rootstocks, can be accumulated upstream hydraulic structures may cause many hydraulic troubles, so studded such as these phenomena more essential to prevent or reduce its effects on these structures. Many studies dealt with the impact of driftwood on scouring around piers and weirs and its hydraulics, but the studded dealt with sluice gate structures are few and still need deep studies. This study dealt with the sensitivity of driftwood blocking flow under a sluice gate. It found that a large gate opening and 50% of the maximum upstream head lead to a decreased probability of trapped index and an increasing likelihood of driftwood passage beneath the sluice gate, which causes scour if driftwood is blocked under a sluice gate, so this case must be avoided. The driftwood trap probability of rootstock is greater than the trunk, and accumulated driftwood causes an increasing upstream water depth by 15%. Increasing its volume increases trapping probability.

1 Introduction

The sluice gates are used widely in many hydraulic structures, such as dams and barrages. Floating driftwood transported by a river, especially in flood waves, such as trees, deadwood and so on, causes many hydraulic problems upstream hydraulic structures like weirs, bridge piers, and sluice gates.

Many studies dealt with sluice gate hydraulics experimentally and theoretically as well as hydraulic jump forming downstream sluice gates such as refs [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11].

Accumulating driftwood upstream hydraulic structures cause many problems in hydraulic performance and may be blocked and reduced flow area for water passage downstream structure; this causes rising upstream water level and reduced discharge throw this hydraulic structure, as well as accumulated driftwood upstream sluice gate may affect the safety of the gate. The performance of the sluice gate structure with the presence of driftwood may be affected depending on the size of the driftwood, the size of the gate opening, the upstream water level, and other sluice gate geometry. The little upstream water level and significant gate opening cause upstream vortex, which draft accumulated upstream debris gate, then passage, or blocking of gate opening which causes server hydraulic resisting.

Reference [12] studied the effect of debris blockage and its effect on the upstream water head of the ogee spillway; they found that the water head upstream increased by 15% due to debris accumulated upstream structure. Reference [13] gives a novel summary of essential points of several studies that dealt with debris on hydraulic structures. Reference [14] studied numerical simulation of debris transported by open channel flow and improved for application and development of probability methodology. The 2D and 3D models of driftwood moving in the channel are submitted by ref. [15] in an experimental model. They compared their results with numerical ones and found convergence of results in both methods that accumulated driftwood influences the flow regime. Reference [16] studied the effect of floodplain flow by forming a log jam experimentally. They found that the velocity distribution is very important to the calculated location of scour damage, and discharge increases when the increased blockage ratio reaches 20.8%. The debris effects on the hydraulic head of the piano weir were studied by ref. [17] on the hydraulic channel model. They found increased water head increases at driftwood, and accumulated driftwood upstream structure decreased weir discharge efficiency. They studied the sensitivity of driftwood blocking on piano weirs [18]. They found both the diameter and length of driftwood were affected by flow over the weir; when debris diameter reached two-third of the water head, a 50% blocking probability appeared. For low head, debris accumulated reached 70%, while this percentage decreased to 20% when the head increased. There are very few studies that dealt with the effect of debris at sluice gates; therefore, the present study provided an investigation and study of the effect of wooden trunks as well as wooden rootstocks in different lengths and diameters with different gate openings and different upstream water levels on the blocking sensitivity of sluice gate.

2 Experimental setup

Experiments were conducted in the hydraulic laboratory of the dams and water recourses engineering department at the University of Mosul in an experimental flume of 10 m long, 30 cm in width, and 45 cm in height (Figure 1). The sluice gate was made from Perspex plastic according to (the British Standard Index). The gate was 2 cm in thickness, 30 cm in width, and 30 cm in height and was installed at a distance of 5 m from the channel upstream.

Figure 1 
               The laboratory channel.
Figure 1

The laboratory channel.

Five upstream water heads from 5 to 10.1 cm and four different gate openings from 2 to 5 cm were tested.

Twelve different kinds of driftwood were used with different sizes and diameters, divided into two groups: (7) Wooden trunks range of diameters (D) from 0.2 to 2 cm and length (L) from 3 to 40 cm. Denoted as A–G Table 1 and Figure 2; (5) Rootstocks ranges of diameter from 0.4 to 1.5 cm, length from 13 to 20 cm, and rootstock spread distance (T) from 5 to 10 cm denoted as (H–L) (Table 2 and Figure 2).

Table 1

Wooden trunk dimensions

No. Case Amount (n) Diameter (D), cm Length (L), cm Volume (V) × 10−3 m3
1 A 4 2 40 0.5026
2 B 5 1.5 32 0.2827
3 C 13 1 22 0.2246
4 D 8 0.8 16 0.0643
5 E 12 0.6 15 0.0508
6 F 37 0.5 10 0.0726
7 G 50 0.2 3 0.0047
Figure 2 
               Driftwood used in experiments.
Figure 2

Driftwood used in experiments.

Table 2

Wooden rootstock dimensions

No. Case Amount (n) Diameter (D), cm Length (L), cm The distance of spread (T), cm Volume (V) × 10−3 m3
1 H 2 1 20 9 0.031
2 I 2 1.5 19 10 0.067
3 J 2 0.9 16 7 0.020
4 K 2 0.6 15 5 0.008
5 L 2 0.4 13 7 0.003

Three test series were conducted [19].

  1. Clearwater without any trunk or rootstock added.

  2. Singulars added for trunk (A–G) cases, rootstock (H–L) cases for all four different gate openings, and five other discharges were tested. The addition process in all cases was randomly located at 2–2.5 m upstream of the sluice gate.

  3. Cumulative driftwood test. Twelve different kinds of trunks and rootstocks were added sequentially without raising previous models and leaving them to accumulate.

Overall, 14 cases of testing (Figure 3; without driftwood added, points A–L and accumulated driftwood), with four different gate openings (2–5) cm and seven other upstream water heads (5–10.1) cm with more than 390 data measured collected, as shown in Table 5.

Figure 3 
               Effect of driftwood on sluice gate flow (a) without driftwood (b) with driftwood.
Figure 3

Effect of driftwood on sluice gate flow (a) without driftwood (b) with driftwood.

The dimensionless driftwood ratios L/b and D/b in Figures 4 and 5 can be used to link the relative size of the driftwood in Tables 14 to the sluice gate and channel dimensions’ Table 5.

Figure 4 
               The relation of driftwood diameter to sluice gate width for all driftwood cases.
Figure 4

The relation of driftwood diameter to sluice gate width for all driftwood cases.

Figure 5 
               The relation of driftwood length to sluice gate width for all driftwood cases.
Figure 5

The relation of driftwood length to sluice gate width for all driftwood cases.

Table 3

Wooden trunk characteristics

Dimension Diameter (D), cm Length (L), cm
Average 0.942857 19.71429
Minimum 0.2 3
Maximum 2 40
Standard deviation 0.621442 12.76341
Table 4

Wooden rootstock characteristics

Dimension Diameter (D), cm Length (L), cm Distance (T), cm
Average 0.88 16.6 7.6
Minimum 0.4 13 5
Maximum 1.5 20 10
Standard deviation 0.420714 2.880972 1.949359
Table 5

Experimental data ranges

Upstream head (H), cm Gate width (b), cm Gate opening (a), cm Driftwood cases Discharge (Q), L s−1 Froude number, (Fr)
5–10.1 30 2–5 Trunk case (A–G) 6.674–19.162 2.016–6.751
Rootstock case (H–L)

3 Theoretical methodology

In Figure 6, flow passing through a sluice gate is determined according to fluid height in the reservoir upstream and the opening of the sluice gate. So, to begin evaluating this problem, the Bernoulli equation between points 1 and 2 was used, and the following equation may be written [20]:

(1) 1 / 2 ρ v 1 2 + γ H 1 = 1 / 2 ρ v 2 2 + γ y 2 ,

where ρ is the water density (kg/m3); v is the velocity of water at Sections 1 and 2 (m/s); v 1 = Q/A 1 = Q/bH 1 and v 2 = Q/A 2 = Q/by2; Q is the water discharge (m3/s); A is the cross-sectional area of the channel (m2); b is the channel width (m); H 1 is the upstream water depth (m); y 2 is the downstream water depth (m); γ is the specific density of water (N/m3).

Figure 6 
               Applying the Bernoulli equation on the sluice gate.
Figure 6

Applying the Bernoulli equation on the sluice gate.

Then, equation (1) can be written as follows:

(2) 1 / 2 ρ ( Q / b H 1 ) 2 + γ H 1 = 1 / 2 ρ ( Q / b y 2 ) 2 + γ y 2 .

Finally, the discharge passing from the sluice gate can be calculated using the following equation:

(3) Q = y 2 b 2 g ( H 1 y 2 ) 1 ( y 2 H 1 ) 2 ,

where g is the gravitational acceleration (m/s2).

4 Results and discussions

4.1 Blocking probability

Generally, in experiments, driftwood was added at the centerline of the experimental channel at a distance between 2 and 2.5 m upstream sluice gate position; experiments show that the length of driftwood, gate opening, and water head upstream sluice gate were the most affected on flow beneath the sluice gate and driftwood trap.

  • A large gate opening and medium head increase the probability of driftwood passage beneath the sluice gate regardless of the size of the debris. In contrast, this probability increased at medium and short driftwood.

  • Decreeing gate opening with the increased water head leads to an increased probability of driftwood trapped regardless of the size of the driftwood.

  • Increasing driftwood length more sensitively to driftwood trapped than diameter with the same other experimental conditions (gate openings and upstream water head).

  • In the worst case, when driftwood is trapped beneath the sluice gate opening, this leads to severe scour downstream sluice gate; this case happened at a large driftwood size with a large gate opening and medium upstream water head beside the vortex effect at each sluice gate corner which is formed in such these conditions (large gate opening and medium head), so these cases must be avoided.

The effects of sluice gate hydraulics are because the flow with driftwood can be considered a two-phase fluid, just like nanoparticles in a flowing fluid, so the driftwood will greatly affect the flow properties [21].

4.2 Probability of driftwood trapped

All cases for driftwood (trunks and rootstocks) were tested individually by adding all cases (A–L) individually and examining the probability of the trap index P (the relation of driftwood trapped upstream sluice gate to all numbers of that driftwood added). Figures 710 represent the effect of gate openings (a) and upstream head (H), as well as driftwood length and diameter (L and D), respectively, on trap index probability for trunk cases (A–G).

Figure 7 
                  The relation of trunk length to upstream water head (L/H) to trap index (p) for cases (A–G).
Figure 7

The relation of trunk length to upstream water head (L/H) to trap index (p) for cases (A–G).

Figure 8 
                  The relation of trunk diameter to upstream water head (D/H) to trap index (p) for cases (A–G).
Figure 8

The relation of trunk diameter to upstream water head (D/H) to trap index (p) for cases (A–G).

Figure 9 
                  The relation of trunk diameter to sluice gate opening (D/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (A–G).
Figure 9

The relation of trunk diameter to sluice gate opening (D/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (A–G).

Figure 10 
                  The relation of trunk length to sluice gate opening (L/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (A–G).
Figure 10

The relation of trunk length to sluice gate opening (L/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (A–G).

Figures 7 and 8 represent the effects of the upstream head (H) as well as driftwood length (L) and diameter (D); it can be seen the most critical influence factor is the upstream head compared with other elements when (H) increasing the probability of the trap index (P) increased. These cases can be expressed in equations (4) and (5).

(4) L / H = 0.8054 P + 1.8733 ,

(5) D / H = 0.038 P + 0.0892 .

Figures 9 and 10 represent the effects of gate opening (a) as well as driftwood length (L) and diameter (D); it can be seen the most important influencing factors are (L and D) compared with gate opening because the more excellent dimensions corresponding with gate openings, when (L and D) increasing and (a) decreased the probability of the trap index (P) increased. Driftwood length and diameter are more affected compared with gate openings; these cases can be expressed in equations (6) and (7).

(6) D / a = 0.2377 P + 0.1327 ,

(7) L / a = 4.9563 P + 2.7859 .

Figures 1114 represent the effect of gate openings (a) and upstream head (H), as well as driftwood length and diameter (L and D), respectively, on trap index probability for rootstocks cases (H–L).

Figure 11 
                  The relation of rootstocks length to upstream water head (L/H) to trap index (p) for cases (H–L).
Figure 11

The relation of rootstocks length to upstream water head (L/H) to trap index (p) for cases (H–L).

Figure 12 
                  The relation of rootstocks diameter to upstream water head (D/H) to trap index (p) for cases (H–L).
Figure 12

The relation of rootstocks diameter to upstream water head (D/H) to trap index (p) for cases (H–L).

Figure 13 
                  The relation of rootstocks diameter to sluice gate opening (D/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (H–L).
Figure 13

The relation of rootstocks diameter to sluice gate opening (D/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (H–L).

Figure 14 
                  The relation of rootstocks length to sluice gate opening (L/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (H–L).
Figure 14

The relation of rootstocks length to sluice gate opening (L/a) to a trap index (p) for cases (H–L).

Figures 11 and 12 represent the effects of the upstream head (H), driftwood length (L), and diameter (D) on the trap index (P); from the figures, it can be seen the most critical influence factor is the upstream head compared with other factors, when (L/H and D/H) decreasing, respectively, the probability of the trap index increased. These cases can be expressed in equations (8) and (9).

(8) L/H = 0.4912 P + 1.4493 ,

(9) D/H = 0.019 P + 0.0708 .

When comparing equations (4) and (5) for trunks driftwood with equations (8) and (9) for rootstocks driftwood, it can be seen that P values from equations (4) and (5) are less than the values calculated from equations (8) and (9); this means the probability of the trapped index for rootstocks models greater than trunk models for the same experimental conditions because the existence of distance separated at rootstocks which increased the likelihood of the trapped index under a sluice gate flow.

Figures 13 and 14 refer to the effects of gate opening (a) rootstocks length (L) and diameter (D). It can be seen the most important influencing factors are (L and D) compared with gate opening because the more excellent dimensions correspond with gate openings. When (L/a and D/a) increase, the trap index (P) probability increases. These cases can be expressed in equations (10) and (11).

(10) D / a = 0.1677 P + 0.1619 ,

(11) L / a = 2.7434 P + 3.4032 .

In these cases, also when comparing equations (6) and (7) for trunk cases with equations (10) and (11) for rootstock cases, it can be seen that P values from equations (6) and (7) are less than the values calculated from equations (10) and (11); this means the probability of trapped for rootstocks models is greater than trunk models for the same experimental conditions because privation trunks of distance separated that existence in rootstocks. This leads to an increased probability of pass trunks beneath the sluice gate and then decreases the likelihood of being trapped compared with rootstocks.

4.3 Probability of accumulated driftwood trapped

The accumulated effects of driftwood on the trapped index (P) to the upstream head of water after and before driftwood was added (H/Hr) for all cases (A-L) are shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15 
                  The relation of accumulated driftwood trap index (p) to (H/Hr) for all cases (A-L).
Figure 15

The relation of accumulated driftwood trap index (p) to (H/Hr) for all cases (A-L).

It can be seen that the trap index increases when (H) increases; equation (12) can be expressed in this case. High upstream water levels of (H) with small gate openings (a) lead to an increased probability of trapped index, but when decreasing (H) and advanced (a) lead to reducing of (P). The likelihood of driftwood passing beneath the sluice gate increased. This case rises when (H) reaches 50% of the maximum level because two corner vortexes appear and draft driftwood under the gate; this vortex effect decreases with increased accumulated driftwood upstream gate. The accumulated driftwood upstream sluice gate leads to an increasing ratio of rising upstream water head by 15% after and before driftwood is added.

(12) H /Hr = 0.2794 P + 0.827 .

4.4 Driftwood volume effect

The driftwood volume can be calculated from equation (13) in Tables 1 and 2

(13) V = n π D 2 4 L ,

where V is the driftwood volume, D is the driftwood diameter, n is the number of driftwood added, and L is the length of driftwood.

Comparing the volume of water and volume of driftwood to find dimensionless parameters to draw it to trap probability indicates the width of the sluice gate (b), the height of the water upstream sluice gate, as well as the distance of accumulated driftwood alignment from the entrance to distance equal to water depth upstream (H), so the volume of water upstream sluice gate is similar to that of (bH 2).

The relation of driftwood volume to upstream water volume (V/bH 2) to the probability of trapped indices for all driftwood cases (trunks and rootstocks) (P) is denoted in Figure 16; it can be seen the maximum values of P occurred when H is maximum and (a) minimum for all driftwood cases and the effect of (H) is more significant than driftwood volume; so when (H) values decreased, this mean value of (V/bH 2) increased and trapped probability falling and driftwood start to pass beneath the gate opening; this can be expressed in equation (14).

(14) P = 0.0019 V / b H 2 + 0.8576 .

Figure 16 
                  The relation of (V/bH
                     2) and (P) for trunks and rootstocks.
Figure 16

The relation of (V/bH 2) and (P) for trunks and rootstocks.

5 Conclusions

Driftwood carried by a river flow includes trunks, rootstocks, and several other debris, so the trunk and rootstock model were included in this study and tested experimentally. The trap index probability (P) is defined as the number of driftwood trapped upstream sluice gate to the total number of driftwood added.

The results showed that:

  1. (P) increased when (L/H) and (D/H) decreased for both trunk and rootstock.

  2. The values for rootstock were greater than trunk because of the distance separate in the rootstock, which is trapped under sluice gate openings.

  3. (P) increased when (L/a) and (D/a) increase, so (P) values for rootstock are more significant than their values in the trunk.

  4. The accumulated driftwood upstream sluice gate leads to an increase in water head upstream sluice gate by 15%, and increasing driftwood volume leads to an increase in trap probability. Still, the effect of increasing (H) on (P) is more significant than (V).

Notations

a: Gate opening L
b: Gate width L
D: Diameter L
Fr: Froude number
H: Upstream head after the driftwood added L
Hr: Upstream head before the driftwood added L
L: Length L
n: Number of driftwoods
P: Probability of trap index
Q: Discharge L3 T−1
T: Distance of spread L
V: Volume L3


Acknowledgment

The author would like to thank the staff of the hydraulic laboratory of dams and water resources engineering department, college of the Engineering University of Mosul, for their support in completing this study.

  1. Conflict of interest: There is no conflict of interest in this manuscript.

References

[1] Habibzadeh A, Rajaratnam N, Loewen M. Characteristics of the flow field downstream of free and submerged hydraulic jumps. Proc Inst Civ Eng Water Manage. 2019;172(4):180–94. 10.1680/jwama.17.00004.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Wu S, Rajaratnam N. Solutions to rectangular sluice gate flow problems. J Irrig Drain Eng. 2015;141:1–7. 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000922.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Heydari M, Abolfathi S, Shabanlou S. Calibration of sluice gate in free and submerged flow using the simulated annealing and ant colony algorithms. J Appl Res Water Wastewater. 2018;5(1):373–80.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Yen JF, Lin CH, Tsai CT. Hydraulic characteristics and discharge control of sluice gates. J Chin Inst Eng Trans Chin Inst Eng A/Chung-Kuo K Ch’eng Hsuch K’an. 2001;24(3):301–10. 10.1080/02533839.2001.9670628.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Belaud G, Cassan L, Baume JP. Calculation of contraction coefficient under sluice gates and application to discharge measurement. J Hydraul Eng. 2009;135(12):1086–91. 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000122.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Cassan L, Belaud G. Experimental and numerical investigation of flow under sluice gates. J Hydraul Eng. 2012;138(4):367–73. 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000514.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Menon J, Mudgal BV. Experimental determination of contraction coefficient and velocity coefficient for radial gates with elliptical lips. Sādhanā. 2018;43(4):1–9. 10.1007/s12046-018-0818-x.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Mohammed AY, Khaleel MS. Gate Lip Hydraulics under Sluice Gate. Mod Instrum. 2013;2(1):16–9. 10.4236/mi.2013.21003.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Khaleel MS, Mohammed AY. A simple technique for preventing vortex with some aspects of flow under inclined sluice gates. Türk Hidrolik Derg. 2017;2(1):1–7.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Murzyn F, Chanson H. Experimental assessment of scale effects affecting two-phase flow properties in hydraulic jumps. Exp Fluids. 2008;45(3):513–21. 10.1007/s00348-008-0494-4.Search in Google Scholar

[11] Hayawi HA, Mohammed AY. Properties of hydraulic jump downstream sluice gate. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol. 2011;3(2):81–3.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Furlan P, Pfister M, Matos J, Schleiss AJ. Blockage of driftwood and resulting head increase upstream of an ogee spillway with piers. Sustainable and safe dams around the world. CRC Press. 2019. p. 730–9. 10.1201/9780429319778-63.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Schmocker L, Weitbrecht V. Driftwood: Risk analysis and engineering measures. J Hydraul Eng. 2013;139(7):683–95. 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000728.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Kihara N, Kaida H. Applicability of tracking simulations for probabilistic assessment of floating debris collision in tsunami inundation flow. Coast Eng J. 2020;62:69–84. 10.1080/21664250.2019.1706221.Search in Google Scholar

[15] Kimura I, Kitazono K. Effects of the driftwood Richardson number and applicability of a 3D–2D model to heavy wood jamming around obstacles. Environ Fluid Mech. 2019;20:503–25. 10.1007/s10652-019-09709-6.Search in Google Scholar

[16] Okamoto T, Takebayashi H, Sanjou M, Suzuki R, Toda K. Log jam formation at bridges and the effect on floodplain flow: A flume experiment. J Flood Risk Manage. 2020;13:1–13. 10.1111/jfr3.12562.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Pfister M, Schleiss AJ, Tullis B. Effect of driftwood on the hydraulic head of Piano Key weirs. Labyrinth and Piano Key weirs II; 2013. p. 255–64.10.1201/b15985-35Search in Google Scholar

[18] Pfister M, Capobianco D, Tullis B, Asce M, Schleiss AJ. Debris-Blocking Sensitivity of Piano Key Weirs under Reservoir-Type Approach Flow. J Hydraul Eng. 2013;139(11):1134–41. 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000780.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Bezzola GR, Hegg C. Event analysis of the flood of 2005. Part I: Processes, damages, and first classification, Ger. Environ. Knowledge, Swiss Agency Environ. Swiss Fed. Inst. For. Snow Landsc. Res. WSL, Birmensd (2007).Search in Google Scholar

[20] Liu L, Liu YQ, Li YY, Shen Y, He JH. Dropping in electrospinning process: a general strategy for fabrication of microspheres. Therm Sci. 2021;25(2 Part B):1295–303.10.2298/TSCI191228025LSearch in Google Scholar

[21] He JH, Abd Elazem NY. The Carbon Nanotube-Embedded Boundary Layer Theory for Energy Harvesting. Facta Universitatis. Series: Mechanical Engineering; 2022.10.22190/FUME220221011HSearch in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-05-08
Revised: 2022-10-25
Accepted: 2022-11-06
Published Online: 2022-12-31

© 2022 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Performance of a horizontal well in a bounded anisotropic reservoir: Part I: Mathematical analysis
  3. Key competences for Transport 4.0 – Educators’ and Practitioners’ opinions
  4. COVID-19 lockdown impact on CERN seismic station ambient noise levels
  5. Constraint evaluation and effects on selected fracture parameters for single-edge notched beam under four-point bending
  6. Minimizing form errors in additive manufacturing with part build orientation: An optimization method for continuous solution spaces
  7. The method of selecting adaptive devices for the needs of drivers with disabilities
  8. Control logic algorithm to create gaps for mixed traffic: A comprehensive evaluation
  9. Numerical prediction of cavitation phenomena on marine vessel: Effect of the water environment profile on the propulsion performance
  10. Boundary element analysis of rotating functionally graded anisotropic fiber-reinforced magneto-thermoelastic composites
  11. Effect of heat-treatment processes and high temperature variation of acid-chloride media on the corrosion resistance of B265 (Ti–6Al–4V) titanium alloy in acid-chloride solution
  12. Influence of selected physical parameters on vibroinsulation of base-exited vibratory conveyors
  13. System and eco-material design based on slow-release ferrate(vi) combined with ultrasound for ballast water treatment
  14. Experimental investigations on transmission of whole body vibration to the wheelchair user's body
  15. Determination of accident scenarios via freely available accident databases
  16. Elastic–plastic analysis of the plane strain under combined thermal and pressure loads with a new technique in the finite element method
  17. Design and development of the application monitoring the use of server resources for server maintenance
  18. The LBC-3 lightweight encryption algorithm
  19. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on road traffic accident forecasting in Poland and Slovakia
  20. Development and implementation of disaster recovery plan in stock exchange industry in Indonesia
  21. Pre-determination of prediction of yield-line pattern of slabs using Voronoi diagrams
  22. Urban air mobility and flying cars: Overview, examples, prospects, drawbacks, and solutions
  23. Stadiums based on curvilinear geometry: Approximation of the ellipsoid offset surface
  24. Driftwood blocking sensitivity on sluice gate flow
  25. Solar PV power forecasting at Yarmouk University using machine learning techniques
  26. 3D FE modeling of cable-stayed bridge according to ICE code
  27. Review Articles
  28. Partial discharge calibrator of a cavity inside high-voltage insulator
  29. Health issues using 5G frequencies from an engineering perspective: Current review
  30. Modern structures of military logistic bridges
  31. Retraction
  32. Retraction note: COVID-19 lockdown impact on CERN seismic station ambient noise levels
  33. Special Issue: Trends in Logistics and Production for the 21st Century - Part II
  34. Solving transportation externalities, economic approaches, and their risks
  35. Demand forecast for parking spaces and parking areas in Olomouc
  36. Rescue of persons in traffic accidents on roads
  37. Special Issue: ICRTEEC - 2021 - Part II
  38. Switching transient analysis for low voltage distribution cable
  39. Frequency amelioration of an interconnected microgrid system
  40. Wireless power transfer topology analysis for inkjet-printed coil
  41. Analysis and control strategy of standalone PV system with various reference frames
  42. Special Issue: AESMT
  43. Study of emitted gases from incinerator of Al-Sadr hospital in Najaf city
  44. Experimentally investigating comparison between the behavior of fibrous concrete slabs with steel stiffeners and reinforced concrete slabs under dynamic–static loads
  45. ANN-based model to predict groundwater salinity: A case study of West Najaf–Kerbala region
  46. Future short-term estimation of flowrate of the Euphrates river catchment located in Al-Najaf Governorate, Iraq through using weather data and statistical downscaling model
  47. Utilization of ANN technique to estimate the discharge coefficient for trapezoidal weir-gate
  48. Experimental study to enhance the productivity of single-slope single-basin solar still
  49. An empirical formula development to predict suspended sediment load for Khour Al-Zubair port, South of Iraq
  50. A model for variation with time of flexiblepavement temperature
  51. Analytical and numerical investigation of free vibration for stepped beam with different materials
  52. Identifying the reasons for the prolongation of school construction projects in Najaf
  53. Spatial mixture modeling for analyzing a rainfall pattern: A case study in Ireland
  54. Flow parameters effect on water hammer stability in hydraulic system by using state-space method
  55. Experimental study of the behaviour and failure modes of tapered castellated steel beams
  56. Water hammer phenomenon in pumping stations: A stability investigation based on root locus
  57. Mechanical properties and freeze-thaw resistance of lightweight aggregate concrete using artificial clay aggregate
  58. Compatibility between delay functions and highway capacity manual on Iraqi highways
  59. The effect of expanded polystyrene beads (EPS) on the physical and mechanical properties of aerated concrete
  60. The effect of cutoff angle on the head pressure underneath dams constructed on soils having rectangular void
  61. An experimental study on vibration isolation by open and in-filled trenches
  62. Designing a 3D virtual test platform for evaluating prosthetic knee joint performance during the walking cycle
  63. Special Issue: AESMT-2 - Part I
  64. Optimization process of resistance spot welding for high-strength low-alloy steel using Taguchi method
  65. Cyclic performance of moment connections with reduced beam sections using different cut-flange profiles
  66. Time overruns in the construction projects in Iraq: Case study on investigating and analyzing the root causes
  67. Contribution of lift-to-drag ratio on power coefficient of HAWT blade for different cross-sections
  68. Geotechnical correlations of soil properties in Hilla City – Iraq
  69. Improve the performance of solar thermal collectors by varying the concentration and nanoparticles diameter of silicon dioxide
  70. Enhancement of evaporative cooling system in a green-house by geothermal energy
  71. Destructive and nondestructive tests formulation for concrete containing polyolefin fibers
  72. Quantify distribution of topsoil erodibility factor for watersheds that feed the Al-Shewicha trough – Iraq using GIS
  73. Seamless geospatial data methodology for topographic map: A case study on Baghdad
  74. Mechanical properties investigation of composite FGM fabricated from Al/Zn
  75. Causes of change orders in the cycle of construction project: A case study in Al-Najaf province
  76. Optimum hydraulic investigation of pipe aqueduct by MATLAB software and Newton–Raphson method
  77. Numerical analysis of high-strength reinforcing steel with conventional strength in reinforced concrete beams under monotonic loading
  78. Deriving rainfall intensity–duration–frequency (IDF) curves and testing the best distribution using EasyFit software 5.5 for Kut city, Iraq
  79. Designing of a dual-functional XOR block in QCA technology
  80. Producing low-cost self-consolidation concrete using sustainable material
  81. Performance of the anaerobic baffled reactor for primary treatment of rural domestic wastewater in Iraq
  82. Enhancement isolation antenna to multi-port for wireless communication
  83. A comparative study of different coagulants used in treatment of turbid water
  84. Field tests of grouted ground anchors in the sandy soil of Najaf, Iraq
  85. New methodology to reduce power by using smart street lighting system
  86. Optimization of the synergistic effect of micro silica and fly ash on the behavior of concrete using response surface method
  87. Ergodic capacity of correlated multiple-input–multiple-output channel with impact of transmitter impairments
  88. Numerical studies of the simultaneous development of forced convective laminar flow with heat transfer inside a microtube at a uniform temperature
  89. Enhancement of heat transfer from solar thermal collector using nanofluid
  90. Improvement of permeable asphalt pavement by adding crumb rubber waste
  91. Study the effect of adding zirconia particles to nickel–phosphorus electroless coatings as product innovation on stainless steel substrate
  92. Waste aggregate concrete properties using waste tiles as coarse aggregate and modified with PC superplasticizer
  93. CuO–Cu/water hybrid nonofluid potentials in impingement jet
  94. Satellite vibration effects on communication quality of OISN system
  95. Special Issue: Annual Engineering and Vocational Education Conference - Part III
  96. Mechanical and thermal properties of recycled high-density polyethylene/bamboo with different fiber loadings
  97. Special Issue: Advanced Energy Storage
  98. Cu-foil modification for anode-free lithium-ion battery from electronic cable waste
  99. Review of various sulfide electrolyte types for solid-state lithium-ion batteries
  100. Optimization type of filler on electrochemical and thermal properties of gel polymer electrolytes membranes for safety lithium-ion batteries
  101. Pr-doped BiFeO3 thin films growth on quartz using chemical solution deposition
  102. An environmentally friendly hydrometallurgy process for the recovery and reuse of metals from spent lithium-ion batteries, using organic acid
  103. Production of nickel-rich LiNi0.89Co0.08Al0.03O2 cathode material for high capacity NCA/graphite secondary battery fabrication
  104. Special Issue: Sustainable Materials Production and Processes
  105. Corrosion polarization and passivation behavior of selected stainless steel alloys and Ti6Al4V titanium in elevated temperature acid-chloride electrolytes
  106. Special Issue: Modern Scientific Problems in Civil Engineering - Part II
  107. The modelling of railway subgrade strengthening foundation on weak soils
  108. Special Issue: Automation in Finland 2021 - Part II
  109. Manufacturing operations as services by robots with skills
  110. Foundations and case studies on the scalable intelligence in AIoT domains
  111. Safety risk sources of autonomous mobile machines
  112. Special Issue: 49th KKBN - Part I
  113. Residual magnetic field as a source of information about steel wire rope technical condition
  114. Monitoring the boundary of an adhesive coating to a steel substrate with an ultrasonic Rayleigh wave
  115. Detection of early stage of ductile and fatigue damage presented in Inconel 718 alloy using instrumented indentation technique
  116. Identification and characterization of the grinding burns by eddy current method
  117. Special Issue: ICIMECE 2020 - Part II
  118. Selection of MR damper model suitable for SMC applied to semi-active suspension system by using similarity measures
Downloaded on 11.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/eng-2022-0384/html
Scroll to top button