Hello. First timer here on this forum. Thank you in advance!
I have a model setup completely with conduit pipe and it features multiple outfalls with MES's (no headwalls). There are also a few interconnected runs with MES's (no headwalls). These pipes are submerged year round. Is it more accurate to model these as a culvert with an MES versus straight conduit?
Krystle,
I assume "MES" means Mitered End Section, referring to the shape of the end of the pipe. If you model these as conduits without a headwall and without the "is culvert?" option, then additional headlosses from resistance through the MES would not be accounted for. Even if there is no concrete "headwall" structure around the mitered end section, there may still be losses through it, and MES is one of the standard headwall types from the HDS-5 standard: "Mitered – Mitered inlets are shaped to conform to the embankment fill slope."
If you believe such losses will be minimal, then you may decide that it is acceptable to omit them. If you believe they may be significant to the analysis, then you can use the headwall element to model them. There is an illustration of such a headwall in the following article: Modeling Reference - Headwalls
Regards,
Jesse DringoliTechnical Support Manager, OpenFlowsBentley Communities Site AdministratorBentley Systems, Inc.
Answer Verified By: Krystle Weems
Jesse,
Yes, your assumption is correct. Thank you for the summary. This is what I was assuming. I will likely model the two scenarios and compare as additional support.
Have a nice day,
Krystle