Submitted:
15 March 2024
Posted:
15 March 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Physical Figure of Suspension of Epipelic Algae Group
3.2. Establishment of the Critical Theoretical Formula for the Suspension of Epipelic Algae Group
3.2.1. Analysis of Transport Capacity of Epipelic Algae Group
3.2.2. Analysis of Influencing Factors on the Transport Velocity of Epipelic Algae Group and Verification of Model Test
4. Discussions
4.1. Research Results of Longitudinal Transport Velocity along the Sidewall
4.2. Study on the Influence of Wind on Transport
4.3. Study on the Influence of Water Flow Characteristics on Transport
4.4. Research Results of Gathering Place Prediction
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Shang Xuemei, Lou Angang, Sun Xuejuan, et al. Numerical simulation of petroleum hydrocarbons transport in Bohai Sea and the influences on water quality. Marine Environmental Science, 2015, 31, 58–65. [Google Scholar]
- He Leping, Wang Zefan, Hu Qijun, et al. On the oil leakage and diffusion regularity for the underground buried oil pipelines. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2019, 19, 1232–1239. [Google Scholar]
- Huang Hailong, Wang Zhen. Numerical analysis of suspended sediment diffusion caused by underwater excavation. Port & Waterway Engineering, 2015, 505, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
- Mi Tan, Yao Jian. Simulation of Pollutant Diffusion in Y-type River Confluence. Environmental Science & Technology, 2020, 43, 9–16. [Google Scholar]
- Li Yafeng, Wu Jianbo, Cheng Hao. Simulation of Pollutant Diffusion in Tanghe Reservoir Based on EFDC Model. Journal of Shenyang Jianzhu University (Natural Science), 2022, 38, 945–952. [Google Scholar]
- Shi Baoshan, Hou Jingming, Wang Junhui, et al. Simulation of pollutant transport in sudden water pollution accident based on GAST model. Engineering Journal of Wuhan University, 2022, 55, 1112–1119. [Google Scholar]
- Tao Ya, Lei Kun, Xia Jianxin. Main hydrodynamic factors identification for pollutant transport in sudden water pollution accident in Shenzhen Bay. Advances in Water Science, 2017, 28, 888–897. [Google Scholar]
- Manel G, Gabriel J, Manuel E, et al. A management system for accidental water pollution risk in a harbor: the Barcelona case study. Journal of Marine Systems 2011, 88, 60–73. [CrossRef]
- Li Haifeng, Sun Sanxiang. Experimental study on the transport characteristics of pollutants on the underlying surface covered by plants. Yellow River, 2023, 45, 79–81. [Google Scholar]
- Fang Haoze, Yang Zhonghua. Effects of submerged vegetation and bed absorption boundary on pollutant transport in wetland. Advances in Water Science, 2023, 34, 126–133. [Google Scholar]
- Pan Li, Zhao Lianjun, Zhang Mingwu, et al. Experimental Study of the Hydrodynamics of an Open Channel with Algae Attached to the Side Wall. Water, 2023, 15, 2921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong Haibin, Sun Zhaohua, Chen Li, et al. Analysis of the Effects of Varying Density in Wharf Groups on River Hydrodynamics and Pollutant Transport: A Case Study in Wuhan Reach. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2021, 30, 2205–2216. [Google Scholar]
- Yu Chong, Ren Chunping. An experimental study on horizontal two-dimensional transport and diffusivity of dye under irregular waves in surf zone. Marine Environmental Science, 2021, 40, 34–40. [Google Scholar]
- Shu Yehua, Gao Chenchen. Numerical simulation of wind-driven current and pollutant transport and diffusion in Taihu Lake. Water Resources Protection, 2021, 37, 120–127. [Google Scholar]
- Wang Huilin, Li Shuolin, Zhu Zhengtao, Huai Wenxin. Analyzing solute transport in modeled wetland flows under surface wind and bed absorption conditions. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2020, 30, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao Guixia, Gao Xueping. Influence of turbulent disturbance on algae in the large shallow lake; Tianjin University: Tianjin, China, 2020; pp. 1–161. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu Jinge, Liu Xin, Deng Jiancai, et al. Pollutant transport rates in the rivers around western Lake Taihu. Journal of Lake Sciences, 2018, 30, 1509–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang Yinghao, Lai Xijun, Zhang Lin, et al. Influence of aquatic vegetation on flow structure under wind-driven waves: a case study in Lake Taihu (China) with two typical submerged vegetations. Advances in Water Science, 2020, 31, 441–449. [Google Scholar]
- Ji Daobin, Li Guojing, Yang Zhengjian, Ma Jun, Huang Yuling, Liu Defu. Water Transport Capacity for Algal Bloom in Tributaries of Three Gorges Resevoir. Water Resources and Power, 2013, 31, 75–77. [Google Scholar]
- Magdalena M, Musielak, Leekarp-Boss, et al. Nutrient transport and acquisition by diatom chains in a moving fluid. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 2009, 638, 401–421. [CrossRef]
- Galabov V, Kavortche A, Marinski J. Simulation of tanker accidents in the bay of Burgas, using hydrodynamic model. Proceedings of the International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying, Geology and Mining, Ecology and Management, 2012, 3. [Google Scholar]









| Flow rate (m3/s) | 36.53 | 68.03 | 102.04 | 220.84 | 301.69 | |
| the mainstream velocity (m/s) | 1.25 | 1.36 | 1.48 | 1.75 | 1.89 | |
| Length×Width of algae group | Thickness of algae group | The percentage of the transport velocity of the epipelic algae group to the mainstream velocity (%) | ||||
| 3m×3m | 3mm | 98.25 | 99.89 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.24 |
| 6mm | 99.44 | 99.39 | 100.02 | 100.00 | 98.13 | |
| 8mm | 99.51 | 96.01 | 97.97 | 92.42 | 95.12 | |
| 6m×3m | 3mm | 100.35 | 100.12 | 97.82 | 100.10 | 98.94 |
| 6mm | 92.97 | 100.12 | 97.13 | 98.73 | 97.80 | |
| 8mm | 95.05 | 97.18 | 97.97 | 97.71 | 97.36 | |
| 6m×6m | 3mm | 99.20 | 97.63 | 96.54 | 99.26 | 96.71 |
| 6mm | 92.00 | 85.13 | 97.39 | 96.20 | 90.56 | |
| 8mm | 88.00 | 83.31 | 94.17 | 95.91 | 94.30 | |
| 9m×6m | 3mm | 96.00 | 99.39 | 99.32 | 93.80 | 90.66 |
| 6mm | 92.00 | 85.40 | 94.01 | 91.78 | 96.39 | |
| 8mm | 88.00 | 80.98 | 92.06 | 94.56 | 98.68 | |
| 9m×9m | 3mm | 93.60 | 95.70 | 98.86 | 86.94 | 96.28 |
| 6mm | 88.00 | 85.40 | 92.21 | 85.20 | 95.24 | |
| 8mm | 88.00 | 82.45 | 88.51 | 86.78 | 96.49 | |
| 15m×15m | 3mm | 92.80 | 94.23 | 94.59 | 92.24 | 86.51 |
| 6mm | 88.00 | 88.34 | 88.51 | 82.65 | 85.66 | |
| 8mm | 81.60 | 89.08 | 87.84 | 95.13 | 83.28 | |
| 21m×15m | 3mm | 88.00 | 92.02 | 94.59 | 94.75 | 84.66 |
| 6mm | 72.00 | 80.98 | 86.49 | 87.92 | 80.43 | |
| 8mm | 48.00 | 80.98 | 81.08 | 94.27 | 79.37 | |
| 18m×18m | 3mm | 72.00 | 88.34 | 94.59 | 91.43 | 83.60 |
| 6mm | 72.00 | 73.62 | 81.08 | 77.14 | 82.96 | |
| 8mm | 56.00 | 66.26 | 81.08 | 74.29 | 78.89 | |
| 30m×18m | 3mm | 40.00 | 80.98 | 91.22 | 91.43 | 85.82 |
| 6mm | 32.00 | 58.89 | 67.57 | 74.29 | 87.91 | |
| 8mm | 32.00 | 58.89 | 67.57 | 68.57 | 80.06 | |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).