###### Abstract
The adequacy of the water flow rate that passes through the bar screen is crucial in ensuring effective retention of solid waste by the main screen. It is important to maintain a balance where the flow rate is high enough to prevent a decrease in water head, avoid clogging of the bars, prevent debris from passing through the screen, and prevent excessive deformation of the screen [15]. The efficiency of the bar screen was significantly decreased when subjected to the passage of water at elevated flow rates. Hence, it is important to achieve an optimal sewage flow rate that enhances the screening process while minimizing any harm to the bar screen and reducing the water height in the channel [16]. [PERSON] et al. conducted a comprehensive structural analysis aimed at predicting the distribution of stress and overall deformation experienced by individual pins when subjected to different kinds of loadings [17]. An analysis was conducted on a rake pin design with a rib under various loadings. The results of the analysis revealed that the design exhibited enhanced stress distribution and exhibited little deformation. One drawback of the study by [PERSON] et al. is that they studied the rake in isolation [17]. Therefore, the full complexity of the situation has not been captured in their study. The authors reached the conclusion that the central area has the highest susceptibility to rupture under each loading type. [PERSON] et al. optimized the design of a bar screen used for removing large sediments and provided recommendations regarding the ideal spacing between bars and the appropriate clearance height [18]. These optimal parameters were determined through individual tests of the bar screen under steady discharge conditions while varying the intensity of sediment supply. However, a limitation of their study was that it lacked any movement mechanism to control the flow of large and small solids in the channel. Further, in their study, there was no rake mechanism to lift solid waste from the bar screen. [PERSON] and [PERSON] examined the effect of the cross-sectional area of the floating waste on sediment transport across an inclined bar screen [19]. They found that when floating waste obstructed 20% of the flow area, it led to a 50% reduction in sediment transport. This suggests that the floating waste volume is essential when designing inclined bar screens. However, despite their primary focus on less dense waste, a limitation of their screens was the presence of a gap below the bar screen, which meant that the sediments could not be effectively regulated. Further, a mechanism was lacking for lifting the floating waste. [PERSON] et al. used the ALE approach to model and solve fluid flow due to the screening mechanism. The authors considered a 2D model comprising a novel rotating sub-screen and the rake [7]. The main screen was ignored due to computational limitations. The sub-screen was attached to the floor of the flowing stream using a pivot, which enabled it to rotate. Hence, different configurations of the sub-screen and the rake (when the two were in contact versus when the two were not in contact) in the screening process were considered. The authors concluded that the bar screen is vulnerable to sewage water flow when the sub-screen and the rake are not in contact. It is noted that the study of [PERSON] et al. [7] possesses certain limitations, mainly due to its focus on 2D analysis. Since their analysis is 2D, the flow impingement in their study is considered on a single bar within the sub-screen and a single rake pin within the rake assembly. The collective contribution of the multiple sub-screen bars or the rake pins pertaining to the 3D geometry could not be considered in their study. Moreover, the study by [PERSON] et al. [7] presumed plane stress conditions due to its 2D nature. In contrast, a 3D analysis would account for the full geometric complexity of the structure, particularly in regions with significant stress gradients.