Evaluation of Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Modelstitle

Evaluation of Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Modelstitle
Author: Claire S. Nichols
Publisher:
Total Pages:
Release: 2005
Genre:
ISBN:

Download Evaluation of Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Modelstitle Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

Abstract: Widespread beach erosion is threatening coastal environments making coastal engineering, especially sediment transport, a rising field of interest. An improved understanding of sediment transport will help us to combat coastal threats such as beach erosion, harbor siltation, submerged object scour, and coastal structure failure. In coastal environments sediment is transported by both currents and waves. This environment is complicated because waves and currents interact in a way that does not allow for a linear sum of their separate behaviors. In this effort, the wave-current bottom boundary layer physics are examined with several applied engineering models and with a more sophisticated numerical model. The models are evaluated with the mean bed stress, a parameter used for the bottom dissipation calculations in circulation models, and the peak bed stress, a parameter used for quantifying sediment transport. The numerical model, Dune, used in these calculations is a quasi-three dimensional, non-hydrostatic numerical model. The model resolves the relevant dynamics of wave and current boundary layers over smooth and rough movable sand beds and includes models for the two modes of sediment transport, bed load and suspended load ((Fredsøe et al., 1999)). Model calculations were performed for 7 wave periods, 20 wave velocities, 10 current velocities, and 2 wave-current angles. The calculations were compared with three models currently used in engineering practice (Grant-Madsen (1994), Soulsby (1993), Styles- Glenn (2000)). Predictions of the mean and peak bed stress by Dune and the three wave-current boundary layer models are generally of comparable magnitude. However, predictions of the mean bed stress by all three engineering models diverge from Dune when the wave velocity is greater than the current velocity. An obliquely approaching current does not have a significant effect on the peak bed stress, but does affect the mean bed stress under large wave forcing. Predictions of the peak bed stress by the Grant-Madsen, and Styles-Glenn models are consistent with the Dune simulations at large wave periods, but are larger than the Dune simulations for the smaller wave periods, indicating a greater sensitivity to inertial effects produced by the waves. These results show that there exists model divergence when the unsteady wave forcing is larger than the mean forcing. This summer the models will be evaluated with field observations obtained in a large-scale wave flume.

Simple Models for Turbulent Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Flow

Simple Models for Turbulent Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Flow
Author: Alison I. Sleath
Publisher:
Total Pages: 380
Release: 2004
Genre:
ISBN:

Download Simple Models for Turbulent Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Flow Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

This study presents the theoretical formulations and applications of simple models for turbulent wave-current bottom boundary layer flow. Eddy viscosity formulations are presented for each model in order to analytically solve the governing equations for the bottom boundary layer. Approximations and procedures for obtaining practical solutions of the current velocity profile are presented for the two-layer Madsen-Salles (1998) and three-layer Barreto-Acobe (2001) flow models. Bottom roughness and ripple geometry models are developed for each model using fixed bed laboratory data and movable bed laboratory and field data. Wave attenuation measurements and current profile data are used in order to investigate the bottom roughness length scale for the cases of pure waves, waves in the presence of a current, and currents in the presence of waves. Wave and sediment characteristics are used to formulate a model for wave-generated ripples based on available laboratory and field data. The two-layer Madsen-Salles (1998) and three-layer Barreto-Acobe (2001) flow models are applied in conjunction with the ripple geometry and roughness models for the cases of known and unknown ripple geometry, and an assessment of expected accuracy of application of the models is presented.

Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Interactions

Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Interactions
Author: Donya P. Frank
Publisher:
Total Pages: 146
Release: 2008
Genre: Numerical analysis
ISBN:

Download Wave-current Bottom Boundary Layer Interactions Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

Abstract: Wave-current bottom boundary layer interactions over flat and rippled beds are examined using a quasi-three-dimensional non-hydrostatic numerical model, Dune. Dune solves the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations with the k-! second-order turbulence closure scheme. The model is forced with free stream wave and mean flows approaching the two-dimensional topography at a given angle. Simulations are performed over both flat and rippled beds for a range of wave and current forcing conditions. The resulting non-dimensional mean bed stress, typically used to parameterize energy dissipation in ocean circulation models, as well as, the peak bed stress, used to quantify sediment transport, are assessed. The simulations are then compared with three applied engineering wave-current bottom boundary layer models (Madsen, 1994; Soulsby, 1997; Styles and Glenn, 2000). Dune predicts that an obliquely approaching current does not significantly impact the peak bed stress, but will affect the mean bed stress under large wave forcing. Predictions of the mean and peak bed stresses by Dune and the engineering models are generally of comparable magnitude on a flat bed, with the exception of cases with large wave inertia. However, the engineering models fail to capture the predicted cross-shore variability of the bed stresses at positions along the ripple.

One-Dimensional Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Model Comparison: Specific Eddy Viscosity and Turbulence Closure Models

One-Dimensional Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Model Comparison: Specific Eddy Viscosity and Turbulence Closure Models
Author:
Publisher:
Total Pages: 5
Release: 2004
Genre:
ISBN:

Download One-Dimensional Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Model Comparison: Specific Eddy Viscosity and Turbulence Closure Models Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

Six one-dimensional-vertical wave bottom boundary layer models are analyzed based on different methods for estimating the turbulent eddy viscosity: Laminar, linear, parabolic, k-one equation turbulence closure, k-e-two equation turbulence closure, and k-w-two equation turbulence closure. Resultant velocity profiles, bed shear stresses, and turbulent kinetic energy are compared to laboratory data of oscillatory flow over smooth and rough beds. Bed shear stress estimates for the smooth bed case were most closely predicted by the k-w model. Normalized errors between model predictions and measurements of velocity profiles over the entire computational domain collected at 15 intervals for one-half a wave cycle show that overall the linear model was most accurate. The least accurate were the laminar and k-s models. Normalized errors between model predictions and turbulence kinetic energy profiles showed that the k-w model was most accurate. Based on these findings, when the smallest overall velocity profile prediction error is required, the processing requirements and error analysis suggest that the linear eddy viscosity model is adequate. However, if accurate estimates of bed shear stress and TKE are required then, of the models tested, the k-w model should be used.

Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Models for Smooth and Rough Beds

Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Models for Smooth and Rough Beds
Author:
Publisher:
Total Pages: 22
Release: 2003
Genre:
ISBN:

Download Wave Bottom Boundary Layer Models for Smooth and Rough Beds Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

Seven one-dimensional wave bottom boundary layer models have been analyzed based on different methods for estimating the turbulent eddy viscosity (laminar, linear, linear-exponential, parabolic. k-one-equation turbulence closure, k-epsilon-two-equation turbulence closure, and k-omega-two-equation turbulence closure). Two generic test cases displayed similar velocity profiles for all (he models with the exception of the laminar model. Boundary layer and sheer stress estimates, however, did show some differences. The linear and parabolic models predicted bed shear stress twice as large as the k-omega model and 25 percent larger than the k or k-epsilon models. Phase leads between the predicted bed shear stress and the free-stream velocity matched expectations with the laminar case leading by 45 degrees and the other models predicting a phase lead of the shear stress maxima between 12 and 18 degrees with respect to the free-stream velocity maximum. Comparisons to laboratory data on smooth and rough beds showed that overall the linear model was slightly more accurate than the parabolic linear-exponential. k, and k-omega models. The least accurate were the laminar and k-epsilon models. Based on the two laboratory simulations (forced by a 9.72-s sinusoidal wave form with an amplitude of 2 m s( -1)). it is shown that the extra computational effort required for the turbulence closure schemes does not afford an improvement in predictive capability in a one-dimensional boundary layer model. Therefore. it is recommended that the linear or parabolic model be used to rapidly determine flow characteristics for one-dimensional studies of the wave bottom boundary layer.

Turbulent Combined Wave-current Boundary Layer Model for Application in Coastal Waters

Turbulent Combined Wave-current Boundary Layer Model for Application in Coastal Waters
Author: Chelsea Joy Humbyrd
Publisher:
Total Pages: 157
Release: 2012
Genre:
ISBN:

Download Turbulent Combined Wave-current Boundary Layer Model for Application in Coastal Waters Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle

Accurately predicting transport processes, including sediment transport, in the coastal environment is impossible without correct current velocity and shear stress information. A combined wave-current boundary layer theory is necessary to predict these quantities, and while the previous Grant-Madsen type boundary layer models are effective, they inconsistently apply a discontinuous two layer eddy viscosity structure to the wave and current problems. We have therefore developed a new continuous three layer model which consistently applies all three layers and leads to a strong coupling between the wave and current solutions. Boundary layer models require an estimate of the movable bed roughness, and while this roughness is scaled by the sand grain diameter for flat beds, in the coastal environment it is often the case that either wave-generated ripples cover the bed or the near-bed sediment is transported as sheet flow, in which case the roughness is much larger and less straightforward to characterize. The common method of predicting roughness in the ripple regime, while effective, unnecessarily predicts ripple geometry and requires a model-dependent factor, which varies widely, relating ripple geometry and bottom roughness. We have therefore developed an alternative, more direct method of predicting bed roughness: the wave energy dissipation factor is predicted from flow and sediment information and then any desired theoretical friction factor model is used to back-calculate the roughness. This proposed method can also be used in the sheet flow regime, allowing a continuous transition between the two regimes, not possible with the common method. This thesis derives the new three layer combined wave-current boundary layer theory, develops the common and proposed methods of predicting roughness in the ripple and sheet flow regimes, and presents results of evaluating the theory and methods with field data. The new theory combined with either roughness method successfully predicts current shear velocities in wave-current field flows over beds in the lower flat-bed, ripple, and sheet flow regimes, with the proposed method yielding the smaller bias. Remaining questions concerning the appropriate near-bottom orbital velocity required to describe field conditions must be resolved when additional field data becomes available.