2014
DOI: 10.1680/eacm.13.00025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Boussinesq modelling of tsunami and storm wave impact

Abstract: (204 words)Many coastal protection structures in the UK have been designed for storm surges with appropriate return periods but their performance during tsunami-type waves is uncertain. A shallow water and Boussinesq (referred to as SWAB) model is well suited to the investigation of both nearshore storm waves and tsunami waves. This paper makes use of the SWAB model to compare the effect on coastal structures of solitary waves and storm waves. Wave runup parameters for both types of wave are generated, and sho… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Good correlation with experimental data has been obtained, which underscores the potential of the approach in defining this type of interaction. The results obtained from the combined SPHAbaqus approach detailed here are comparable in terms of accuracy with those obtained using the alternative approach of Tsunami wave and structure interaction: an investigation with smoothed-particle hydrodynamics Cunningham, Rogers and Pringgana the shallow water and Boussinesq model adopted for case study 1 by McCabe et al (2014), where the runtimes are significantly lower but provide no information on the 3D flow field. The close agreement with experimental data of the combined SPH-Abaqus simulations with the quantification of wave pressure histories on discrete structures illustrates that this is a useful tool that can help improve current guidance for resilience of coastal structures in extreme events.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…Good correlation with experimental data has been obtained, which underscores the potential of the approach in defining this type of interaction. The results obtained from the combined SPHAbaqus approach detailed here are comparable in terms of accuracy with those obtained using the alternative approach of Tsunami wave and structure interaction: an investigation with smoothed-particle hydrodynamics Cunningham, Rogers and Pringgana the shallow water and Boussinesq model adopted for case study 1 by McCabe et al (2014), where the runtimes are significantly lower but provide no information on the 3D flow field. The close agreement with experimental data of the combined SPH-Abaqus simulations with the quantification of wave pressure histories on discrete structures illustrates that this is a useful tool that can help improve current guidance for resilience of coastal structures in extreme events.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…This is an idealisation taking advantage of the well-defined and reproducible characteristics of a solitary wave. For discussion on the merits of this approach, the reader is referred to McCabe et al (2014). The variation of solitary wave height, H, was non-dimensionalised using the offshore water depth h 0 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model equations were derived assuming small bed slopes and are therefore not suited to the modelling of steep revetments and vertical walls without modification: F wall takes account of this, being derived from the force imposed on a jet of water in a breaking wave impacting against a wall. McCabe et al (2013) showed that inclusion of this reverse momentum term could greatly improve predictions of volumes for waves overtopping a revetment with a recurve wall, although McCabe et al (2014) showed that it contributes little to the total force imposed on a wall by a breaking wave. McCabe et al (2013) give further detail on the equations, the finite volume solver and the method used for calculating wave breaking.…”
Section: Model Equations and Solvermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the hydrostatic pressure assumption was made: the uplift force acting on the caisson is a function of the instantaneous water depths on either side. Horizontal forces are also assumed to be a function of the instantaneous water depth, plus the force due to the reverse momentum term, which was shown by McCabe et al (2014) to be relatively small. These forces are shown in Fig.…”
Section: Rubble Mound Foundationmentioning
confidence: 99%