2021
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2020.1179
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some analytical solutions for validation of free surface flow computational codes

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, Matskevich and Chubarov (2019) extended the results of Ball and Thacker to include the effects of Coriolis forces and bottom friction. Bristeau et al (2021) also extended the results of Thacker and introduced two respective solutions describing velocity distributed along the vertical axis and velocity accounting for variable density.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Additionally, Matskevich and Chubarov (2019) extended the results of Ball and Thacker to include the effects of Coriolis forces and bottom friction. Bristeau et al (2021) also extended the results of Thacker and introduced two respective solutions describing velocity distributed along the vertical axis and velocity accounting for variable density.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…This is evident in general relativity where gravitational forces are described as curvature of space. Above solitary solutions permit to validate numerical solvers without having to depict complex domain shapes such as parabolic bowls [10]. Also, due to the simplicity of the boundary conditions, these can be imposed on the boundaries of arbitrary domain shapes as long as the domain is permitted to adapt along one dimension to h B .…”
Section: Supplemental Documentmentioning
confidence: 99%