Difference between revisions of "SHOREFACE CASE"
(New page: <div class="title">Shore Face Planar Beach Test Case</div>) (change visibility) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="title">Shore Face Planar Beach Test Case</div> | <div class="title">Shore Face Planar Beach Test Case</div> | ||
This test case consists of spectral waves approaching a mild sloping | |||
(1/80) plane beach with an oblique angle of incidence. The wave | |||
forcing is simulated with SWAN by specifying a JONSWAP spectrum | |||
for 2 moffshore wave height with a peak period of 10 s at an angle of | |||
10 degrees for the incoming wave field.SWANwas configured to use | |||
90 directional bins and 30 frequency bins between 0.04 and 0.5 Hz. | |||
Additional parameters for each circulation model used for the plane | |||
beach test case are listed in Table1. Each circulationmodelcomputes | |||
the radiation stress forcing based on the SWAN wave output using | |||
the formulations described above for each model. There is not a feedback | |||
of the currents to the wave model for this application. Also we | |||
neglect the contribution from the roller model. Both circulation | |||
models impose the same quadratic bottom stress formulation using | |||
the depth average currents. | |||
Revision as of 20:56, 3 February 2009
This test case consists of spectral waves approaching a mild sloping (1/80) plane beach with an oblique angle of incidence. The wave forcing is simulated with SWAN by specifying a JONSWAP spectrum for 2 moffshore wave height with a peak period of 10 s at an angle of 10 degrees for the incoming wave field.SWANwas configured to use 90 directional bins and 30 frequency bins between 0.04 and 0.5 Hz. Additional parameters for each circulation model used for the plane beach test case are listed in Table1. Each circulationmodelcomputes the radiation stress forcing based on the SWAN wave output using the formulations described above for each model. There is not a feedback of the currents to the wave model for this application. Also we neglect the contribution from the roller model. Both circulation models impose the same quadratic bottom stress formulation using the depth average currents.
