1
Fork 0

Results from swash 1

This commit is contained in:
Edgar P. Burkhart 2022-06-07 11:41:48 +02:00
parent ec051a2054
commit 95785f9df5
Signed by: edpibu
GPG key ID: 9833D3C5A25BD227
4 changed files with 34 additions and 0 deletions

BIN
nature/fig/maxw.pdf Normal file

Binary file not shown.

BIN
nature/fig/out_orbitals.pdf Normal file

Binary file not shown.

BIN
nature/fig/ts.pdf Normal file

Binary file not shown.

View file

@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
\documentclass[a4paper, twocolumn]{article}
\usepackage{polyglossia} \usepackage{authblk}
\usepackage[sfdefault]{inter}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\setmainlanguage{english}
@ -74,8 +75,41 @@ calibrated using photographs from the storm of February 28, 2017. Results from t
to the analytical equations provided by \textcite{nandasena2011}.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Identified wave}
Preliminary work with the photographer allowed to identify the time at which the block displacement event happened.
Using the data from the wave buoy located 1250m offshore of the Artha breakwater, a seamingly abnormally large wave of
14m amplitude was identified that is supposed to have lead to the block displacement.
Initial analysis of the buoy data plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:wave} shows that the movement of the buoy follows two
orbitals that correspond to an incident wave direction. These results would indicate that the identified wave is
essentially an incident wave, with a minor reflected component.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig/ts.pdf}
\includegraphics{fig/out_orbitals.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Left}: Free surface measured during the extreme wave measured on February 28, 2017 at 17:23UTC.
\textit{Right}: Trajectory of the wave buoy during the passage of this particular wave.}\label{fig:wave}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Reflection analysis}
The results from the large scale SWASH model using two configurations --- one of them being the real bathymetry, and
the other being a simplified bathymetry without the breakwater --- are compared in Figure~\ref{fig:swash}. The results
obtained with both simulations show a maximum wave amplitude of 13.9m for the real bathymetry, and 12.1m in the case
where the breakwater is removed.
The 13\% difference between those values highlights the existence of a notable amount of reflection at the buoy.
Nonetheless, the gap between the values is still fairly small and the extreme wave identified on February 28, 2017 at
17:23:08 could still be considered as an incident wave.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig/maxw.pdf}
\caption{Free surface obtained with the SWASH model in two configurations. \textit{Case 1}: With breakwater;
\textit{Case 2}: Without breakwater.}\label{fig:swash}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}