Abstract

This paper presents the results of a wave hindcast of a severe storm in the Southern North Sea to verify recently developed deep and shallow water source terms. The work was carried out in the framework of the ONR funded NOPP project (Tolman et al. 2013) in which deep and shallow water source terms were developed for use in third-generation wave prediction models. These deep water source terms for whitecapping, wind input and nonlinear interactions were developed, implemented and tested primarily in the WAVEWATCH III model, whereas shallow water source terms for depth-limited wave breaking and triad interactions were developed, implemented and tested primarily in the SWAN wave model. So far, the new deep-water source terms for whitecapping were not fully tested in shallow environments. Similarly, the shallow water source terms were not yet tested in large inter-mediate depth areas like the North Sea. As a first step in assessing the performance of these newly developed source terms, the source term balance and the effect of different physical settings on the prediction of wave heights and wave periods in the relatively shallow North Sea was analysed. The December 2013 storm was hindcast with a SWAN model implementation for the North Sea. Spectral wave boundary conditions were obtained from an Atlantic Ocean WAVEWATCH III model implementation and the model was driven by hourly CFSR wind fields. In the southern part of the North Sea, current and water level effects were included. The hindcast was performed with five different settings for whitecapping, viz. three Komen type whitecapping formulations, the saturation-based whitecapping by Van der Westhuysen et al. (2007) and the recently developed ST6 whitecapping as described by Zieger et al. (2015). Results of the wave hindcast were compared with buoy measurements at location K13 collected by the Dutch Ministry of Transport and Public Works. An analysis was made of the source term balance at three locations, the deep water location North Cormorant, the inter-mediate depth location K13 and at location Wielingen, a shallow water location close to the Dutch coast. The results indicate that at deep water the source terms for wind input, whitecapping and nonlinear four-wave interactions are of the same magnitude. At the inter-mediate depth location K13, bottom friction plays a significant role, whereas at the shallow water location Wielingen also depth-limited wave breaking becomes important.

Highlights

  • Wave modelling in coastal seas poses additional challenges to a modeller in comparison to open ocean wave modelling as the proximity of land and depth effects starts to play a role in the evolution of the wave field

  • The SWAN wave model was first run with the present default settings for whitecapping dissipation, viz. the Komen type dissipation using δ = 1 as recommended by Rogers et al (2003) and a constant JONSWAP bottom friction coefficient of Cf,J ON = 0.038 m2 s−3 as recommended by Zijlema et al (2012)

  • This analysis was performed with the third-generation wave SWAN model 41.10 to hindcast the severe winter storm of December 2013 hitting north-west Europe

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Wave modelling in coastal seas poses additional challenges to a modeller in comparison to open ocean wave modelling as the proximity of land and depth effects starts to play a role in the evolution of the wave field. Orographic effects and changes in surface roughness lead to relative small scale changes in wind speed and wind direction, whereas depth limitations influence the propagation and dissipation of waves. Tidal and wind induced currents and water levels may further affect the evolution of wind waves. The interplay of all of these factors requires a careful assessment of the significance of each of these processes on wave evolution to assess wave model performance and to find sources of errors to improve the wave model. The common way to study these effects is to analyse results in terms of wave spectrum-based integrated parameters like the significant wave height or a mean wave period. A deeper analysis is to analyse results of third-generation spectral wave models in terms of the wave spectra and the under-lying source terms

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call