Open AccessA third‐generation wave model for coastal regions: 2. Verification
Author(s) -
Ris R. C.,
Holthuijsen L. H.,
Booij N.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: oceans
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.67
H-Index - 298
eISSN - 2156-2202
pISSN - 0148-0227
DOI - 10.1029/1998jc900123
Subject(s) - shoal , bathymetry , geology , shoaling and schooling , refraction , wave shoaling , wind wave , breaking wave , significant wave height , waves and shallow water , wave model , wave propagation , wave height , meteorology , geophysics , physics , mechanical wave , oceanography , optics , longitudinal wave
A third‐generation spectral wave model (Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN)) for small‐scale, coastal regions with shallow water, (barrier) islands, tidal flats, local wind, and ambient currents is verified in stationary mode with measurements in five real field cases. These verification cases represent an increasing complexity in two‐dimensional bathymetry and added presence of currents. In the most complex of these cases, the waves propagate through a tidal gap between two barrier islands into a bathymetry of channels and shoals with tidal currents where the waves are regenerated by a local wind. The wave fields were highly variable with up to 3 orders of magnitude difference in energy scale in individual cases. The model accounts for shoaling, refraction, generation by wind, whitecapping, triad and quadruplet wave‐wave interactions, and bottom and depth‐induced wave breaking. The effect of alternative formulations of these processes is shown. In all cases a relatively large number of wave observations is available, including observations of wave directions. The average rms error in the computed significant wave height and mean wave period is 0.30 m and 0.7 s, respectively, which is 10% of the incident values for both.