Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 52, Issue 1, pp 53–68 | Cite as

Estimation of the velocity field induced by plunging breakers in the surf and swash zones

  • Germán Rivillas-Ospina
  • Adrián Pedrozo-Acuña
  • Rodolfo Silva
  • Alec Torres-Freyermuth
  • César Gutierrez
Research Article

Abstract

This study presents an investigation into the spatial and temporal evolution of the velocity field induced by plunging waves using the bubble image velocimetry (BIV) technique. The BIV velocity estimates are validated with both direct single-point measurements and a well-validated VOF-type numerical model. Firstly, BIV-derived time series of horizontal velocities are compared with single-point measurements, showing good agreement at two cross-shore locations on the impermeable slope in the swash and surf zones. The comparison includes a discussion on the uncertainty associated with both data sets. In order to evaluate the transient two-dimensional description of the flow field, a high-resolution VOF-type numerical model based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations is used. A reliable estimation of the numerically derived surf zone velocity is established. In the swash zone, however, an overprediction of the offshore flow is identified, which may be ascribed to the single-phase nature of the numerical description, suggesting the importance of the dynamics of the air/water mixture for accurate modelling of this breaker type. The non-intrusive BIV technique was shown to be a good complementary tool to the numerical model in the estimation of velocity field induced by plunging waves in the laboratory. It is shown that the BIV technique is more suitable when the nature of the velocity field under the presence of an aerated flow is sought. This is relevant for hydrodynamic studies of plunging breakers when, due to air entrainment, the use of other measurement techniques or single-phase formulations in numerical models may provide uncertain results.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research was supported in part by research grants from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (PAPIIT IN106610) and the research fund provided by the Engineering Institute (A2). We would like to thank the following for their assistance with the laboratory work described in this paper: Ariadna Cruz Quiroz, Jorge G. González Armenta, Miguel A. Laverde Barajas and Juan P. Rodríguez Rincón.

References

  1. Adrian RJ (1991) Particle-imaging techniques for experimental fluid mechanics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 23:261–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakhtyar AMR, Barry DA, Yeganeh-Bakhtiary A, Zou QP (2010) Air-water two-phase flow modeling of turbulent surf and swash zone wave motions. Adv Water Resour 33(12):1560–1574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brocchini M, Baldock TE (2008) Recent advances in modelling swash zone dynamics: Influence of Surf-Swash interaction on nearshore hydrodynamics and morphodynamics. Rev Geophys 46:RG3003. doi: 10.1029/2006RG000215
  4. Cowen EA, Sou IM, Liu PLF, Raubenheimer B (2003) Particle image velocimetry measurements within a laboratory-generated swash zone. J Eng Mech 129(10):1119–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cox DT, Kobayashi N (2000) Identification of intense, intermittent coherent motions under shoaling and breaking waves. J Geophys Res 105:14223–14236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cox DT, Shin S (2003) Laboratory measurements of void fraction and turbulence in the bore region of surf zone waves. J Eng Mech Res 129:1197–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cox DT, Kobayashi N, Okayasu A (1996) Bottom shear stress in the surf zone. J Geophys Res 101:14337–14348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dvořák V (1880) Über eine neue einfache Art der Schlierenbeobachtung. Ann der Physik 245(3):502–512. doi: 10.1002/andp.18802450309 Google Scholar
  9. Garcia N, Lara JL, Losada IJ (2004) 2-D numerical analysis of near-field flow at low-crested permeable breakwaters. Coastal Eng 51(10):991–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Govender K, Mocke GP, Alport MJ (2002a) Video-imaged surf zone wave and roller structures and flow fields. J Geophys Res 107(C7):3072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Govender K, Alport MJ, Mocke G, Michallet H (2002b) Video measurements of fluid velocities and water levels in breaking waves. Physica Scripta T97:152–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Govender K, Mocke GP, Alport MJ (2004) Dissipation of isotropic turbulence and length-scale measurements through the wave roller in laboratory spilling waves. J Geophys Res 109(C8):C08018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gui L, Merzkirch W (1996) A method of tracking ensembles of particle images. Exp Fluids 21:465–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gui L, Merzkirch W (2000) A comparative study of the MQD method and several correlation-based PIV evaluation algorithms. Exp Fluids 28:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hassan YA, Schmidl WD, Ortiz-Villafuerte J (1998) Investigation of three-dimensional two-phase flow structure in a bubbly pipe Meas. Sci Technol 9:309–326Google Scholar
  16. Holland KT, Puleo JA, Kooney TN (2001) Quantification of swash flows using video-based particle image velocimetry. Coastal Eng 44(2):65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hsu T-J, Sakakiyama T, Liu PL-F (2002) A numerical model for wave motions and turbulence flows in front of a composite breakwater. Coastal Eng 46(1):25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huang ZC, Hsiao SC, Hwung HH, Chang KA (2009) Turbulence and energy dissipations of surf-zone spilling breakers. Coastal Eng 56(7):733–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang ZC, Hwung HH, Hsiao SC, Chang KA (2010) Laboratory observation of boundary layer flow under spilling breakers in surf zone using particle image velocimetry. Coastal Eng 57(3):343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jayaratne R, Hunt-Raby A, Bullock G, Bredmose H (2008) Individual violent overtopping events: new insights. In: Proceedings of the 31th international conference on coastal engineering, Hamburg, World Scientific, 1-13 ppGoogle Scholar
  21. Kimmoun O, Branger H (2007) A particle image velocimetry investigation on laboratory surf-zone breaking waves over a sloping beach. J Fluid Mech 588:353–397CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Kimmoun O, Branger H, Zucchini B (2004) Laboratory PIV measurements of wave breaking on a beach. In: Proceedings of the 14th international offshore and polar engineering conference, May 23–28Google Scholar
  23. Lara JL, Garcia N, Losada IJ (2006) RANS modelling applied to random wave interaction with submerged permeable structures. Coastal Eng 53(3–4):395–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lin P, Liu PL-F (1998a) A numerical study of breaking waves. J Fluid Mech 359:239–264CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin P, Liu PL-F (1998b) Turbulence transport, vorticity dynamics, and solute mixing under plunging waves in surf zones. J Geophys Res 103(15):15677–15694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lindken R, Merzkirch W (2002) A novel PIV technique for measurements in multi-phase flows and its application to two-phase bubbly flows. Exp Fluids 33:814–825Google Scholar
  27. Liu PL-F, Lin P, Chang KA, Sakakiyama T (1999) Numerical modeling of wave interaction with porous structures. J Waterway Port Coastal Ocean Eng 125:322–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Masselink G, Puleo JA (2006) Swash-zone morphodynamics. Cont Shelf Res 26(5):661–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Masselink G, Evans D, Hughes MG, Russell P (2005) Suspended sediment transport in the swash zone of a dissipative beach. Marine Geol 216(3):169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Merzkirch W (1987) Flow visualization, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Mowbray DE (1967) The use of schlieren and shadowgraph techniques in the study of flow patterns in density stratified liquids. J Fluid Mech 27(3):595–608. doi: 10.1017/S0022112067000564 Google Scholar
  32. Nadaoka K, Hino M, Koyano Y (1989) Structure of the turbulent flow field under breaking waves in the surf zone. J Fluid Mech 204:359–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nishino K, Kato H, Torii K (2000) Stereo imaging for simultaneous measurement of size and velocity of particles in dispersed two-phase flow Meas. Sci Technol 11:633–645Google Scholar
  34. O'Donoghue T, Pokrajac D, Hondebrink LJ (2010) Laboratory and numerical study of dambreak-generated swash on impermeable slopes. Coast Eng 57(5):513–530. doi: 10.1016/j.coastaleng.2009.12.007 Google Scholar
  35. Pedrozo-Acuña A, Simmonds DJ, Reeve DE (2008) Wave-impact characteristics of plunging breakers acting on gravel beaches. Mar Geol 253(1):26–35. doi: 10.1016/j.margeo.2008.04.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pedrozo-Acuña A, Torres-Freyermuth A, Zou QP, Hsu T-J, Reeve DE (2010) Diagnostic investigation of impulsive pressures induced by plunging breakers impinging on gravel beaches. Coastal Eng 57(3):252–266. doi: 10.1016/j.coastaleng.2009.09.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pedrozo-Acuña A, Ruiz de Alegría-Arzaburu A, Torres-Freyermuth A, Mendoza E, Silva R (2011) Laboratory investigation on pressure gradients induced by plunging breakers. Coastal Eng 58(8):722–738. doi: 10.1016/j.coastaleng.2011.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Petti M, Longo S (2001) Turbulence experiments in the swash zone. Coastal Eng 43:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petti M, Quinn PA, Liberatore C, Easton WJ (1994) Wave velocity field measurements over a submerged breakwater. In: Proceedings of the 24th international conference on coastal engineering, pp 525–539Google Scholar
  40. Raubenheimer B (2002) Observations and predictions of fluid velocities in the surf and swash zones. J Geophys Res 107(C11):3190. doi: 10.1029/2001JC001264 Google Scholar
  41. Ray SD (2002) Applied photographic optics. Focal, Oxford, pp 215–233Google Scholar
  42. Ryu Y, Chang K-A (2008) Green water void fraction due to breaking wave impinging and overtopping. Exp Fluids 45:883–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ryu Y, Chang K-A, Lim H-J (2005) Use of bubble image velocimetry for measurement of plunging wave impinging on structure and associated greenwater. Meas Sci Technol 16:1945–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ryu Y, Chang K-A, Mercier R (2007) Runup and green water velocities due to breaking wave impinging and overtopping. Exp Fluids 43:555–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ting FCK (2006) Large-scale turbulence under a solitary wave. Coast Eng 53(5–6):441–462Google Scholar
  46. Ting FCK, Kirby JT (1994) Observation of undertow and turbulence in a laboratory surf zone. Coast Eng 24(1–2):51–80Google Scholar
  47. Ting FCK, Kirby JT (1995) Dynamics of surf-zone turbulence in a strong plunging breaker. Coast Eng 24:177–204 Google Scholar
  48. Ting FCK, Kirby JT (1996) Dynamics of surf-zone turbulence in a spilling breaker. Coast Eng 27:131–160Google Scholar
  49. Westerweel J, Dabiri D, Gharib M (1997) The effect of a discrete window offset on the accuracy of cross-correlation analysis of digital PIV recordings. Exp Fluids 23:20–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Willert CE, Gharib M (1991) Digital particle image velocimetry. Exp Fluids 10:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang Q, Liu PL-F (2008) A numerical study of swash flow generated by bores. Coastal Eng 55(12):1113–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Germán Rivillas-Ospina
    • 1
  • Adrián Pedrozo-Acuña
    • 1
  • Rodolfo Silva
    • 1
  • Alec Torres-Freyermuth
    • 2
  • César Gutierrez
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoMéxico cityMexico
  2. 2.Instituto de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoSisalMexico

Personalised recommendations