Ocean Dynamics

, Volume 60, Issue 1, pp 65–79 | Cite as

On the parameters of absorbing layers for shallow water models

  • Axel ModaveEmail author
  • Éric Deleersnijder
  • Éric J. M. Delhez


Absorbing/sponge layers used as boundary conditions for ocean/marine models are examined in the context of the shallow water equations with the aim to minimize the reflection of outgoing waves at the boundary of the computational domain. The optimization of the absorption coefficient is not an issue in continuous models, for the reflection coefficient of outgoing waves can then be made as small as we please by increasing the absorption coefficient. The optimization of the parameters of absorbing layers is therefore a purely discrete problem. A balance must be found between the efficient damping of outgoing waves and the limited spatial resolution with which the resulting spatial gradients must be described. Using a one-dimensional model as a test case, the performances of various spatial distributions of the absorption coefficient are compared. Two shifted hyperbolic distributions of the absorption coefficient are derived from theoretical considerations for a pure propagative and a pure advective problems. These distribution show good performances. Their free parameter has a well-defined interpretation and can therefore be determined on a physical basis. The properties of the two shifted hyperbolas are illustrated using the classical two-dimensional problems of the collapse of a Gaussian-shaped mound of water and of its advection by a mean current. The good behavior of the resulting boundary scheme remains when a full non-linear dynamics is taken into account.


Boundary condition Absorbing layer Sponge layer Shallow water model 



EJMD and ED are, respectively, Honorary Research Associate and Research Associate at the National Fund for Scientific Research (Belgium). This work was supported by the French Community of Belgium (RACE, ARC-05/10-333) and by the Interuniversity Attraction Poles Programme TIMOTHY-P6/13 (Belgian Science Policy). This paper is MARE publication n°181.


  1. Beckers JM, Deleersnijder E (1993) Stability of a FBTCS scheme applied to the propagation of shallow-water inertia-gravity waves on various space grids. J Comput Phys 108:95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berenger JP (1994) A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. J Comput Phys 114:185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berenger JP (2007) Perfectly matched layer (PML) for computational electromagnetics. Morgan and Claypool, San RafaelGoogle Scholar
  4. Bermúdez A, Hervella-Nieto L, Prieto A, Rodrígez R (2007) An optimal perfectly matched layer with unbounded absorbing function for time-harmonic acoustic scattering problems. J Comput Phys 223:469–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blayo E, Debreu L (2005) Rebisiting open boundary conditions from the point of view of characteristic variables. Ocean Model 9:231–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cailleau S, Fedorenko V, Barnier B, Blayo E, Debreu L (2008) Comparison of different numerical methods used to handle the open boundary of a regional ocean circulation model of the bay of biscay. Ocean Model 25(1–2):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camerlengo AL, O’Brien JJ (1980) Open boundary conditions in rotating fluids. J Comput Phys 35:12–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chapman DC (1985) Numerical treatment of cross-shelf open boundaries in a barotropic coastal ocean model. J Phys Oceanogr 15:1060–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Collino F, Monk PB (1998) Optimizing the perfectly matched layer. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 164:157–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darblade G, Baraille R, Le Roux AY, Carton X, Pinchon D (1997) Conditions limites non réfléchissantes pour un modùle de Saint-Venant bidimensionnel barotrope linéarisé. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences Paris 324:485–490Google Scholar
  11. Davies HC (1976) A lateral boundary formulation for multi-level prediction models. Q J R Meteorol Soc 102:405–418Google Scholar
  12. Engquist B, Majda A (1977) Absorbing boundary conditions for numerical simulation of waves. Math Comput 139:629–651Google Scholar
  13. Flather R (1976) A tidal model of the north-west european continental shelf. Mémoires Société Royale des Sciences de Liège 10:141–164Google Scholar
  14. Gan J, Allen JS (2005) On open boundary conditions for a limited-area coastal model off oregon. part 1: response to idealized wind forcing. Ocean Model 8(1–2):115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedström GW (1979) Non reflecting boundary conditions for non linear hyperbolic systems. J Comput Phys 30:222–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Herzfeld M (2009) The role of numerical implementation on open boundary behaviour in limited area ocean models. Ocean Model 27:18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holthuijsen LH (2007) Waves in oceanic and coastal waters. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Hu FQ (1996) On absorbing boundary conditions for linearized euler equations by a perfectly matched layer. J Comput Phys 129:201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hu FQ (2001) A stable, perfectly matched layer for linearized euler equations in unsplit physical variables. J Comput Phys 173:455–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hu FQ (2008) Development of PML absorbing boundary conditions for computational aeroacoustics: a progress review. Comput Fluids 37:336–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Israeli M, Orszag SA (1981) Approximation of radiation boundary conditions. J Comput Phys 41:115–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jensen TG (1998) Open boundary conditions in stratified ocean models. J Mar Syst 16(3–4):297–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lavelle JW, Thacker WC (2008) A pretty good sponge: dealing with open boundaries in limited-area ocean models. Ocean Model 20:270–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. LeBlond PH, Mysak LA (1978) Waves in the ocean. Elsevier oceanography series 20. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  25. Marchesiello P, McWilliams JC, Shchepetkin A (2001) Open boundary conditions for long-term integration of regional oceanic models. Ocean Model 3:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martinsen EA, Engedahl H (1987) Implementation and testing of a lateral boundary scheme as an open boundary condition in a barotropic ocean model. Coast Eng 11:603–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McDonald A (2002) A step toward transparent boundary conditions for meteorological models. Mon Weather Rev 130:140–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller MJ, Thorpe AJ (1981) Radiation conditions for the lateral boundaries of limited-area numerical models. Q J R Meteorol Soc 107:615–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morse PM, Feshbach H (1999) Methods of theoretical physics. International series in pure and applied physics. McGraw-Hill, BostonGoogle Scholar
  30. Navon IM, Neta B, Hussaini MY (2004) A perfectly matched layer approach to the linearized shallow water equations models. Mon Weather Rev 132:1369–1378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nycander J, Döös K (2003) Open boundary conditions for barotropic waves. J Geophys Res-Oceans 108(C5):3168–3187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nycander J, Hogg AM, Frankcombe LM (2008) Open boundary conditions for nonlinear channel flow. Ocean Model 24(3–4):108–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Orlanski I (1976) A simple boundary condition for unbounded hyperbolic flows. J Comput Phys 21:251–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Palma ED, Matano RP (1998) On the implementation of passive open boundary conditions for a general circulation model: the barotropic mode. J Geophys Res-Oceans 103(C1):1319–1341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palma ED, Matano RP (2001) Dynamical impacts associated with radiation boundary conditions. J Sea Res 46(2):117–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pearson RA (1974) Consistent boundary conditions for numerical models of systems that admit dispersive waves. J Atmos Sci 31:1481–1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Raymond WH, Kuo HL (1984) A radiation boundary condition for multi-dimensional flows. Q J R Meteorol Soc 110:535–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Røed L, Cooper C (1986) Open boundary conditions in numerical ocean models. In: O’Brien JJ (ed) Advanced physical oceanography numerical modelling, vol 186. NATO ASI Series C, pp 411–436Google Scholar
  39. Ruddick KG, Deleersnijder E, De Mulder T, Luyten PJ (1994) A model study of the rhine discharge front and downwelling circulation. Tellus 46A:149–159Google Scholar
  40. Ruddick KG, Deleersnijder E, Luyten PJ, Ozer J (1995) Haline stratification in the rhine-meuse freshwater plume: a tree-dimensional model sensitivity analysis. Cont Shelf Res 15(13):1597–1630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sommerfeld A (1949) Partial differential equations in physics. Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  42. Treguier AM, Barnier B, de Miranda AP, Molines JM, Grima N, Imbard M, Madec G, Messager C, Reynaud T, Michel S (2001) An eddy-permitting model of the atlantic circulation: evaluating open boundary conditions. J Geophys Res-Oceans 106(C10):22115–22129CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Axel Modave
    • 1
    Email author
  • Éric Deleersnijder
    • 2
  • Éric J. M. Delhez
    • 1
  1. 1.MARE - Modélisation et Méthodes MathématiquesUniversité de LiègeLiègeBelgium
  2. 2.Center for Systems Engineering and Applied Mechanics (CESAME)Université catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations