Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 42–58

Development and validation of a three-dimensional, wave-current coupled model on unstructured meshes

Research Paper

Abstract

Using unstructured meshes provides great flexibility for modeling the flow in complex geomorphology of tidal creeks, barriers and islands, with refined grid resolution in regions of interest and not elsewhere. In this paper, an unstructured three-dimensional fully coupled wave-current model is developed. Firstly, a parallel, unstructured wave module is developed. Variations in wave properties are governed by a wave energy equation that includes wave-current interactions and dissipation representative of wave breaking. Then, the existing Finite-Volume Coastal Ocean Model (FVCOM) is modified to couple with the wave module. The couple procedure includes depth dependent wave radiation stress terms, Stokes drift, vertical transfer of wave-generated pressure transfer to the mean momentum equation, wave dissipation as a source term in the turbulence kinetic energy equation, and mean current advection and refraction of wave energy. Several applications are presented to evaluate the developed model. In particular the wind and wave-induced storm surge generated by Hurricane Katrina is investigated. The obtained results have been compared to the in situ measurements with respect to the wave heights and water level elevations revealing good accuracy of the model in reproduction of the investigated events. In a comparison to water level measurements at Dauphin Island, inclusion of the wave induced water level setup reduced the normalized root mean square error from 0.301 to 0.257 m and increased the correlation coefficient from 0.860 to 0.929. Several runs were carried out to analyze the effects of waves. The experiments show that among the processes that represent wave effects, radiation stress and wave-induced surface stress are more important than wave-induced bottom stress in affecting the water level. The Hurricane Katrina simulations showed the importance of the inclusion of the wave effects for the hindcast of the water levels during the storm surge.

Keywords

wave-current interactions three-dimensional model unstructured meshes radiation stress 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Horsburgh K J, Wilson C. Tide-surge interaction and its role in the distribution of surge residuals in the North Sea. J Geophys Res, 2007, 112: C8003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Longuethiggins M S, Stewart R W. Radiation stresses in water waves—a physical discussion, with applications. Deep-Sea Res, 1964, 11: 529–562Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Choi B H, Eum H M, Woo S B. A synchronously coupled tide-wavesurge model of the Yellow Sea. Coast Eng, 2003, 47: 381–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davies A M, Lawrence J. Examining the influence of wind and wind wave turbulence on tidal currents, using a three-dimensional hydrodynamic model including wave-current interaction. J Phys Oceanogr, 1994, 24: 2441–2460CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mastenbroek C, Burgers G, Janssen P A. The dynamical coupling of a wave model and a storm surge model through the atmospheric boundary layer. J Phys Oceanogr, 1993, 23: 1856–1866CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Warner J C, Sherwood C R, Signell R P, et al. Development of a three-dimensional, regional, coupled wave, current, and sediment-transport model. Comput Geosci, 2008, 34: 1284–1306CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xie L, Liu H Q, Peng M C. The effect of wave-current interactions on the storm surge and inundation in Charleston Harbor during Hurricane Hugo 1989. Ocean Model, 2008, 20: 252–2Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xie L, Pietrafesa L J, Wu K. A numerical study of wave-current interaction through surface and bottom stresses: Coastal ocean response to Hurricane Fran of 1996. J Geophys Res, 2003, 108: 3049–3066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xie L, Wu K J, Pietrafesa L, et al. A numerical study of wave-current interaction through surface and bottom stresses: Wind-driven circulation in the South Atlantic Bight under uniform winds. J Geophys Res, 2001, 106: 16841–16855CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang M Y, Li Y S. The dynamic coupling of a third-generation wave model and a 3d hydrodynamic model through boundary layers. Cont Shelf Res, 1997, 17: 1141–1170CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yin B S, Xu Z H, Huang Y, et al. Simulating a typhoon storm surge in the East Sea of China using a coupled model. Prog Nat Sci, 2009, 19: 65–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Group W. The wam model—a third generation ocean wave prediction model. J Phys Oceanogr, 1988, 18: 1775–1810CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tolman H L. A third-generation model for wind waves on slowly varying, unsteady, and inhomogeneous depths and currents. J Phys Oceanogr, 1991, 21: 782–797CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Booij N, Ris R C, Holthuijsen L H. A third-generation wave model for coastal regions — 1. Model description and validation. J Geophys Res, 1999, 104: 7649–7666CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mellor G L, Donelan M A, Oey L Y. A surface wave model for coupling with numerical ocean circulation models. J Atmos Ocean Tech, 2008, 25: 1785–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mellor G L. The three-dimensional current and surface wave equations. J Phys Oceanogr, 2003, 33: 1978–1989CrossRefMathSciNetADSGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mellor G L. Some consequences of the three-dimensional current and surface wave equations. J Phys Oceanogr, 2005, 35: 2291–2298CrossRefMathSciNetADSGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mellor G L. The depth-dependent current and wave interaction equations: A revision. J Phys Oceanogr, 2008, 38: 2587–2596CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mellor G L, Yamada T. Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems. Rev Geophys Space Phys, 1982, 20: 851–875CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen C S, Qi J H, Li C Y, et al. Complexity of the flooding/drying process in an estuarine tidal-creek salt-marsh system: An application of FVCOM. J Geophys Res, 2008, 113: C7052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen C S, Xue P F, Ding P X, et al. Physical mechanisms for the offshore detachment of the Changjiang Diluted Water in the East China Sea. J Geophys Res, 2008, 113: C2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen C S, Gao G P, Qi J H, et al. A new high-resolution unstructured grid finite volume Arctic Ocean model (AO-FVCOM): An application for tidal studies. J Geophys Res, 2009, 114: C8017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Huang H, Chen C, Blanton J O, et al. A numerical study of tidal asymmetry in Okatee Creek, South Carolina. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 2008, 78: 190–202CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ji R, Chen C, Franks P J, et al. The impact of Scotian Shelf Water “cross-over” on the plankton dynamics on Georges Bank: A 3-D experiment for the 1999 spring bloom. Deep-Sea Res Part II, 2006, 53: 2684–2707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ji R, Davis C, Chen C, et al. Influence of local and external processes on the annual nitrogen cycle and primary productivity on Georges Bank: A 3-D biological-physical modeling study. J Mar Syst, 2008, 73: 31–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shore J A. Modelling the circulation and exchange of Kingston Basin and Lake Ontario with FVCOM. Ocean Model, 2009, 30: 106–114CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xue P, Chen C, Ding P, et al. Saltwater intrusion into the Changjiang River: A model-guided mechanism study. J Geophys Res, 2009, 114: C02006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhao L Z, Chen C S, Cowles G. Tidal flushing and eddy shedding in Mount Hope Bay and Narragansett Bay: An application of FVCOM. J Geophys Res, 2006, 111: C10015CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Blumberg A F, Mellor G L. A description of a three-dimensional coastal ocean circulation model. In: Heaps N S, ed. Three-Dimensional Coastal Ocean Models. Washington, DC: AGU, 1987. 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Karypis G, Kumar V. Metis—A software package for partitioning unstructured graphs, partitioning meshes, and computing fill-reducing orderings of sparse matrices-Version 4.0, 1998Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen C S, Liu H D, Beardsley R C. An unstructured grid, finite-volume, three-dimensional, primitive equations ocean model: application to coastal ocean and estuaries. J Atmos Ocean Tech, 2003, 20: 159–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Szymkiewicz R. Oscillation—Free solution of shallow water equations for nonstaggered grid. J Hydraul Eng-ASCE, 1993, 119: 1118–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kobayashi M H, Pereira J M, Pereira J C. A conservative finite-volume second-order-accurate projection method on hybrid unstructured grids. J Comput Phys, 1999, 150: 40–75MATHCrossRefMathSciNetADSGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wu L, Bogy D B. Use of an upwind finite volume method to solve the air bearing problem of hard disk drives. Comput Mech, 2000, 26: 592–600MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Smolarkiewicz P K. A fully multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm with small implicit diffusion. J Comput Phys, 1984, 54: 325–362CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen C, Beardsley R C, Cowles G. An unstructured grid, finite-volume coastal ocean model. FVCOM User Manual, 2006Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brown J M, Wolf J. Coupled wave and surge modelling for the eastern Irish Sea and implications for model wind-stress. Cont Shelf Res, 2009, 29: 1329–1342CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oey L Y, Ezer T, Wang D P, et al. Loop current warming by hurricane Wilma. Geophys Res Lett, 2006, 33: L8613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Donelan M A, Dobson F W, Smith S D, et al. On the dependence of sea surface roughness on wave development. J Phys Oceanogr, 1993, 23: 2143–2149CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Feddersen F, Guza R T, Elgar S, et al. Alongshore momentum balances in the nearshore. J Geophys Res, 1998, 103: 15667–15676CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rosales P, Ocampo-Torres F J, Osuna P, et al. Wave-current interaction in coastal waters: Effects on the bottom-shear stress. J Mar Syst, 2008, 71: 131–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Grant W D, Madsen O S. Combined wave and current interaction with a rough bottom. J Geophys Res, 1979, 84: 1797–1808CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Signell R P, Beardsley R C, Graber H C, et al. Effect of wave-current interaction on wind-driven circulation in narrow, shallow embayments. J Geophys Res, 1990, 95: 9671–9678CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ting F C K, Kirby J T. Observation of undertow and turbulence in a laboratory surf zone. Coast Eng, 1994, 24: 51–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rakha K A. A Quasi-3D phase-resolving hydrodynamic and sediment transport model. Coast Eng, 1998, 34: 277–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wu X Z, Zhang Q H. A three-dimensional nearshore hydrodynamic model with depth-dependent radiation stresses. China Ocean Eng, 2009, 23: 291–302Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Newberger P A, Allen J S. Forcing a three-dimensional, hydrostatic, primitive-equation model for application in the surf zone: 2. Application to DUCK94. J Geophys Res, 2007, 112: C8019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Smith W, Sandwell D T. Global sea floor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings. Science, 1997, 277: 1956–1962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Levitus S, Boyer T P. World Ocean Atlas 1994, Volume 4: Temperature. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1994. 117Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Levitus S, Burgett R, Boyer T P. World Ocean Atlas 1994, Volume 3: Salinity. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1994. 91Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Powell M D, Houston S H, Amat L R, et al. The HRD real-time hurricane wind analysis system. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 1998, 77–78: 53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chin T M, Milliff R F, Large W G. Basin-scale, high-wavenumber sea surface wind fields from a multiresolution analysis of scatterometer data. J Atmos Ocean Tech, 1998, 15: 741–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Onogi K, Tslttsui J, Koide H, et al. The JRA-25 reanalysis. J Meteorol Soc Jpn, 2007, 85: 369–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Egbert G D, Erofeeva S Y. Efficient inverse modeling of barotropic ocean tides. J Atmos Ocean Tech, 2002, 19: 183–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Oey L Y, Lee H C. Deep eddy energy and topographic Rossby waves in the Gulf of Mexico. J Phys Oceanogr, 2002, 32: 3499–3527CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kim S Y, Yasuda T, Mase H. Numerical analysis of effects of tidal variations on storm surges and waves. Appl Ocean Res, 2008, 30: 311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sheng Y P, Alymov V, Paramygin V A. Simulation of storm surge, wave, currents, and inundation in the Outer Banks and Chesapeake Bay during hurricane Isabel in 2003: The importance of waves. J Geophys Res, 2010, 115: C4008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kim S Y, Yasuda T, Mase H. Wave set-up in the storm surge along open coasts during typhoon Anita. Coast Eng, 2010, 57: 631–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Craig P D, Banner M L. Modeling wave-enhanced turbulence in the ocean surface layer. J Phys Oceanogr, 1994, 24: 2546–2559CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wang J H, Shen Y M. Development of an integrated model system to simulate transport and fate of oil spills in seas. Sci China Tech Sci, 2010, 53: 2423–2434CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina

Personalised recommendations