Acta Oceanologica Sinica

, Volume 38, Issue 7, pp 36–47 | Cite as

Wave prediction in a port using a fully nonlinear Boussinesq wave model

  • Young-Kwang Choi
  • Seung-Nam SeoEmail author
  • Jin-Yong Choi
  • Fengyan Shi
  • Kwang-Soon Park


A wave forecasting system using FUNWAVE-TVD which is based on the fully nonlinear Boussinesq equations by Chen (2006) was developed to provide an accurate wave prediction in the Port of Busan, South Korea. This system is linked to the Korea Operational Oceanographic System (KOOS) developed by Park et al. (2015). The computational domain covers a region of 9.6 km×7.0 km with a grid size of 2 m in both directions, which is sufficient to resolve short waves and dominant sea states. The total number of grid points exceeds 16 millions, making the model computational expensive. To provide real-time forecasting, an interpolation method, which is based on pre-calculated results of FUNWAVE-TVD and SWAN forecasting results at the FUNWAVE-TVD offshore boundary, was used. A total of 45 cases were pre-calculated, which took 71 days on 924 computational cores of a Linux cluster system. Wind wave generation and propagation from the deep water were computed using the SWAN in KOOS. SWAN results provided a boundary condition for the FUNWAVE-TVD forecasting system. To verify the model, wave observations were conducted at three locations inside the port in a time period of more than 7 months. A model/model comparison between FUNWAVE-TVD and SWAN was also carried out. It is found that, FUNWAVE-TVD improves the forecasting results significantly compared to SWAN which underestimates wave heights in sheltered areas due to incorrect physical mechanism of wave diffraction, as well as large wave heights caused by wave reflections inside the port.


real-time wave forecasting FUNWAVE-TVD SWAN KOOS wave observations wave diffraction 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abadie S M, Harris J C, Grilli S T, et al. 2012. Numerical modeling of tsunami waves generated by the flank collapse of the Cumbre Vieja Volcano (La Palma, Canary Islands): tsunami source and near field effects. Journal of Geophysical Research, 117(C5): C05030, doi: Google Scholar
  2. Booij N, Ris R C, Holthuijsen L H. 1999. A third-generation wave model for coastal regions: 1. Model description and validation. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(C4): 7649–7666, doi: Google Scholar
  3. Borgman L E. 1984. Directional spectrum estimation for the Sxy gauges. Vicksburg, MS, USA: Waterways Experiment Station, 1–104Google Scholar
  4. Bouws E, Günther H, Rosenthal W, et al. 1985. Similarity of the wind wave spectrum in finite depth water: 1. Spectral form. Journal of Geophysical Research, 90(C1): 975–986, doi: Google Scholar
  5. Chen Qin. 2006. Fully nonlinear Boussinesq-type equations for waves and currents over porous beds. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 132(2): 220–230, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2006)132:2(220)Google Scholar
  6. Chen Qin, Kirby J T, Dalrymple R A, et al. 2003. Boussinesq modeling of longshore currents. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(C11): 3362, doi: Google Scholar
  7. Cho K H, Choi J Y, Jeong S H, et al. 2013. Development of a skill assessment tool for the Korea operational oceanographic system. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 32(9): 74–81, doi: Google Scholar
  8. Choi J, Kirby J T, Yoon S B. 2015. Boussinesq modeling of longshore currents in the SandyDuck experiment under directional random wave conditions. Coastal Engineering, 101: 17–34, doi: Google Scholar
  9. Choi Y K, Seo S N. 2015. Wave transformation using modified FUNWAVE-TVD numerical model. Journal of Korean Society of Coastal and Ocean Engineers, 27(6): 406–418, doi: 10.9765/KS-COE.2015.27.6.406Google Scholar
  10. Erduran K S, Ilic S, Kutija V. 2005. Hybrid finite-volume finite-difference scheme for the solution of Boussinesq equations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 49(11): 1213–1232, doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0363Google Scholar
  11. Goda Y. 2000. Random Seas and Design of Maritime Structures. 2nd ed. New Jersey: World Scientific, 443Google Scholar
  12. Guimarāes P V, Farina L, Toldo E Jr, et al. 2015. Numerical simulation of extreme wave runup during storm events in Tramandai Beach, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Coastal Engineering, 95: 171–180, doi: Google Scholar
  13. Kennedy A B, Chen Qin, Kirby J T, et al. 2000. Boussinesq modeling of wave transformation, breaking, and runup. I: 1D. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 126(1): 39–47, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2000)126:1(39)Google Scholar
  14. Kirby J T, Shi Fengyan, Tehranirad B, et al. 2013. Dispersive tsunami waves in the ocean: model equations and sensitivity to dispersion and Coriolis effects. Ocean Modelling, 62: 39–55, doi: Google Scholar
  15. Kirby J T, Wei Ge, Chen Qin, et al. 1998. FUNWAVE 1.0: fully nonlinear Boussinesq wave model Documentation and user’s manual. CACR-98-06, Newark, NJ, USA: University of DelawareGoogle Scholar
  16. Oh S H, Jeong W M. 2013. Characteristics of high waves observed at multiple stations along the east coast of Korea. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13(12): 3503–3514, doi: Google Scholar
  17. Park K S, Heo K Y, Jun K, et al. 2015. Development of the operational oceanographic system of Korea. Ocean Science Journal, 50(2): 353–369, doi: Google Scholar
  18. Rogers W E, Kaihatu J M, Hsu L, et al. 2007. Forecasting and hindcast-ing waves with the SWAN model in the Southern California Bight. Coastal Engineering, 54(1): 1–15, doi: Google Scholar
  19. Rusu L, Pilar P, Soares C G. 2008. Hindcast of the wave conditions along the west Iberian coast. Coastal Engineering, 55(11): 906–919, doi: Google Scholar
  20. Sandhya K G, Balakrishnan Nair T M, Bhaskaran P K, et al. 2014. Wave forecasting system for operational use and its validation at coastal Puducherry, east coast of India. Ocean Engineering, 80: 64–72, doi: Google Scholar
  21. Seo S N. 2008. Digital 30sec gridded bathymetric data of Korea marginal seas — KorBathy30s. Journal of Korean Society of Coastal and Ocean Engineers, 20(1): 110–120Google Scholar
  22. Shi Fengyan, Dalrymple R A, Kirby J T, et al. 2001. A fully nonlinear Boussinesq model in generalized curvilinear coordinates. Coastal Engineering, 42(4): 337–358, doi: Google Scholar
  23. Shi Fengyan, Kirby J T, Dalrymple R A, et al. 2003. Wave simulations in Ponce de Leon inlet using Boussinesq model. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 129(3): 124–135, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2003)129:3(124)Google Scholar
  24. Shi Fengyan, Kirby J T, Harris J C, et al. 2012. A high-order adaptive time-stepping TVD solver for Boussinesq modeling of breaking waves and coastal inundation. Ocean Modelling, 43-44: 36–51, doi: Google Scholar
  25. Shi Fengyan, Malej M, Smith J M, et al. 2018. Breaking of ship bores in a Boussinesq-type ship-wake model. Coastal Engineering, 132: 1–12, doi: Google Scholar
  26. Skamarock W C, Klemp J B, Dudhia J, et al. 2008. A description of the advanced research WRF version 3. NCAR/TN-475+STR, Boulder: National Center for Atmospheric ResearchGoogle Scholar
  27. The SWAN Team. 2017. SWAN implementation manual. SWAN Cycle III version 41.20A. The Netherlands: Delft University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  28. WAMDI Group. 1988. The WAM Model — A third generation ocean wave prediction model. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 18(12): 1775–1810, doi: 10.1175/1520-0485(1988)018<1775:TW-MTGO>2.0.CO;2Google Scholar
  29. Tolman H L. 1997. User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH-III version 1.15. NOAA/NWS/NCEP/OMB Technical Note 151, 97Google Scholar
  30. Wei Ge, Kirby J T, Grilli S T, et al. 1995. A fully nonlinear Boussinesq model for surface waves. Part 1. Highly nonlinear unsteady waves. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 294: 71–92, doi: Google Scholar
  31. Wei Ge, Kirby J T, Sinha A. 1999. Generation of waves in Boussinesq models using a source function method. Coastal Engineering, 36(4): 271–299, doi: Google Scholar
  32. Willmott C J. 1981. On the validation of models. Physical Geography, 2(2): 184–194, doi: Google Scholar
  33. Yamamoto S, Daiguji H. 1993. Higher-order-accurate upwind schemes for solving the compressible Euler and Navier-Stokes equations. Computers & Fluids, 22(2-3): 259–270Google Scholar
  34. Yoo J, Lee D Y, Ha T M, et al. 2010. Characteristics of abnormal large waves measured from coastal videos. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10(4): 947–956, doi: Google Scholar
  35. Yoon SB, Park WK, Choi J. 2014. Observation of rip current velocity at an accidental event by using video image analysis. Journal of Coastal Research, (72): 16–21Google Scholar
  36. Zhou J G, Causon D M, Mingham C G, et al. 2001. The surface gradient method for the treatment of source terms in the shallow-water equations. Journal of Computational Physics, 168(1): 1–25, doi: Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chinese Society for Oceanography and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young-Kwang Choi
    • 1
  • Seung-Nam Seo
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jin-Yong Choi
    • 3
  • Fengyan Shi
    • 4
  • Kwang-Soon Park
    • 3
  1. 1.Civil and Architectural Engineering DepartmentKEPCO Engineering and ConstructionGimcheon-siRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Task Force for Construction of RV ISABU Support FacilityKorea Institute of Ocean Science and TechnologyBusan Metropolitan CityRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Operational Oceanography Research CenterKorea Institute of Ocean Science and TechnologyBusan Metropolitan CityRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Center for Applied Coastal ResearchUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations