WAVE.

HEIGfiTS AND SET-UP

IN A SURF ZONE.

By I . A. Svendsen

Dept. of C i v i l Engineering
*)
U n i v e r s i t y of Delaware

A p r i l 1983

On leave from I n s t , of Hydrodyn. and Hydraul. Engrg.,

T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y of Denmark.
ABSTRACT

A t h e o r e t i c a l model i s developed f o r wave heights and set-up i n a

s u r f zone. I n the time averaged equations of energy and momentvmi the energy

f l u x , r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and energy d i s s i p a t i o n are determined by simple

approximations which include the surface r o l l e r i n the breaker. Comparison

w i t h measurements shows good agreement. Also the t r a n s i t i o n s immediately

a f t e r breaking are analysed and shown to be i n accordance w i t h the above

mentioned xdeas and r e s u l t s .

 5

1. INTRODUCTION

The proper modeling of wave motion i n the s u r f zone on a l i t t o r a l

c o a s t has been the goal o f many i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n p a r t i c u l a r i n the l a s t

two decades. Yet i n s p i t e of progress both i n terms of a growing stock o f

r e l i a b l e ejcperimental r e s u l t s and i n t h e o r e t i c a l understanding o f the p r o c e s s e s

the general impression o f the s i t u a t i o n today i s s t i l l t h a t much remains t o

be done.

The- p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s mainly t h e o r e t i c a l but r e l i e s h e a v i l y

on experimental evidence a t a number o f p o i n t s . I t also i n d i r e c t l y leans

on the many c o n t r i b u t i o n s i n the l i t e r a t u r e which have helped to show t h a t

conventional wave t h e o r i e s cannot be used to d e s c r i b e s u r f zone waves.

As i n most o f those c o n t r i b u t i o n s we only consider i n t e g r a l p r o p e r t i e s

of the waves and work with equations time averaged over a wave p e r i o d . The

goal i s only to d e s c r i b e the wave height and mean water l e v e l (set-up) v a r i a -

tions. T h i s means t h a t the i n t e g r a l wave p r o p e r t i e s we need to determine

f i r s t of a l l a r e energy f l u x , r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and energy dissipation.

I n s p i t e of the f a c t t h a t i n t e g r a l p r o p e r t i e s

should be l e s s s e n s i t i v e to minor i n a c c u r a c i e s i n the d e t a i l s of the wave

d e s c r i p t i o n i t i s g e n e r a l l y accepted t h a t l i n e a r wave theory i s too d i f f e r e n t

to y i e l d a proper d e s c r i p t i o n of energy f l u x and r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s i n the s u r f

zone. Some authors have t r i e d to use s o l i t a r y wave theory (see e.g., Divoky

e t a l . , 1968), c n o i d a l theory or hyperbolic wave theory (James, 1974, i s an

example) which are other e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e wave t h e o r i e s . For reasons t h a t

1
 2

may become c l e a r from the present c o n t r i b u t i o n these p a r t i c u l a r suggestions

do not work, but t h i s conclusion i s often concealed by the f a c t t h a t r e s u l t s

obtained f o r the wave heights and set-up a l s o depend on how the energy

d i s s i p a t i o n i s modelled.

Also the idea o f a s i m i l a r i t y s o l u t i o n for the waves has been pursued.

Such an approach i s more l i k e l y to be able to lead to acceptable r e s u l t s ,

although i n the form presented by Wang s Yang (1980) i t i m p l i c i t l y assumes

t h a t the wave height t o water depth i s a constant which we know i s not t h e

case (see e.g., the experimental r e s u l t s by Horikawa s Kuo (1966), and a l s o

t h i s paper).

I n acknowledgement of the l i m i t e d success of the t h e o r e t i c a l

i n v e s t i g a t i o n s and the access t o modern measuring techniques such a s LDA,

c o n t r i b u t i o n s have been published g i v i n g both very d e t a i l e d measurements of

v e l o c i t y and p r e s s u r e f i e l d s and computations of p a r t i c u l a r l y r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s

and momentum balance from the b a s i c d e f i n i t i o n s (see S t i v e , 1980, and S t i v e

& Wind, 1982).

The p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r e v a l u a t i n g the energy d i s s i p a t i o n are f a r more

restricted. I n p r i n c i p l e turbulence i s created by two sources: the bottom

boundary l a y e r and the s u r f a c e breaker. I n p r a c t i c e , however, the bottom

d i s s i p a t i o n i s t o t a l l y outweighted by the d i s s i p a t i o n due t o breaking, and

i s consequently neglected here.

The i d e a which turns out t o be most f r u i t f u l i n determining the

energy d i s s i p a t i o n ( i f a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the turbulent flow i s not

attempted) i s based on the resemblance of s u r f zone waves with bores. This

 3

was discussed by LeMehauté (1962) and l a t e r by Divoky e t a l . (1968). To

f i t measiirements, however, they used the motion of a non-saturated breaker

suggested by LeMehauté (1962), which i m p l i e s an energy d i s s i p a t i o n s m a l l e r than

the d i s s i p a t i o n i n a h y d r a u l i c jtimp of the same height as the wave. This i s

the opposite r e s u l t of t h a t found by Svendsen e t a l . (1978) who concluded t h a t

the d i s s i p a t i o n i n a c t u a l measurements were l a r g e r than i n a jump o f the same

heights The. explanation f o r t h i s controversy probably l i e s i n the d i f f e r e n t

values used f o r t h e energy f l u x . I n s e c t i o n 7 we w i l l see t h a t i n a c n o i d a l

•or s o l i t a r y wave (used f o r a s s e s s i n g the energy flvix by Divoky e t a l . ) t h e

energy f l u x f o r a given wave height i s much smaller than i n a s u r f zone wave.

Hence the s m a l l e r d i s s i p a t i o n required by Divoky e t a l . f o r a given (measured)

wave height decrease.

In t h e present paper we simply use the h y d r a u l i c jump expression f o r

the energy d i s s i p a t i o n . T h i s i s i n r e a l i z a t i o n of two f a c t s .

F i r s t l y Svendsen S Madsen (1981) e s s e n t i a l l y confirmed the conclusion

±n Svendsen e t a l . (1978) tin the following denoted I ) , but t h e i r r e s u l t s

i n d i c a t e t h a t many f a c t o r s a r e involved, and f u r t h e r s t u d i e s show t h a t the

d e v i a t i o n from the h y d r a u l i c jump d i s s i p a t i o n i n most c a s e s i s l e s s than 20%.

Secondly the other e f f e c t s studied i n the following are found t o be

more important.

The paper may be considered a continuation of the work reported i n I .

To determine t h e wave height and set-up v a r i a t i o n we consider the equations

of energy and momentum balance, both averaged over the wave period (section 2 ) ,

and i n s e c t i o n 3 derive a closed form s o l u t i o n to the energy equation. In

 4

s e c t i o n 4 we i n v e s t i g a t e an a n a l y t i c a l s o l u t i o n f o r a s p e c i a l case. This

r e v e a l s t h a t neglecting set-up there i s only one parameter K (given by t h e

wave p r o p e r t i e s a t the s t a r t i n g point) which determines the wave h e i g h t s .

K i s a combination o f the bottom slope parameter S = h L/h i d e n t i f i e d f o r

s h o a l i n g by Svendsen S Hansen (1976) (h i s bottom slope, L wave length and

h watei: depth), the wave height t o water depth r a t i o H/h and the dimensionless

energy f l u x B.

The three wave p r o p e r t i e s mentioned e a r l i e r (the energy f l u x ,

r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and energy d i s s i p a t i o n ) are determined i n s e c t i o n 5. Here

i t becomes necessary t o concentrate on the inner region (defined i n I ) o f

the s u r f zone where the waves have become b o r e - l i k e ( F i g . 1 ) . I t i s shown

t h a t the most important feature i s the e x i s t e n c e o f a surface r o l l e r which

t o the f i r s t approximation can be considered as a voltime of water c a r r i e d

with the wave. The r o l l e r almost doubles both energy flxxx. and r a d i a t i o n

s t r e s s r e l a t i v e t o a shallow water wave otherwise o f the same shape.

Fig. 1 ' .

Section 6 shows comparison with experimental r e s u l t s i n the inner

region. Both wave heights and set-up are w e l l p r e d i c t e d .

When i t comes to the outer region ( F i g . 1 ) , however, some p a r a d o x i c a l

f e a t u r e s are i d e n t i f i e d i n the measurements ( s e c t i o n 7 ) . The paradox i s r e -

solved by c o n s i d e r i n g jump conditions analogous to those applied f o r bores

and h y d r a u l i c jiimps. T h i s i m p l i e s using the momentum and energy equations

f o r the e n t i r e outer region. The r e s u l t s show t h a t the expressions derived

 5

i n Section 5 for waves i n the inner region are c o n s i s t e n t with r e s u l t s f o r

waves before breaking.

Throughout the d e r i v a t i o n s the simplest and lowest order approximations

have been used. Thus many d e t a i l s such as non-uniform v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e s , the

e f f e c t of the strong txirbulence, e t c . are simply neglected. The reason i s

t h a t these aspects, however important, turn out to be minor c o r r e c t i o n s

r e l a t i v e to the e f f e c t s included. Hence the following i s meant as an attempt

to show t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e f o r the wave motion i n a s u r f zone to formulate

a crude model which reproduces a l l the major f e a t u r e s observed i n the

measurements.
 2. THE BASIC EQUATIONS

We consider the two dimensional problem sketched i n F i g . 2 which a l s o

shows the d e f i n i t i o n of v a r i a b l e s .

Fig. 2

The three b a s i c equations t o be s a t i s f i e d represent the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f

mass, momentum and energy, i n t e g r a t e d over depth and averaged over a wave

period T.

The conseirvation o f mass w i l l not be invoked e x p l i c i t l y but used i n the

way the p a r t i c l e v e l o c i t i e s i n the wave a r e evaluated.

We consider r e g u l a r p r o g r e s s i v e waves only and hence the momentum

equation simply reads

as
XX an (2.1)
= - p g ( h + n)
9x ax

where S i s the r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s defined (exactly) by ( denoting average

XX

over a wave period)

S = P + F„
XX m p
(2.2)

2^
P = pu dz
m P -h

with the dynamic p r e s s u r e p^^ given by

= pgz + p (2.3)

2-1
 2-2

Using f o r mean energy f l u x and V f o r energy d i s s i p a t i o n , the energy

equation (also averaged over a wave period) becomes

9E
3x = V (2.4)

The general d e f i n i t i o n of E^ i s

'1

= [(p^ + I p(u^ + v^ + w^)]u dz (2.5)

I n both (2.3) and (2.5) v e l o c i t i e s and p r e s s u r e s are the instantaneous

v a l u e s , so t h a t these d e f i n i t i o n s a l s o cover the turbulent flow s i t u a t i o n s i n

a s u r f zone. S i n c e , however, any ordered mechanical energy t h a t i s turned

i n t o turbulence w i l l be reduced to heat w i t h i n roughly-the f o l l o w i n g wave

p e r i o d we s h a l l choose i n (2.4) t o consider only the f l u x of (ordered) wave

energy, that i s , consider energy l o s t as soon as i t has been changed t o

turbulence. To i l l u s t r a t e t h i s we w r i t e

^ f = ^f,w-^^f ..

Where E ^ i s the t o t a l f l u x of t u r b u l e n t energy (by a l l means, i n c l u d i n g

d i f f u s i o n ) and (with v = 0)

1 2 2
"^f ,w - J (Pj3 + J p(u + w )u dz (2.7)
-h
(~ denoting ensemble averaged values) i s the f l u x of "wave energy."

Hence (2.4) becomes

9E, 9E;
-f'-^ = p _ f = (2.8)
3x 9x t

where then equals minus the production of turbulent energy

 2-3

But i n the steady wave motion considered a l s o equals minus the

energy d i s s i p a t i o n V .

Hence i n (2.4) we simply use (2.7) f o r and t h i s means c o n s i d e r i n g

only ordered wave energy, which i s a c h o i c e , not an approximation.

I t i s convenient f o r the following a n a l y s i s t o introduce non-dimensional

measures of both the wave energy f l u x E , the r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and the

I ,w
energy d i s s i p a t i o n . The following d e f i n i t i o n s are used.

B = E^ Y(pgcH^) (2=9)

P = S^ p g H 2 (2.10)

D = P^.(4hT/pgH^) (2.11)

where T i s the wave p e r i o d and c the speed of propagation f o r the wave.

3. A CLOSED FORM SOLUTION TO THE ENERGY EQUATION

I t t u m s out t h a t the energy equation can be solved i n c l o s e d form

f o r a f a i r l y general type o f problem. With (2.11) and (2.7) s u b s t i t u t e d

C2.4) reads

f>w ^ H D (3.1) •
3x 4HT

The v a r i a t i o n of the wave height i s a combination of t h r e e e f f e c t s :

the change i n water depth (which on a beach causes a wave height i n c r e a s e ) ,

the d i s s i p a t i o n of energy (tending to reduce the wave height) and the change

i n shape o f the wave (taken i n a r a t h e r general sense) which i s r e f l e c t e d i n

the v a r i a t i o n o f R, P and D.

Whereas the f i r s t two of these e f f e c t s are represented i n the time

averaged equations, the same time averaging has excluded the p o s s i b i l i t y of

a s s e s s i n g the change i n wave shape (n, u, p, e t c . ) d i r e c t l y from the equations

and the v a l u e s of B, P and D must be evaluated s e p a r a t e l y (see s e c t . 5) . ,

Hence i n the f o l l o w i n g we assume these parameters are known.

To obtain a s o l u t i o n to (3.1) we introduce a shoaling c o e f f i c i e n t

K defined so t h a t a t any depth

s

2 2
c B ( K H ) = c B H = const (3.2)
^ s r r r r

where index ^ r e f e r s to some chosen reference p o i n t . T h i s equation would

give the H v a r i a t i o n i n the absence of d i s s i p a t i o n . The a c t u a l wave height

i s then expressed as

H = K K^H (3.3)
s d r

3-1
 3-2

which defines the d i s s i p a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t K^. Thus we get using (3.2) which

implies a/8x(cBK ^) = 0:
s

= 2pg K^K^CBK/H^ =2E^^^

(' denoting 3/9x) which s u b s t i t u t e d i n t o (3.1) y i e l d s

4cBhT
d

or

K' K H D
d _ s r
2 ~ ScBhT

or

K H D
s r (3.4)
8cBhT

So f a r no assiomptions have been introduced n e i t h e r about the type of

wave considered (except t h a t i t i s r e g u l a r and progressive) nor about the

nature of the energy d i s s i p a t i o n . Thus (3.4) a p p l i e s to waves i n the s u r f

zone as w e l l as to the attenuation of waves due to bottom f r i c t i o n . (3.4)

even a p p l i e s to the growth of waves due to wind energy being added i f we l e t

n > 0. I n the f o l l o w i n g , however, we concentrate on the s u r f zone where

D < 0.

We now make the assumption (which w i l l l a t e r be j u s t i f i e d ) t h a t the

c o e f f i c i e n t s on the r i g h t hand s i d e only depend on the water depth h. (For

a numerical e v a l u a t i o n of the following s o l u t i o n t h i s assumption may be relaxed

to include a weak dependence on H as w e l l . ) Hence (3.4) may be integrated

d i r e c t l y giving
 •X K H D
s r (3.5)
dx
K. K ScBhT
'dr X

where the i n t e g r a t i o n constant i s K^^ = 1 f o r x^ x^. That i s

-r-l
•X K DH
s r (3.6)
^d = 1 - dx
ScBhT

R e c a l l i n g t h a t (3.2) i m p l i e s

— '*;r— (3.7)
s c B

we therefore get f o r H by s u b s t i t u t i o n i n t o (3.3)

3 ^-1
H X DK
1 - dx (3.8)
8c B T
r r r

We see t h a t t h i s c l o s e d form s o l u t i o n depends on one combination of the wave

p r o p e r t i e s a t the reference point, namely

H , H h
1 r r
(3.9)
8c B T 8B h L
r r r r r

C3-8), however, corresponds to a c e r t a i n change i n x. And s i n c e K mainly

s

depends on h t h i s means t h a t the bottom slope h i s a c t u a l l y a parameter a s

well. For monotonously changing depth we can express t h i s e x p l i c i t l y by

changing to h a s i n t e g r a t i o n v a r i a b l e . This y i e l d
fX DK h
1 - K s
x r dh
h h'
r X X
r
with (3.10)
 3-4

and h ish a t the reference point. Hence the wave height v a r i a t i o n i n

xr X

a s u r f zone w i l l be the same f o r a l l wave conditions having the same value

of K a t the s t a r t i n g p o i n t of the computation (which, i n p r i n c i p l e , may be

any point from the breaking point where D becomes non-zero and shorewards) .

I t a l s o shows t h a t the bottom slope i t s e l f i s not a proper measure

of the steepness of the beach. The r e l e v a n t parameter i s h L/h, which i s

the same, slope peirameter. as was found f o r the shoaling of waves by Svendsen

& Hansen (1976).

Notice t h a t h i n c l u d e s the set-up, t h a t i s

h^hg^ + ïï (3.11

where h ^ ^ i s the depth i n the absence of waves.

 Is

4. ANALYTICAL SOLUTION FOR A SPECIAL CASE

One s p e c i a l case i s of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t as i t renders an a n a l y t i c a l

solution possible. I t corresponds to a plane beach with D and B c o n s t a n t and

c = c i/qh. The l a t t e r assxmption with c s l i g h t l y l a r g e r than /gh - and hence

c s l i g h t l y more than Vgh but varying l i k e h. ' - was found i n I to be a good

approximation.

I n t h i s case the i n t e g r a l i n (3.10) may r e a d i l y be solved and we get

I =s • t^ •••• "•
with
W X U H
h-
IJ.
= 5i _ ^ (4.1)
j,.V4^,^4^(^.-3/4_^j3 h

I n t h i s s o l u t i o n i s included the set-up n determined from the s o l u t i o n

of t h e momentum equation. T h i s , however, i s nonlinear i n n and not s o l v a b l e

except i f H/(h+n') i s assumed constant (Bowen e t a l . (1968)). Although

t h i s -is not r e a l i s t i c ^ f o r the major p a r t of the s u r f zone , n « h and

hence i n e v a l u a t i o n (4.1) we may e i t h e r completely neglect n ( v i z means

h' - (h/h ) ).or use the above mentioned approximation H/h = a = const.

The l a t t e r g i v e s the approximation

^ - '1 ~ "i^^swL - \,sm)

(4.2)

a, =
l+2a2p

or ( i f we n e g l e c t i n comparison to h^)

(1 + a^) - (4.3)
^ r ^ SWL

4-1
 4-2

which d i f f e r from Bowen e t a l . ' s r e s u l t i n t h a t a i s not ass\amed equal to

0.8.

Figs. 3
& 4 F i g s . 3 and 4 show the v a r i a t i o n of H/H^ and H/h*(H^/h^) versus

h' = Ch/h f o r d i f f e r e n t values of KD and n = 0.

SWL r'SWL

I n these f i g u r e s we could, f o r example, consider the r e f e r e n c e p o i n t

taken a t the breaking point.

Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i s the v a r i a t i o n of the wave h e i g h t t o water

depth r a t i o H/h. As a n t i c i p a t e d H/h i s f a r from constant f o r any value o f KD.

For a wide range o f KD, however, (which a l s o turns out to be p r a c t i c a l l y

r e a l i s t i c ) the H/h v a r i a t i o n shows a minimum which may be recognized a l s o

i n many experimental r e s u l t s (see e.g., Horikawa s Kuo (1966)).

C l e a r l y t h i s phenomenon r e f l e c t s the b a s i c f e a t u r e mentioned above

t h a t the wave height v a r i a t i o n i s a balance between shoaling and d i s s i p a t i o n .

T h i s can more r e a d i l y be seen by w r i t i n g (3.1) i n the form ( f o r d e r i v a t i o n see I )

h c B 2
H + _D_ (4.4)
h h 2c 2B h 8cTB

The f i r s t bracket on the r i g h t s i d e represents the s h o a l i n g , the l a s t

term the d i s s i p a t i o n . Since a t the reference (breaker) p o i n t H/h w i l l u s u a l l y

be quite l a r g e , the second term w i l l dominate provided [D| i s s u f f i c i e n t l y

l a r g e as i n a breaker. Hence a t a s t a r t (H/h)^ i s negative. As (H/h)^

however decreases f a s t e r with H/h than does (H/h)""" the d i f f e r e n c e between

the two terms decreases t i l l (H/h) ~ 0. Hence were i t not f o r other e f f e c t s

H/h would asyifiptotically approach the value obtained by equating the r i g h t

s i d e to zero.
 4-3

At the same time, however, as h decreases for constant h^ both b^/h

and c^/c i n c r e a s e s and near the shore l i n e t h i s e f f e c t becomes completely

dominating r e s u l t i n g i n the shown i n c r e a s e i n H/h.

The p o s i t i o n of the minimum f o r H/h can be found from (4.4) t o be

(with c^/c = h ^ 2 h )

h D

(Notice t h a t both h^ and D are < 0.) I f we introduce K t h i s becomes

(H/h) . ^ T
"^"^
(H/h)^ = I
4 (KD>4r^)"^ (4.6)

which may be solved i n combination w i t h (4.1). The r e s u l t i s t h a t the minimum

f o r H/h occurs a t

14/3
8 KD
h' .
20 KD - 15
mxn

T h i s value and the corresponding value of H/h are shown i n F i g . 5.

Fig. 5

We a l s o see t h a t f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y small KD(<' 1.25 i t turns out) the

wave height w i l l be i n c r e a s i n g already from the reference p o i n t . This i s

not l i k e l y to happen f o r breakers but w i l l sometimes be the s i t u a t i o n where

the d i s s i p a t i o n i s caused by bottom f r i c t i o n (that i s seawards of the breaking

point).

On the other hand, the s i t u a t i o n may a l s o occur t h a t a wave approaching

a shore w i l l not break a t a l l because i t s energy i s being d i s s i p a t e d by bottom

f r i c t i o n f a s t e r than the height can i n c r e a s e due to s h o a l i n g , so t h a t i t never

 lb

4-4

reaches a height s u f f i c i e n t f o r breaking to occur. Obviously t h i s r e q u i r e s

a very small bottom slope and we see from (3.10) t h a t h^ small l e a d s to K

l a r g e so t h a t even with the small D from bottom f r i c t i o n KD becomes l a r g e r

than 1.2S. ( P i g . 4 a l s o i n c i d a t e s t h a t i f breaking i s to be avoided entirely

then h must decrease shorewards. With constant h (however small) the wave

height w i l l s t a r t to i n c r e a s e sooner or l a t e r and hence the wave w i l l reach

breaking.)

The question, however, remains whether B, D and P can be considered

constants through the s u r f zone (as assumed i n t h i s s e c t i o n ) , and what their

v a l u e s w i l l be.
 i'i

5. ENERGY FLUX, RADIATION STRESS AND ENERGY DISSIPATION IN THE SURF ZONE

The s o l u t i o n s derived above can t h e o r e t i c a l l y be used r i g h t from the

breaking point and shorewards, but i t has often been pointed out (see e.g.,

I ) t h a t the flow i n the s o - c a l l e d "outer region" immediately shoreward o f the

breaking p o i n t i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from the conditions i n the i n n e r

region. The t r a m s i t i o n s i n the outer region w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 7.

F i r s t , however, values of the dimensionless parameters B, P and D

a r e detejnnined i n the inner region.

The important f e a t u r e dominating the wave motion i n t h i s region i s

t h e s u r f a c e r o l l e r , which i n essence i s a volume of water c a r r i e d shorewards

w i t h the breaker. F i g . 6 shows a t y p i c a l s i t u a t i o n , and a l s o i n d i c a t e s a

t y p i c a l v e l o c i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n along a v e r t i c a l a t the f r o n t of the wave.

Fig. 6

The r o l l e r i s defined as the r e c i r c u l a t i n g p a r t of the flow above

the d i v i d i n g s t r e a m l i n e ( i n a coordinate system following the wave). Since

i t i s r e s t i n g on the f r o n t o f the wave the absolute mean v e l o c i t y i n t h e r o l l e r

equals the propagation speed c f o r the wave, and i n the following we use t h i s

value f o r the v e l o c i t y i n the r o l l e r , n e g l e c t i n g the z - v a r i a t i o n .

From t h i s • i t follows t h a t the r o l l e r represents a s i g n i f i c a n t

enhancement of the ordinary Stokes d r i f t Q . Thus a s u r f zone wave p o t e n t i a l l y

5

r e p r e s e n t s a much bigger mass t r a n s p o r t than non-breaking waves. The a c t u a l

net mass f l u x , however, i s i n any s i t u a t i o n determined by the boundary c o n d i t i o n s

i n the x - d i r e c t i o n , and i n the general three dimensional case i t w i l l a l s o

5-1
 5-2

depend strongly on the longshore v a r i a t i o n s of bottom topography and wave

heights.

I n the present two dimensional study we assume a zero net mass f l u x

(Q = 0 ) , which of course implies t h a t there i s a return flow compensating f o r

the surface d r i f t .

From observations we know t h a t i n the inner region the change i n

wave shape i s slow so the instantaneous volume f l u x

rn
u(x,z,t)dz (5.1)
-h

may b a determined a s

Q=cn+Q=Ud+Q (5.2)

where the surface p r o f i l e i s s p e c i f i e d so t h a t n" = 0. U i s the wave p a r t i c l e

v e l o c i t y averaged over depth. As mentioned we s h a l l f u r t h e r assume t h a t Q = 0.

Fig. 7
Although i t i s a crude s i m p l i f i c a t i o n the v e l o c i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n shown

i n F i g . 7 w i l l contain a l l the primary information o u t l i n e d above and we w i l l

use t h a t . The t h i c k n e s s e of the surface r o l l e r w i l l be zero except i n the

f r o n t which i s i m p l i c i t l y understood i n the following d e r i v a t i o n s . Hence we

get

Q = cn = ce + u^(d-e) (5.3)

Outside the r o l l e r we have

u = c(ri - e ) / ( d - e) (5.4a)
o
 21
5-3

and i n the r o l l e r

u = c (5.4b)

The pressure i n the wave motion i s of course not s t a t i c . I n combination

with the r a t h e r crude assumptions made above, however, i t i s c o n s i s t e n t t o assxime

a s t a t i c pressure v a r i a t i o n corresponding to the l o c a l , instantaneous p o s i t i o n

of t h e f r e e s u r f a c e . That i s , using (2.3)

Pj3 = pgn (5.5)

The Energy F l u x B

With these assumptions we f i r s t c a l c u l a t e the non-dimensional energy

f l u x B defined by ( 2 . 9 ) . Substituted into (.2.7) t h i s y i e l d s (omitting the

" which i n d i c a t e s t h e t u r b u l e n t ensemble averaging)

,|pCu2 .„2, (5.6)

2
pgcH -h ° ^

Introducing the assumptions o u t l i n e d above - which a l s o i m p l i e s

n e g l e c t i n g the w^-contribution - we f i r s t get from (2.7)

^f,w=R + Ï p^'<3-=Ef,o ^ f ,1 (s-'^)

-h
where E i s the f i r s t term i n the i n t e g r a l and E - the second. (5.5) g i v e s
r,u r ,i

rn
Pj^udz = pgnudz (5.8)
-h -h

which by v i r t u e of (5.2b) becomes

^ f , 0 " P^^"^^ " pgcH^(n/H)^ (5.9)

 Thus the r o l l e r does not contribute to t h i s term. For E we get
x ,x

n-e
u dz + c'^dz
^f,i = h o

1 2 H ^ 1 3 1
2PgcH ^' edt (5.10)

where c - gh and TI .« h has been used i n the f i r s t term. Since n = 0 we will

3 2

f i n d t h a t (ri/H) « (ri/H) , the l a t t e r being an i n t e g r a l of a non-negative

q u a n t i t y (see Hansen, l a s a i .

The a r e a A of the s u r f a c e r o l l e r i s defined as

edt = - edx = (5.11)

c

where X i s the l e n g t h of the r o l l e r (see P i g . 6 ) . I n (5.10) t h i s y i e l d s

1 3 A 1 „2 A h
(5.12)
^f,l = 2 P° 1 = 2
rl
which shows t h a t the c o n t r i b u t i o n to the energy f l u x from the s u r f a c e r o l l e r

i s p r o p o r t i o n a l to i t s area i n the v e r t i c a l plane.

Veiry l i t t l e information i s a v a i l a b l e about the s i z e of the s u r f a c e

roller. Duncan (1981) has measured A i n a breaker behind a towed h y d r o f o i l ,

and h i s r e s u l t s are shown i n F i g . 8. For the present a p p l i c a t i o n we will

approximate these r e s u l t s with

A ~ 0.9 H (5.13)

and hence we get f o r E_

^ f ,w
r \2
1 + 0.45 - (5.14)
^f,w ^ IJ
 2Z
5-5

and from (5.6) f o r B

n "dt + i . A . = 1 n
dt + 0.45 - (5.15)
- I [HJ
2 gL T [HJ L

Here L i s a l o c a l quantity defined as cT, not the p h y s i c a l d i s t a n c e

between two consecutive wave c r e s t s .

Values of B defined a s
o
•T 2
IL dt
O T H
•'0

a r e shown-for waves i n the s u r f zone i n F i g . 9. The measurements a r e a l l

Fig. 9 taken on a 1/34.3 slope a t ISVA and the r e s u l t s only show the trend i n the

variation. C l e a r l y there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t amount of s c a t t e r i n g but a l s o some

systematic v a r i a t i o n with wave parameters (such as the deep water steepness

H / L ) which needs f u r t h e r documentation and a n a l y s i s ,

o o

The main tendency, however, i s q u i t e obviously t h a t from the p o i n t

of breaking B^ i n c r e a s e s r a p i d l y from a r e l a t i v e l y small v a l u e (indicating a

r a t h e r peaky wave p r o f i l e r e p r e s e n t i n g a small energy f l u x f o r a gxven wave

height) towards values around 0.07 - 0.08. The v a r i a t i o n may be f u r t h e r

i l l u s t r a t e d by the examples given i n Table 1 f o r some simple s u r f a c e p r o f i l e s .

Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t a r e the value 0.083 and 0.089 f o r t r i a n g u l a r and

p a r a b o l i c wave shapes r e s p e c t i v e l y , because s u r f zone wave p r o f i l e s o f t e n

resemble such shapes a s P i g . 10 shows.

F i g . 10
 5-6

Table 1

The Radiation. S t r e s s P

The r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s defined by (2.2) represents the time averaged

momentum f l u x . I n (2.2) i s included the e f f e c t of the t u r b u l e n t normal

s t r e s s e s a s w e l l as any net volume f l u x superimposed on the wave.

The l a t t e r , however, we are excluding here. The c o n t r i b u t i o n from

the t u r b u l e n t s t r e s s e s was analysed by S t i v e s Wind (1982) on the b a s i s of

experimental data. They concluded t h a t t h i s e f f e c t only i n c r e a s e s the r a d i a t i o n

s t r e s s by some 5%. P a r t of the reason f o r t h i s modest e f f e c t o f strong

turbulence i s t h a t the v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y f l u c t u a t i o n s reduce the p r e s s u r e

whereas t h e h o r i z o n t a l f l u c t u a t i o n s i n c r e a s e the momentum f l u x . Hence i n

the present context we may n e g l e c t the t u r b u l e n t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o S ^ .

Using (5.5) we then get f o r i n (2.2)

1 2 1 2
F pgndz - — pgn = -r pgn (5.17)
P J-h ^ ^

which by means of (5.16) may be w r i t t e n

 5-7

(5.18)

For F ^ we get, using (5.4a,b)

2 2 (5.19)
F = pu dz = p u (d-e) + c e
m o
-h

Here

2 2
2,^ X 2 n - 2rie + e (5.20)
. u (d-e) = c
o d-e

which we approximate by u s i n g e « d. We a l s o n o t i c e t h a t s i n c e e 7^ Q almost

symmetrically around n = 0 the value of ne must be very s m a l l . Hence we get

2 2 2 c ^2 -
e| .eh
F - pc ~ p - H (5.21)
m H

From Duncan's r e s u l t s can be found t h a t e/H - 0 . 3 and s i n c e e = 0

2 2
over most o f the wave p r o f i l e i t follows t h a t (e/h) « (ri/H) so t h a t we

f o r F get (again using c - v'gh)

m

2, Ah, (5.22)
^m~ (B^-^--)
H

I n combination w i t h (5.18) and (5.13) t h i s y i e l d s f o r S X X

(5.23)

or

P = I + 0.9 7" (5.24)

2 o L

With the r e s u l t s from F i g . 9 f o r B^ and a t y p i c a l value of 0.05 - 0.10 f o r

h/L we see t h a t the presence of the s u r f a c e r o l l e r roughly doubles the

radiation stress.
 5-8

The Energy D i s s i p a t i o n D

The t h i r d parameter i n the equations i s the dimensionless energy

d i s s i p a t i o n D. A d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of D i s q u i t e complicated and i s considered

unnecessary i n combination w i t h the s i m p l i f y i n g assiomptions introduced a t a

number of other p o i n t s . Svendsen S Madsen (1981) showed t h a t n e g l e c t i n g the

form change the energy d i s s i p a t i o n i n a s u r f zone wave can be determined by

D = 1 + _i±i E—Ë ° • (5.25)

°bore . V - " c

where a, 8 are c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r depth averaged v e l o c i t y and p r e s s u r e c o n t r i b u t i o n s

i n the momentum and energy equations, and ^ and ^ r e f e r to trough and c r e s t

respectively. With the assumptions o u t l i n e d above, however, t h i s e x p r e s s i o n

s i m p l i f i e s to

D = D (5.26)
bore

where D i s the energy d i s s i p a t i o n i n a bore of the same height as the Wave,

bore
The dimensional form of DJ^QJ,Q is (C = ^^/^^)

AE = p g Q d ^ i ^ ^ (5.27)

(see e.g., Henderson (1966)). I n a wave Q = u^d^ = ch so t h i s may a l s o be

written

AE = pgch (5.28)
t c

I f we assume t h a t each breaker s u f f e r s a s i m i l a r d i s s i p a t i o n per

second then the mean d i s s i p a t i o n per m^ bottom area i s A E / L . And substituting

 2^
5-9

t h i s for i n (2.11) then y i e l d s

D = J i — (5.29)
\%
Introducing the c r e s t e l e v a t i o n i n s t e a d of d^ and d.^. we get

d = h + n ; d. = h + n ^ - H (5.30)
C G t C

and thus

D = (5.31)

whick shows t h a t f o r f i x e d n /H D does depend s l i g h t l y on H/h. F i g . 11 shows

c
the v a r i a t i o n and F i g . 12 g i v e s v a l u e s of from the experiments quoted

above. As was the case f o r B the r e s u l t s f o r n^/H show s i g n i f i c a n t s c a t t e r i n g

but i n the i n n e r region of the s u r f zone the value i s mostly 0.6 - 0.7 which

from F i g . 11 i s seen to represent a D n e a r l y independent of H/h.

F i g . 11 a l s o shows t h a t D only v a r i e s s l i g h t l y with n^/H. In other

words, the primary v a r i a t i o n of the energy d i s s i p a t i o n i s represented by the

H"^/h dependency a l r e a d y accounted f o r i n the d e f i n i t i o n (2.11).

 2^

6. COMPARISON WITH MEASUREMENTS

The outer and the inner region

The o r i g i n a l concept o f an outer ( t r a n s i t i o n ) region and an i n n e r

(bore) region was p r i m a r i l y based on the v i s u a l observations of wave behaviour

a f t e r breaking (see I ) . The impression i s one of a gradual change towards the

bore shape- found^ i n t h e i n n e r region. Consequently no attempt was made t o

d e f i n e a proper l i m i t between.the two regions and wave height measurements

t r u l y do not suggest a n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n .

The s i t u a t i o n i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t when the v a r i a t i o n s i n mean water

l e v e l a r e considered. F i g . 13 shows some examples from Hansen S Svendsen

(1979) covering a wide range o f deep water steepnesses. They a l l e x h i b i t a

marked change i n the slope o f the mean water l e v e l a t some d i s t a n c e shoreward

from the breaking p o i n t . A s i m i l a r v a r i a t i o n can a l s o be; seen i n other

i n v e s t i g a t i o n s such a s Bowen e t a l . (1968) andT S t i v e & Wind (1982). The mean

water l e v e l i s h o r i z o n t a l o r weakly sloping over a d i s t a n c e o f 5-8 times t h e

breaker depth and then a r a t h e r sharp i n c r e a s e i n slope o c c u r s . The d i s t a n c e

of n e a r l y h o r i z o n t a l mean water l e v e l i s comparable t o the d i s t a n c e o f t h e most

obvious transformations of t h e wave shape f o l l o w i n g a f t e r the i n i t i a t i o n o f

breaking, and so i t w i l l be coherent with the o r i g i n a l concept t o define t h e

l i m i t between the outer and the inner region as the point where the slope o f

the mean water l e v e l changes. I n the f o l l o w i n g t h i s i s termed t h e t r a n s i t i o n

point.
 2^

6-2

Wave c o n d i t i o n s i n the i n n e r region

P h y s i c a l explanations f o r these changes a r e sought i n s e c t i o n 7.

F i r s t , however, we n o t i c e t h a t s i n c e the r e s u l t s d e r i v e d above f o r the parameters

B, P and D a r e based on the wave p r o p e r t i e s i n the i n n e r zone comparisons w i t h

experimental data should s t a r t i n t h a t r e g i o n . I t i s 'convenient t o use the

same r e f e r e n c e p o i n t i n a l l computations. To s t a r t computations a t the above

d e f i n e d t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t (and emphasize the a r b i t r a r i n e s s o f t h e r e f e r e n c e

p o i n t ) we t h e r e f o r e w r i t e (3.6) as

DK
dh + dh (6.1)
hh
^d '=rV h
•— r t

which upon d e f i n i t i o n o f

H fh^ DK dh
t s (6.2)
^t Sc^B^T h X
r
can be w r i t t e n

H rh DK
dh (6.-3)
, hh
^d ^t ^°rV

(which can a l s o ba obtained d i r e c t l y from C3,5)). For the wave h e i g h t t h i s means

fh' . -r-l
Ddh' (6.4)
h^ (c'B')^/\'_

where we i n analogy to (4.1b) have d e f i n e d

= c/c^ ; B' = B/B^ (6.5)

K i s given by (3.10b) and K^ by (6.2) which can a l s o be w r i t t e n (see (3.3) and

(3.7))
 - 3o
6-3

r r

I n a l l these e x p r e s s i o n s index ^ i n d i c a t e s v a l u e s a t the t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t .

Using t h i s ( s l i g h t l y more general) v e r s i o n o f the s o l u t i o n d e r i v e d i n

s e c t i o n 3 we a r e s t i l l f r e e t o l e t the r e f e r e n c e p o i n t a l s o be, f o r example,

the t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t . I n the f o l l o w i n g computations, however, and the c o r r e -

sponding f i g u r e s we have chosen the breaker p o i n t (B) as r e f e r e n c e .

The momentiam equation (2.1) i s solved simultaneously w i t h t h e

determination o f the wave h e i g h t . Hence (3.11) i s used f o r h i n ( 6 . 4 ) .

With (2.10) and (5.24) s u b s t i t u t e d (2.1) becomes

d n ^ J ^ ^ j ( 3 + 0.9 ^)H^] (6.7)

dx , - dx ' ^2 o L'
h+ri

I n the computations we n e g l e c t the v a r i a t i o n of B^ and assume t h a t h/L

^'ïP'. I t i s emphasized again t h a t t h i s means c i s p r o p o r t i o n a l to /gh, n o t

e q u a l t o (see I ) . For B and n i s used B = 0.075 (see P i g . 9) and n /H

^ O C O V-

= 0.6 ( F i g . 1 2 ) . '

D i s c u s s i o n of r e s u l t s

F i g s . 14, 15 and 16 show a comparison w i t h r e s u l t s f o r t h r e e r a t h e r

d i f f e r e n t wave s t e e p n e s s e s , a l l on a plane slope 1/34.3. I n g e n e r a l the

agreement i s q u i t e good p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r the set-up. The l a t t e r i s of p a r t i c u l a r

i n t e r e s t because the c a l c u l a t i o n s show t h a t n i s much more s e n s i t i v e to the

assumptions made than i s the wave h e i g h t v a r i a t i o n . As can be expected from

what was s a i d above the H v a r i a t i o n i s v i r t u a l l y independent of t h e choice o f

 6-4

I t i s n o t i c e d t h a t i n some of the c a s e s the H - v a r i a t i o n i s s l i g h t l y less

curved than corresponding to the b e s t f i t of measurements, and the v a l u e s of

H grow a l i t t l e too l a r g e . T h i s tendency w i l l be f u r t h e r a m p l i f i e d i f a l a r g e r

v a l u e f o r n /H i s used (see P i g s . 11 and 1 2 ) . Both these p o i n t s can be adjusted

c

by using a v a l u e of D perhaps 20-30% l a r g e r than given by (5.31), which i s

q u i t e c o n s i s t e n t with the r e s u l t s reported e a r l i e r (see I and Svendsen S Madsen,

1981) t h a t the a c t u a l energy d i s s i p a t i o n i n a s u r f zone wave i s l a r g e r than i n

a hydratü-ic jump of the same hèight.

The e f f e c t of i n c l u d i n g the s u r f a c e r o l l e r i n B can be understood by

c o n s i d e r i n g the energy equation i n the form ( 4 . 4 ) . I n the f i r s t b r a c k e t repre-

s e n t i a q the s h o a l i n g mechanism B ^ B i s much s m a l l e r than the other two terms.

So the v a l u e o f B mainly e n t e r s the. l a s t term,. Hence, the,• incijease i n B due to

the r o l l e r i s e q u i v a l e n t to a s i m i l a r decrease i n D , and the o b s e r v a t i o n above

t h a t D i s too s m a l l could a l s o be due to an o v e r e s t i m a t i o n of B.

i n F i g s . 14-16 are a l s o i n c l u d e d r e s u l t s obtained by o m i t t i n g the

sxirface r o l l e r (.dqtted curve corresponding to B = B^ and P = 3/2 B^) . The

e f f e c t i s quite appreciable. On the other hand, c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t the p r e s e n c e

of the s u r f a c e r o l l e r n e a r l y doubles energy f l u x and r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s the

d i f f e r e n c e between the f u l l and the dotted l i n e s i n these f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e s

t h a t the e f f e c t of a l s o i n c l u d i n g turbulence, d e v i a t i o n from s t a t i c pressure,

etc. would h a r d l y be d i s c e r n i b l e .

The s t r o n g e s t j u s t i f i c a t i o n , however, f o r the importance of the s u r f a c e

r o l l e r i s obtained by c o n s i d e r i n g the motion i n the t r a n s i t i o n region.

7. THE WAVE MOTION IMMEDIATELY AFTER BREAKING

I t i s tempting and i l l u s t r a t i v e f i r s t t o t r y i f the s o l u t i o n p r e s e n t e d

i n the p r e v i o u s chapters a l s o a p p l i e s t o the r e g i o n of r a p i d t r a n s i t i o n r i g h t

a f t e r the i n i t i a t i o n o f breaking.

Fig. 17 shows a computation o f the wave height v a r i a t i o n , s t a r t i n g a t

the breaking p o i n t . The agreement i s s u r p r i s i n g l y good. (Again e i t h e r D i s .

s l i g h t l y too s m a l l o r B too l a r g e . ) T h i s , however, does not apply t o F i g . 18,

which g i v e s a s i m i l a r comparison f o r the set-up n/h^^g. The two f i g u r e s

together- show t h e • p a r a d o x i c a l f a c t a l r e a d y h i n t e d a t e a r l i e r t h a t t h e

r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s i n t h e t r a n s i t i o n region s t a y s n e a r l y constant even w i t h a

30-40% decrease i n wave h e i g h t . Recalling (2.10) t h i s can only be t r u e i f P

i s i n c r e a s i n g , roughly--as; H. ,.

By c o n s i d e r i n g what happens when the breaking s t a r t s , i t becomes c l e a r

t h a t t h e c o l l a p s e o f the wave cannot immediately be matched by d i s s i p a t i o n o f

a''similar amount o f energy. I n the f i r s t transformation a l a r g e amount o f t h e

l o s t p o t e n t i a l energy i s converted i n t o forward momentum f l u x which e v e n t u a l l y

i s concentrated mainly i n t h e r o l l e r , and t h i s must be t h e reason f o r t h e

simultaneous i n c r e a s e i n P.

T h i s i s a l s o c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the f a c t t h a t P f o r v e r y high waves i s

rather small. There a r e no r e s u l t s a v a i l a b l e f o r the skew waves a t the breaking

p o i n t , but the high order r e s u l t s f o r Stokes waves presented by C o k e l e t (1977)

can be used t o determine P f o r very high, symmetrical waves. F i g . 19 shows

the v a r i a t i o n of P w i t h H/h f o r two v a l u e s of h/L. Notice t h a t f o r the h i g h e s t

 53
7-2

waves P i s l e s s than h a l f the value o f 3/15 f o r l i n e a r long waves and

c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s than P f o r c n o i d a l waves of the same h e i g h t .

The i n c r e a s e i n P, however, i s i n e v i t a b l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a

s i m i l a r i n c r e a s e i n B, the energy f l u x f o r a wave of u n i t h e i g h t and

propagation speed. The problem i s the same as f o r P: very steep waves

w i t h peaky c r e s t s r e p r e s e n t a very s m a l l energy f l u x r e l a t i v e t o t h e i r

h e i g h t ( F i g . 20 shows r e s u l t s s i m i l a r t o those f o r P) and t h e c o l l a p s e o f

the c r e s t i n the i n i t i a l stage o f breaking l e a d s t o a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e

i n B.

As we w i l l see s h o r t l y thèse.shifts i n P and B a r e a l s o c o n s i s t e n t

w i t h t h e . r e s u l t found i n Chapter 5, t h a t waves i n the i n n e r region r e p r e s e n t

r a t h e r - h i g h v a l u e s o f - r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and energy f l u x r e l a t i v e t o - t h e i r

h e i g h t and speed.

B u t even w i t h no energy d i s s i p a t i o n an i n c r e a s e in-B w i l l i n i t s e l f

require d e c r e a s i n g wave h e i g h t . - Hence -fche' q u e s t i o n a r i s e s : hov; much of the

wave height decrease i n t h e o u t e r t r a n s i t i o n region i s a c t u a l l y due t o r e -

d i s t r i b u t i o n of energy (represented by the changes i n P and B) and how much

i s r e a l energy d i s s i p a t i o n ?

T h i s problem and t h e change i n B and P can be a n a l y s e d by c o n s i d e r i n g

the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f momentum and energy over t h e t r a n s i t i o n region a s a whole

i n analogy t o the jump c o n d i t i o n s t h a t a p p l i e s t o bores and h y d r a u l i c jumps

i n open channel flow and t o shocks i n compressible flows.

 2>f
7-3

Between the breaking p o i n t (denoted w i t h s u f f i x g) and the t r a n s i t i o n

point we have from (2.8)

I?dx = (7.1)
^ f , t - ^f,B

where I i s the width of the t r a n s i t i o n r e g i o n . We are i n t e r e s t e d i n determining

how l a r g e a f r a c t i o n i s of the energy d i s s i p a t i o n we would have had, had B

s t a y e d c o n s t a n t and equal to B^. T h i s energy d i s s i p a t i o n would o b v i o u s l y have

been

^m = P^Bg^o^H^' - C ^ H / ) = E ^ ^ ( ^ J [ ^ ] - 1) (7.2)

by v i r t u e o f ( 2 . 9 ) . Using (2.9) i n (7.1) as w e l l y i e l d s

2 B.
1) (7.3)

so t h a t the r a t i o we a r e looking f o r i s

v. rH ^2
A = a = (7.4)
tm a - 1 ^«B

I n the momentum equation (2.1) we have 3n/3x = 0 and hence.

u s i n g C2.10)

(7.5)
\ = ^ B ( W '

F i n a l l y s i n c e P. and B a r e given by (5.24) and (5.15), respectively.

we have by e l i m i n a t i o n of B between those two

o

(7.6)
= f ^t - V^B
 7-4

Thus i f we know the p r o p e r t i e s of the wave a t breaking we can determine

B^, and A- I n need of more c o r r e c t information we use (from F i g s . 19 and

20) f o r an example w i t h h /L_ = 0.057

= 0.05 , Pg = 0.07

and assume the t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t i s a t h^ = 0.85 w i t h H^/Hg = 0 . 6 5 . We then

get from (7.4)

A = 0.33

which means t h a t only 33% of the energy t h a t corresponds to the decrease i n

wave height i s a c t u a l l y l o s t - The i n c r e a s e i n B accovints f o r the r e s t . We

f u r t h e r get

C7.5): P =0.166 a g a i n s t (.5.24): P = 0.152

t
(7.6): B^ - 0.103 a g a i n s t (5.15): B^ = 0.094

Thus the v a l u e of P and B. r e q u i r e d to a c c o m t f o r the gross change

ll t —

i n the r a d i a t i o n stress/mean water l e v e l and the wave height over the t r a n s i t i o n

r e g i o n agrees w e l l w i t h the v a l u e s we can determine f o r a wave a t tha s t a r t of

the bore r e g i o n u s i n g the i d e a s from s e c t i o n 5.

T h i s i s taken as another i n d i c a t i o n t h a t the i d e a s presented i n t h a t

s e c t i o n f o r the p r o p e r t i e s of waves i n the i n n e r region are a t l e a s t q u a l i t a t i v e l y

correct.

As mentioned above the constant r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s i n the t r a n s i t i o n

region must imply

 7-5

P « H"^ (V.7)

Most measurements f u r t h e r show t h a t H v a r i e s approximately linearly, i . e . ,

H a - ax (7.8)

a f t e r breaking. Since the v a r i a t i o n of H i s much f a s t e r than the v a r i a t i o n

2
i n depth, and s i n c e E_ H we may neglect c i n (2.8) and w r i t e

1 ^ f - °x 2a DH ^y^gj
dx B " H 4hLB

However i f we i n t h i s equation - i n analogy with the s i t u a t i o n i n the bore

r e g i o n represented by ( 7 . 6 ) - assume t h a t B « P + c o n s t , then (7.9) yields

D = 0 which c l e a r l y i s not c o r r e c t . Hence ( 7 . 9 ) i s not s u i t a b l e f o r a s s e s s i n g

D on the b a s i s of some reasonable c o n j e c t u r e f o r B.

So i f one wants to be a b l e t o extend the method d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s paper

t o the t r a n s i t i o n region there i s room f o r both f u r t h e r experimental investi-

g a t i o n s and f o r some e m p i r i c a l i n t e r p o l a t i o n formulas f o r the develop-

ment of D from zero a t the breaking p o i n t to the v a l u e given by (5.31)

a t the t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t . >

I n the absence of such r e s u l t s t h e r e i s always the p o s s i b i l i t y of u s i n g

( 7 . 7 ) f o r P i n the t r a n s i t i o n region to get the c o r r e c t n - v a r i a t i o n and l e t B

and D be given by the bore v a l u e s (5.15) and (5.31) r i g h t from the breaking

p o i n t (which we have seen w i l l give approximately the c o r r e c t H - v a r i a t i o n ) ,

I t i s j u s t t h a t t h i s means B i s discontinuous a t the breaking p o i n t (which,

of course i s not t r u e ) and i t i s a l s o an u n s a t i s f a c t o r y procedure from a p h y s i c a l

p o i n t of view because i t obviously does not model the r e a l p r o c e s s e s .

 37

8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

The p h y s i c a l mechanisms behind the v a r i a t i o n of wave h e i g h t s and

set-up i n the s u r f zone have been analysed and a t h e o r e t i c a l model has been

suggested. I t i s based on r a t h e r simple approximations f o r the i n t e g r a l

p r o p e r t i e s o f the wave motion. Comparison i n the inner r e g i o n of the s u r f

zone w i t h ejqperiments shows acceptable agreement.

An attempt has been made to e x p l a i n the nature of the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s

of the waves i n t h e t r a n s i t i o n zone r i g h t a f t e r breaking (Section 7) .

The methods f o r determining the non-dimensional energy f l u x B,

r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s P and energy d i s s i p a t i o n D can e a s i l y be r e f i n e d , the c r e s t

e l e v a t i o n rj /H may perhaps more c o r r e c t l y be determined by a l i n e a r l y de¬

c

creasing function, e t c . Such improvements, however, are not l i k e l y t o change

t h e b a s i c c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the major d i f f e r e n c e between s u r f zone waves and

o r d i n a r y waves i s represented by the s u r f a c e r o l l e r . And as a f i r s t approxi-

mation the r o l l e r can be considered as a volume of water c a r r i e d shoreward

w i t h the wave. T h i s p i c t u r e i s found t o be i n accordance both w i t h the motion.

a l l e g e d f o r the i n n e r r e g i o n and with the changes o c c u r r i n g over the t r a n s i t i o n

region,

The author g r a t e f u l l y acknowledges a c c e s s to the unpublished data

s e n t by J . Biihr Hansen and used i n some of the f i g u r e s .

 52

REFERENCES

BOWEN, A. J . , D. L . INMAN S V. P. SIMMONS .(l'968) . Wave 'set-down' and wave

set-up. j; Geophys. Res.,73_, 2569,

COKELET, E . D, (19771. Steep g r a v i t y waves i n water of a r b i t r a r y uniform

depth.. P h i l . T r a n s . Roy. Soc. Lond. , 286, 183-230.

DIVOKY, D., B„ LEMEHAUTÉ S A. L I N (1968). Breaking waves on g e n t l e s l o p e s .

J a u r . Geophys. Res., 75_, 1681-1692.

DUNCAN, J . -H. (19^81) . An experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n of b r e a k i n g waves

produced by a towed h y d r o f o i l . Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., A 377, 331-348.

HANSEN, J . B. (1980). Experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of p e r i o d i c waves near

breaking. Proc. 17 Coast. Engrg. Conf., Sydney, 260-277.

HANSEN, J . B. (1982). Wave measurements i n the s u r f zone. P r i v a t e communi-

c a t i o n o f unpxiblished d a t a .

HANSEN, J . B. & I . A. SVENDSEN (1979). Regular waves i n s h o a l i n g water,

experimental d a t a . I n s t . Hydrodyn'. & Hydr. Engrg. S e r i e s Paper 21.

HENDERSON, F. M. (1966). Open channel flow. Macmillan P u b l . Co., N.Y.,

522 pp.

HORIKAWA, K & C. KUO (1966), Wave t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a f t e r b r e a k i n g p o i n t .

10th Conf. Coast. Engrg., Tokyo, 217-233.

JAMES, I . D. (1974). Non-linear waves i n t h e nearshore r e g i o n : Shoaling and

set-up. E s t u a r i n e C o a s t a l Mar. S c i . , 2_, 207-234.

LEMEHAUTÉ, B. (1962). On t h e non-saturated breaker theory and t h e wave

run-up. Proc. 8 t h Coast. Engrg. Conf., 77-92.

 39

STIVE, M. J . F. (1980). V e l o c i t y and p r e s s u r e f i e l d o f s p i l l i n g b r e a k e r s .

Proc. 17th Coast. Engrg. Conf., Sydney, 547-556.

STIVE, M. J . P. & H. G. WIND (1982). A study of r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s and set-up

i n the nearshore region. C o a s t a l Engineering, 6_, 1-25.

SVENDSEN, I . A. S J . B. HANSEN (1976). Defonnation up t o breaking o f p e r i o d i c

waves on a beach. Proc. 15th Coast. Engrg. Conf., Honolulu, Chap. 27,

477-496.

SVENDSEN, i.A., P. A. MADSEN a J . B. HANSEN (1978). Wave c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n

the STirf zone. Proc. 16th Coast. Engrg. Conf., Hamburg, I_, Chap. 29,

520-539.

SVENDSEN;. I . A. & P. A. MADSEN (1981). Energy d i s s i p a t i o n i n h y d r a u l i c jumps

and breaking waves. Progr. Rep. 55, I n s t . Hydr. & H y d r a u l i c Engrg.,

39-47.

WANG, H. S W-C. YANG (1980). A s i m i l a r i t y model i n the s u r f zone. Proc.

17th Coast. Engrg. Conf., Sydney, 529-546.

 ^0

L I S T OF CAPTIONS

1. Regions i n the s u r f zone Cf rora I ) ,

2. Definitions.

3. H/H from a n a l y t i c s o l u t i o n (4.1) v e r s u s (h/h_)^,„.

f 1
H from a n a l y t i c s o l u t i o n v e r s u s C h / h ^ l ^ g .
r
h
r
Minimum v a l u e s of H/h^^/(H^/h^) and the value h^^^ of h' a t which they

occvir.

6. The r o l l e r o f a s u r f zone wave.

7. The approximation f o r the h o r i z o n t a l v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e .

8. Cross s e c t i o n a r e a A f o r a r o l l e r . Measurements by Duncan (1981) .

9. Measured v a l u e s of B defined by (5.16). (Data from Hansen, 1982).

o

10. Wave p r o f i l e s i n the s u r f zone. Derived from measurements i n I .

11. The v a r i a t i o n of D w i t h H/h and n /H according to (5.31) .

c

12. Measurements of n /H i n the s u r f zone. , (Data from Hansen, 1982).

c

13. Measurements of the mean water l e v e l shoreward of tha b r e a k i n g p o i n t .

A l s o shown i s the v a l u e of l o c a l wave h e i g h t to breaker h e i g h t , H/H^.

(Measurements from Hansen & Svendsen, 1979).

14. Wave h e i g h t s and set-up f o r a wave with deep water steepness H^/L^ = 0.071.

Theory u s i n g (5.4) and ( 5 , 7 ) .

Measurements by Hansen S Svendsen (1979), Case B.

15. Wave h e i g h t s and set-up f o r a wave w i t h deep water steepness H^/L^ = 0.024.

Theory u s i n g (6.4) and ( 5 . 7 ) .

Measurements by Hansen (1982), Case H.

16. Wave h e i g h t s and set-up f o r a wave w i t h deep water steepness H^A^ = 0.0107.

Theory u s i n g (6.4) and ( 6 . 7 ) .

Measurements by Hansen & Svendsen (1979), Case N.

17. Wave h e i g h t u s i n g (6.4) and (6.7) from t h e breaking p o i n t .

Measurements by Hansen (1982), Case H.

13. Set-=-up u s i n g (6.4) and (6.7) from the breaking p o i n t .

Measurements by Hansen (1982).

19. The non-dimensional r a d i a t i o n s t r e s s f o r symmetrical waves.

R e s u l t s from Cokelet (1977), lowest order c n o i d a l waves.

20. The non-dimensional energy f l u x i n symmetrical waves.

• R e s u l t s from Cokelet (1977), lowest order c n o i d a l waves.

 RUN-UP

INNER REGION REGION

OUTER REGION
Rather slow change in wave shape No "sur-
' ^Rapid transitions of face roller."
Front part resembles (periodic) bore.
• wave shape.

Point of
breaking

MW5

F;g2
-J
 Bo
~ 0.034

X 0.034
O
O -«0.0093

A ^ O A 0.003

O O V -«0.0053
' 'V A
O 0.0053
0 ZsA
OS",, A + /- 0 . 0 3 4
V ^ A
O

0.5
1 1 I X _. 1 1 1 • < nn.

^5 9
 Hq/Lq

0.0^4
9-954
in 0.034
0 0.0093
0 0.0053

A 0.0030

0.0053
 CASE B CASE H
Ho/Lo -0.071 H Q / L O = 0 . 0 2 4

CASE C
0.048!
-•6
•
* •
0.81 Ty/^mm •
« •
1.0-

-4 -4 -4 ^
0.61 • / 0.6-
•
/o.s- •

h2
""•••^

ye
0.5 1.0 0.5 • v., .. .• -•.» •
1.0
:•- -
• - •. ' '
• • • •

r2 • • *•
•
• ft
^ •.; •

CASE N
B^Lo^ = a O I 0 7
CASE Q CASE R
0 . 0 0 3 1
Ho/Lo = 0 . 0 0 7 5
"T^^m m

- 4 - 4

yO.8- /o.s-
0.6i • •

h2-.-. -2
••
•
• . .
/ 0.6- • • / 0.6-
ft

0.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 • •

•
•
• •
• •

_-2 _-2
-0.05 1
Fig Is a
eo

0.5 H/h
-0.+ -0.2 0.0 0.2