Contribution To The Theory of Undular Bores. A Journey Around The Korteweg de Vries Equation

WATER
#WaterMonographs
MONOGRAPHS
Contribution to the
Theory of Undular Bores
A journey around the
Korteweg–de Vries equation
Damien Violeau
Supported by
IAHR International Association

for Hydro-Environment
Engineering and Research
AIRH
Hosted by
Spain Water and IWHR, China
IAHR.org
June 5, 2022 9:14: RPS: IAHR Monograph Series
Contribution to the Theory of Undular Bores

$MRXUQH\DURXQGWKH.RUWHZHJņGH9ULHVHTXDWLRQ
Damien Violeau
1
2
Contribution to the
Theory of Undular Bores
$MRXUQH\DURXQGWKH
.RUWHZHJņGH9ULHVHTXDWLRQ
Damien Violeau
3
IAHR WATER MONOGRAPHS
Series Editor
Damien Violeau
LNHE, EDF R&D, France.
Saint-Venant Hydraulics Laboratory, Ecole des PontsParisTech, France.
E-mail: damien.violeau@edf.fr
The International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research (IAHR), founded in 1935, is a worldwide independent organisation of
engineers and water specialists working in fields related to the hydro-environmental sciences and their practical application. Activities range from river
and maritime hydraulics to water resources development and eco-hydraulics, through to ice engineering, hydro-informatics and continuing education
and training. IAHR stimulates and promotes both research and it’s application, and by so doing strives to contribute to sustainable development, the
optimisation of the world’s water resources management and industrial flow processes. IAHR accomplishes its goals by a wide variety of member
activities including: working groups, research agenda, congresses, specialty conferences, workshops and short courses; Journals, Monographs and
Proceedings; by involvement in international programmes such as UNESCO, WMO, IDNDR, GWP, ICSU, and by co-operation with other water-related
(inter)national organisations.
ISBN (electronic version): 978-90-824846-9-4

ISBN (printed version): 978-90-832612-0-1
CC BY-NC-ND
June 2022
Published by:
IAHR — International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research
Madrid Office Beijing Office

Paseo Bajo Virgen del Puerto 3, 28005, Madrid, SPAIN A-1 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, 100038, Beijing, CHINA
Tel: +34 913357908; Fax: +34 913357935 Tel: +86 1068781128; Fax: +86 1068781890
IAHR publications follow the Ethical Guidelines and Codes of Conduct provided by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).
Cover information: Favre waves upstream the Sisteron dam. French Alps. Photo by EDF
Typeset by Research Publishing, Singapore
Cover by tres estudio creativo, Spain
Technical editing Sean Mulligan, VorTech Water Solutions and National University of Ireland, Ireland
4
IAHR Water Monographs Contribution to the Theory of Undular Bores. A journey around the Korteweg–de Vries equation
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments iii
Presentation v
Nomenclature vii
Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1. Favre waves 1
2. The challenges of dispersive waves 2
Chapter 2. The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) 5

1. Building the KdV equation 5
2. KdV cnoidal wave and KdV soliton 7
3. Benjamin and Lighthill’s theory 12
Chapter 3. Inverse Scattering Transform (IST) 19

1. Notion of Lax pair 19
2. Principle of IST 20
3. Example: characterisation of a spectrum 21
4. Propagation and wave reconstruction 24
Chapter 4. Dispersive Shock Waves (DSW) 31

1. Whitham modulation 31
2. Riemann invariants 34
3. Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution 36
4. Characteristic curves 43
Chapter 5. Application to the Favre waves 49

1. Initial state 49
2. Theory and validation 52
Chapter 6. Dissipation effects 57

1. The Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation (KdVB) 57
2. Dissipative and dispersive shock wave 58
Summary and conclusions 67
Appendices 71
1. Appendix A: Rigorous derivation of the KdV equation 71
2. Appendix B: Elliptic functions and integrals 74
3. Appendix C: A Lax pair of KdV 77
4. Appendix D: Application of the GLM theorem to a discrete spectrum 78
5. Appendix E: Detail of Whitham’s calculations 79
References 81
IAHR.org #WaterMonographs i
ii
Acknowledgments
The author is grateful to the following persons who helped in the publication of this monograph: Estibaliz Serrano,
Dr Denys Dutykh, Prof. Oscar Castro-Orgaz, Dr Sean Mulligan, Prof. Pengzhi Lin, Dr Robert Ettema and an anonymous
reviewer. This work was funded by EDF, France.
IAHR.org #WaterMonographs iii

iv
Presentation
Undular bores are water-surface oscillations that propagate between two levels of stationary water. They occur under
various circumstances (such as tides, tsunamis, river dams and lock operations) and are a visible part of a larger group
of physical phenomena termed dispersive shock waves. The physics of free-surface undular bores is well documented
through on-site observations and laboratory measurements. But their mathematical description is the topic of many pub-
lications, often unknown to engineers. The history of these scientific theoretical investigations begins at the end of the
19th century, with the work of Boussinesq, Korteweg and de Vries (to name a few prominent physicists). In the second
part of the 20th century, physicists made important developments to understand and describe the growth and behaviour
of these dispersive shock waves. However, this topic of theoretical physics remains incompletely understood. Moreover,
investigating this domain may be diffcult for a non-specialist, because specific mathematical tools had to be invented to
handle this complicated, non-linear problem.
The purpose of the present monograph is to describe some of the most important and classic theoretical features of
undular bores, with the aim of enabling an engineer (or a non-specialist researcher) to journey through this beautiful
topic of mathematical physics. I decided to restrict this scientific journey to the Korteweg—de Vries equation, now rather
well understood and able to provide some quantitative predictions. The theoretical developments presented here, taken
from the most remarkable recent works on this topic (mainly under the initiatives of Profs. Gennady El, Roger J. Grimshaw
and Anatoly Kamchatnov), are illustrated with the application example of the so-called Favre waves. Inspired by my per-
sonal scientific education, I have tried to present the development in a rigorous way, but without difficult mathematical
concepts; a physical lecture à la Landau and Lifshitz, so to speak. I hope the reader will enjoy this journey and learn about
a vivid research topic with extensive applications.
Damien Violeau (IAHR member), 6th March 2022.
IAHR.org #WaterMonographs v
vi
Nomenclature
Acronyms
DSW Dispersive Shock Wave
GLM Gel’fand–Levitan–Marchenko equation
GP Gurevich and Pitaevskii
IST Inverse Scattering Transform
KdV Korteweg–de Vries equation
KdVB Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation
RH Rankine–Hugoniot relations
SSE Schrödinger Stationary Equation
SV Saint-Venant equations
Dimensionless numbers
F Relative Froude number
Fa Absolute Froude number
U Ursell number
U0 Initial Ursell number
Greek Symbols
¸ First root of f
˛ Second root of f
ffl See eqn. 4.60
” Dimensionless free surface elevation
⊥
” Dimensionless background water level
”0 Dimensionless initial elevation of the free surface
”h⊥ Dimensionless background water level of harmonic waves
”s⊥ Dimensionless background water level of solitons
‚ Third root of f
»n Square roots of the negative eigenvalues of the SSE
– Eigenvalue of the SSE
Dimensionless viscosity of KdVB
0 Dimensionless critical viscosity
! Dimensionless angular frequency
ffi Wave function
„ Wave phase
”˜ Free surface elevation
”˜0 Free surface elevation
!
˜ Angular frequency
“n See eqn. 3.23
Roman Symbols
‘ Dimensionless horizontal space scale of the initial condition
sˆ Dimensionless absolute hydraulic jump speed
sˆl Dimensionless absolute velocity of DSW leading edge
sˆt Dimensionless absolute velocity of DSW trailing edge
tˆ Relative dimensionless time
IAHR.org #WaterMonographs vii

Nomenclature IAHR Water Monographs
x̂ Absolute dimensionless horizontal space coordinate

A Second operator of a Lax pair
L First operator of a Lax pair
C̃ Long wave celerity
h̃ Rest depth
k̃ Wavenumber
s˜ Dimensionless hydraulic jump speed
t˜ Time
Ũ Background velocity
ũ Dimensionless SV fluid velocity
x̃ Horizontal space coordinate
A First integration constant in the Whitham equations of KdV
B Second integration constant in the Whitham equations of KdV
bn Transmission coefficients
c Dimensionless relative wave celerity
ch Dimensionless celerity of harmonic waves
cs Dimensionless celerity of solitons
E(m) Complete elliptic integral of the second kind
f (”) Fundamental polynomial of KdV
g Gravity acceleration
H Dimensionless wave amplitude
Hs Dimensionless amplitude of solitons
k Dimensionless wavenumber
K(m) Complete elliptic integral of the first kind
k? Dimensionless cnoidal wave number
kh Dimensionless wavenumber of harmonic waves
L Dimensionless wavelength
Lh Dimensionless wavelength of harmonic waves
m Modulation parameter
N Number of waves
r± Riemann invariants of the SV equations
r1;2;3 Riemann invariants of the Whitam equations of KdV
sl Dimensionless velocity of DSW leading edge
st Dimensionless velocity of DSW trailing edge
t Dimensionless time
v± Transport velocities of the SV equations
v1;2;3 Transport velocities of the Whitham equation of KdV
W Whitham’s state function
x Dimensionless horizontal space coordinate
viii #WaterMonographs IAHR.org

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1 Favre waves
The waves attributed to Henry Favre (1935) can occur upstream of a low dam after sluice gate closure. One observes a
wave train travelling upstream as highlighted in Figure 1. From that picture, one can make a few remarks. First of all,
each wave apparently keeps its shape while propagating, in particular the front wave crest elevation remains constant,
as one can see by looking at the wet area on the channel banks. Moreover, each crest elevation is slightly lower than the
previous one. Finally, the typical wave height1 H̃ is comparable to the typical distance between crests L̃, say one order
of magnitude less. As for the channel rest depth h̃, the banks slope suggests that it is comparable to H̃. Therefore, these
waves satisfy h̃ ∼ H̃ ∼ L̃=10.
Figure 1 Propagation of Favre waves upstream of the Sisteron dam (French Alps, photos by EDF). Top: view from upstream (the dam is located far away
while waves propagates towards us); bottom: view from downstream (waves propagate towards the horizon, the dam being behind the photographer).
1
All dimensional quantities have a tilde in this work. Most of time we will work with dimensionless quantities without tildes.
IAHR.org #WaterMonographs 1
Introduction IAHR Water Monographs
Predicting Favre waves is of interest for hydropower design and safety. After Favre’s pioneering experimental tests (1935),
several decades passed before more experiments were published (Treske, 1994 ; Prüser et Zielke, 1994 ; Soares-Frazão et
Zech, 2002 ; Bristeau et al., 2011). Many attempts of numerical simulations are also available in the literature (e.g. Prüske
et Zielke, 1994 ; Soares-Frazão et Zech, 2002 ; Bristeau et al., 2011 ; Gavrilyuk et al., 2016 ; Chassagne et al., 2019).
Favre waves belong to the category of undular bores, whose dynamics is analysed in this work from the perspective of
the Korteweg–de Vries equation. Free-surface undular bores develop in transition zones between two different water
levels, i.e. like a non-local shock wave. They can be observed in estuaries during a flood of spring tides, or during the
last stage of a tsunami propagation as it approaches the coasts. From experimental evidence, it is known that under such
conditions, local free-surface shock waves (hydraulic jumps) appear when the Froude number on the lowest elevation
side, calculated in a frame moving with the shock wave and denoted F > 1, is larger than a critical threshold estimated
to Fc = 1:35 by Treske (1994). However, more recent literature converge towards Fc = 1:30. This traditional hydraulic
jump is determined by instabilities leading to wave breaking (Kharib and Abid, 2017) and is well studied in the academic
literature. In the present work we thus look at the case 1 < F < Fc , for which undular bores appear. It is noteworthy that
undular bores are different than undular hydraulic jumps (Chanson and Montes, 1995). Undular bores appear in wide
channels and are almost two-dimensional (in a vertical cross-section), while undular jumps do not have this translational
invariance property, because of the shock-wave pattern arising from the lateral boundary layer separation (Castro-Orgaz
and Chanson, 2021).
Prüske et Zielke (1994) investigate a simple analytical model proposed by Gurevich and Pitaevskii (1973), based on
Whitham’s modulation of the Korteweg–de Vries equation, with qualitative comparisons to measurements. The topic of
this monograph is to analyse this approach in more detail, up to quantitative validations based on the experimental data
of Soares-Frazão et Zech (2002). We will also explain and test another analytical model by the same authors (Gurevich and
Pitaevskii, 1987), including energy dissipation. The theoretical developments proposed here are not new with respect to
the state-of-the-art; our purpose is to give an overview of the mathematical tools required to describe free-surface undular
bores (especially within the Korteweg–de Vries perspective), with emphasis on quantitative validation. Similar hydraulic
problems can be analysed with this technique, providing decent predictions that allow avoiding the use of expensive
numerical simulations.
2 The challenges of dispersive waves

The theoretical or numerical prediction of free surface (or fluid interface) waves is a difficult task for the following reason.
As a boundary, a free surface is the locus of boundary condition prescription, thus it influences the motion of the whole
fluid mass. In turn, because it is free, it moves according to the velocity that the whole fluid mass imposes. Therefore,
there is a strong and non-linear coupling between the motions of a free surface and of the bounded fluid. Said differently,
solving a free surface problem means handling a system of partial differential equations (PDE) on a time-space domain
that is unknown, being part of the solution that is being searched for.
The most popular way to circumvent this issue consists of vertically integrating the fluid governing equations (depth aver-
aging, which is possible as soon as the free surface elevation is a single-valued function of the horizontal space coordi-
nates), allowing the integration of surface boundary conditions in the resulting equations, while the free surface elevation
becomes an ordinary variable of the problem. But another issue is raised in this framework: the choice of the vertical dis-
tribution of stresses (essentially pressure).
Two special cases exist, allowing the resolution of these problems: linear waves on one hand, long waves on the other
hand. These cases are obviously ideal situations never encountered for in the nature, but their study is much useful in
many circumstances. Indeed, when the ratio H̃=h̃ is much smaller than 1, the equations can be linearised, and quite often
2 #WaterMonographs IAHR.org
exactly solved with help from our good friends Fourier, Laplace and a few others like Cauchy and Poisson. On the other
hand, when the ratio L̃=h̃ is large enough, the waves are said to be long waves. The vertical component of the velocity field
is then small enough to make the vertical pressure distribution almost hydrostatic; depth-averaging the free-surface Euler
equations then leads to the (non-linear) Saint-Venant equations, sometimes referred to as the shallow water equations.
These equations, hereafter denoted SV, allow the theoretical prediction of arbitrary non-linear waves using the celebrated
method of Riemann invariants and characteristic curves. In order to investigate the criterion regarding L̃=h̃, it is useful to
recall the frequency dispersion relations of the free-surface Euler equations Eq. 1.1 and of the SV equations Eq. 1.2, both
linearised for one-dimensional waves (i.e. waves propagating in a given direction and being invariant through translations
along the perpendicular direction, like many observed undular bores):
r
!
˜ g
Euler: = Ũ ± tanh k̃ h̃; 1.1
k̃ k̃
!
˜
q
Saint-Venant: = Ũ ± g h̃; 1.2
k̃
2ı
˜ and k̃ =
! L̃
denoting the angular frequency and wavenumber, respectively, while Ũ is the constant, depth-averaged
current velocity and g the gravity acceleration. The second of these equations is the limit of the first one in the case of
˜ k̃ − Ũ , non-dimensionalised using the long wave celerity C̃, as a function k̃ h̃,
long waves (kh ≪ 1). Figure 2 shows !=
where
q
C̃ + g h̃: 1.3
Figure 2 shows us that the SV equations are appropriate (i.e. are a good approximation of the Euler equations to model the
propagation of linear free-surface waves) as long as k̃ h̃ ≤ 0:2, hence if L̃=h̃ is greater than 30, say. In such a case the waves
!
˜
are non-dispersive, since their celerity k̃
= C̃ with respect to the local current does not depend on their wavelength (or
wavenumber).
|ω̃/k̃ − Ũ |/C̃
Saint-Venant
1.0
Euler
0.5
KdV
0.0 −1 k̃ h̃
0 1
10 10 10
Figure 2 One-dimensional, linearised dispersion relations for the Euler equations with a free surface Eq. 1.1, for the SV equations Eq. 1.2 and for the
KdV equation Eq. 2.2. In all cases, surface tension is neglected.
The above analysis, along with the observations of the previous section, tell us that Favre waves are non-linear and dis-
persive. Therefore, the SV equations are inappropriate to analyse or predict them, as well as for the understanding of all
undular bores. The same comment can be said about linearised equations. However, in the next chapters we will see that
Introduction IAHR Water Monographs
we can handle this problem in a simplified way, using a depth-integrated, weakly non-linear and weakly dispersive equa-
tion, called the Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV). This is not the only possible theoretical way to address undular bores
(or more generally non-linear dispersive waves and wave trains), but the present work is focused on the KdV equation
and its properties, with the aim to help hydraulicians (researchers or engineers) in understanding how they work.
CHAPTER 2
The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV)

1 Building the KdV equation
Expanding the dispersion relation Eq. 1.1 as a Taylor series with respect to k̃ h̃, we get
s
˛ ˛
˛!˜
˛ − Ũ ˛ = C̃ tanh k̃ h̃
˛
˛ k̃ 2.1
˛ k̃ h̃
» “ ”2 „“ ” «–
4
= C̃ 1 − 61 k̃ h̃ + O k̃ h̃ ;
which implies, to this order and keeping only waves that propagate towards the positive values of x in the frame of the
local current:
“ ”
˜ − Ũ + C̃ k̃ + 61 C̃ h̃2 k̃ 3 = 0:
! 2.2
The corresponding behaviour of !=

˜ k̃ − Ũ , non-dimensionalised with C̃, is plotted on Figure 2. We see that accounting
for the third-order term in k̃ allows us to approach Euler’s dispersion relation up to k̃ h̃ ≤ 0:6, thus up to L̃=h̃ greater than
10, say. It is a noticeable improvement compared to SV: we can describe waves that are three times shorter. The simplest
PDE with such a dispersion relation as Eq. 2.2 is obtained by identifying2 !
˜ to −i@t˜ and k̃ to i@x̃ , x̃ and t˜ being the space
and time coordinates. Formally, this procedure yields
“ ”
@t˜ + Ũ + C̃ @x̃ + 61 C̃ h̃2 @x̃ x̃ x̃ = 0: 2.3
One can decide to apply the latter operator to the free surface elevation ”˜ (x̃; t˜), measured from the reference level h̃.
However, in doing the above developments we started with a linearised dispersion relation. In order to obtain a non-linear
equation, we simply add an “advection” term:
r
“ ” g
”˜t˜ + Ũ + C̃ ”˜x̃ + 32 ”˜”˜x̃ + 61 C̃ h̃2 ”˜x̃ x̃ x̃ = 0: 2.4
h̃
√
where indices refer to partial derivatives. The factor (g =h̃) in the advection term is imposed by the physical dimensions.
As for the factor 32 , it cannot be explained by the above reasoning. As a matter of fact, this is not a rigorous derivation;
nonetheless it is worth noting that it is used by Landau and Lifshitz (1981, §39)3 . A correct, but longer derivation of Eq. 2.4
is given in Appendix A. Besides, another approach is briefly addressed in Section 3.
We now proceed to the following non-dimensionalisation:

1 C̃ t˜
t+ 6 ; 2.5
h̃ “ ”
x̃ − Ũ + C̃ t˜
x+ ;
h̃
3 ”˜
”+ 2 ;
h̃
which implies
@t @x C̃ Ũ + C̃
@t˜ = @t + @x = @t − @x ; 2.6
@ t˜ @ t˜ 6h̃ h̃
@t @x 1
@x̃ = @t + @x = @x :
@ x̃ @ x̃ h̃
We proceed as in quantum mechanics: the operator Eq. 2.3 applies to a plane wave ei (k̃ x̃−!˜ t ) .
2 ˜
3
I am indebted to Denys Dutykh for bringing this “derivation" to my attention.
The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs
We get
”t + 6””x + ”xxx = 0: 2.7
The above equation is attributed to Korteweg and de Vries (1895) and is referred to by their names4 , summarised by KdV
in the following. We will analyse this equation in this work, in order to describe a model for undular bores (in particular
for Favre waves). Note that, in its dimensionless form (and in the relative frame), the linearised dispersion relation, for
waves propagating on an arbitrary reference level5 ” ⊥ , now reads
! − 6” ⊥ k + k 3 = 0; 2.8
with
6h̃ h “ ”i
!= ˜ − k̃ Ũ + C̃ ;
! 2.9
C̃
k + k̃ h̃:
We can immediately make the following comments:
• Since the rest water depth h̃ is constant, the channel bed is assumed flat. One also supposes that it is (almost) straight
and has a rectangular, rather wide, constant section. In the more general case of an arbitrary section (like the trapezoidal
canal of Figure 1), the KdV equation should have corrective coefficients (see Fenton, 1973; Teng and Wu, 1997), as well
as on a variable bed (Schneider et al., 2018). It seems there is no known KdV equation for curved channels.
• The choice of a + sign confers to KdV a one-directional property: it is applicable to right-propagating waves only. In
fact, it is obvious that KdV is not invariant through a change of sign of x.
• The method whereby we made time dimensionless in Eq. 2.5 includes a change of reference frame: we move at the
constant velocity Ũ + C̃ with respect to the channel banks.
• The method to build KdV shows that dispersion is due to the ”xxx term, i.e. the space third derivative of the surface
elevation. As we explained, this term is appropriate for weakly dispersive waves.
• The ratio of the non-linear (advection) term to the dispersive term has an order of magnitude given by a dimensionless
number called the Ursell number 6 U :
non-linearity ””x H̃ ‘˜2D
= ∼ 3
2 + U: 2.10
dispersion ”xxx h̃3
where ‘˜D is a length scale that is appropriate for the evaluation of horizontal derivatives. In general it is not L̃, as we will
see. The rigorous construction of KdV given in Appendix A lies on the hypothesis that U is not very different from unity:
dispersion and non-linearity should be of the same order of magnitude (which is not the case for all waves in nature,
of course). This means that the waves should be weakly non-linear to ensure the validity of KdV.
Other systems of PDE can represent surface non-linear dispersive waves, like the family of Boussinesq’s systems (initiated
by Bounssinesq, 1877), the Serre equations7 (1953), etc. A quite exhaustive list is given in El and Hoefer (2016). A particular
feature of KdV is that there is one single equation. We can explain it better by starting from the one-dimensional SV on a
4
Although this equation appeared 18 years earlier in Boussinesq’s work (1877), Korteweg and de Vries did the first consistent analysis
of the equation. Gustav de Vries was a Ph.D student of Diederik Korteweg’s. Looking at the KdV equation in the literature, we observe
some discrepancies in the notations, in particular the factor 6 in the central term, which stems from the dimensionless choice we made.
We consider here the most frequent notation.
5
This level is dimensionless, and is measured above the rest level h̃. The utility of this choice will appear later.
6
In this estimation we forget the factor 6 in the non-linear term, because it depends on the rules chosen for non-dimensionalisation.
7
Serre’s equations and its variations are sometimes attributed to Green and Naghdi (1969) or to Su and Gardner (1976).
flat bed and with no source terms:

““ ” ”
”˜t˜ + h̃ + ”˜ ũ = 0; 2.11
´x̃
ũt˜ + 12 ũ 2 + g ”˜ x̃ = 0;
`
ũ being the local depth-averaged velocity field. Now, suppose that the fluid velocity is a function of the surface elevation,
” ). Substituting that into Eq. 2.11 we obtain
i.e. ũ = ũ (˜
„ “ ” dũ «
”˜t˜ + ũ + h̃ + ”˜ ”˜x̃ = 0; 2.12
d˜
”
„ «
dũ dũ
”˜˜ + ũ + g ”˜x̃ = 0:
” t
d˜ d˜
”
If we consider Eq. 2.12 as a linear homogeneous system with unknowns (˜

”t˜; ”˜x̃ ), we see that the existence of solutions
requires that the determinant is null, leading to
dũ g
r
=± : 2.13
d˜
” h̃ + ”˜
Integrating, we find the relation existing between velocity and surface elevation:
r “ ”
ũ ∓ 2 g h̃ + ”˜ = constant: 2.14
The previous equation contains the Riemann invariants of the homogeneous SV system:
r “ ”
r± + ũ ± 2 g h̃ + ”˜ : 2.15
Because we are interested in waves propagating to the right, the r− invariant is concerned. Thus we must choose the +
sign in Eq. 2.14, and the constant in Eq. 2.14 is r− = Ũ − 2C̃. Next, if we input this into Eq. 2.12 we get
r !
”˜
”˜t˜ + Ũ − 2C̃ + 3C̃ 1 + ”˜x̃ = 0: 2.16
h̃
The latter equation can be written in a dimensionless form using conventions Eq. 2.5:
„q «
”t + 18 1 + 23 ” − 1 ”x = 0: 2.17
Finally, having in mind weakly non-linear waves, we can expand the square root to the lowest order in ” :
”t + 6””x = 0: 2.18
This is the KdV equation without its dispersive term8 . We call it the Hopf equation. This manipulation explains the first
terms of KdV (in particular the advection term), as an equation governing ” alone. It also has the advantage of making a
link between KdV and the SV Riemann invariants; this point will be useful later in this work.
2 KdV cnoidal wave and KdV soliton

The KdV equation is known to be a Hamiltonian system with an integrability property (Zakharov and Fadeev, 1971;
Zakharov and Shabat, 1972, 1974). Before we investigate in more details its properties in the next chapter, we will first
8
It is risky to continue this process: expanding the square root of Eq. 2.16 up to the next order, we would find the additive term −”2 ”x ,
leading to the so-called Gardner’s equation. However, the latter allows the existence of bright solitons, i.e. solitary waves constituting a
depression of the free surface; such waves are not observed in the nature, except for capillary waves, not considered here (Falcon et al.,
2002). Nonetheless, the Gardner’s equation has some interest in other fields of wave physics, like plasmas (see examples in Kamchatnov
et al., 2012).
establish a family of exact solutions to the KdV equation, initiated by Korteweg and de Vries in their seminal paper. We
follow Landau and Lifshitz (1981) or El and Hoefer (2016), with Kamchatnov’s notation (2016). The reader can also refer
to Keulegan and Patterson (1940).
We search a family of waves propagating with the celerity9 c, i.e. ” (x; t) = ” („), with
„ + x − ct: 2.19
Substituting this ansatz in Eq. 2.7 we obtain

c”„ − 6””„ − ”„„„ = 0: 2.20
Integrating once with respect to „ we get

c” − 3” 2 − ”„„ = −B: 2.21
Multiplying by ”„ and integrating once more, we find
1 2
2 ”„ = −” 3 + 21 c” 2 + B” − A 2.22
+ f (”)
= − (” − ¸) (” − ˛) (” − ‚) ;
where A and B are two integration constants depending on initial conditions, and defining the polynomial f with roots
¸, ˛ and ‚. The latter are connected to A, B and c by
A = −¸˛‚; 2.23
B = − (¸˛ + ˛‚ + ‚¸) ;
c = 2 (¸ + ˛ + ‚) :
Hence, we can separate the variables in Eq. 2.22:

d”
Z
p = „: 2.24
2f (”)
We have in mind waves of finite amplitude, to keep the non-linearity moderate. It is easy to deduce that the roots of f (”)
are real. Indeed, at least one of them (say ¸) is real since the polymial is of odd degree with real coefficients. If the other
two roots were not real, they should be complex conjugate: ‚ = ˛ ∗ . Eq. 2.22 then would yield
1 2 2
2 ”„ = (¸ − ”) |” − ˛| ; 2.25
and nothing would prevent ” for growing indefinitely, which proves that ˛ and ‚ are real. In the sequel, we order them as
follows: ‚ 6 ˛ 6 ¸.
One can observe that Eq. 2.22 is similar to the motion equation of a particle with mass M oscillating in the potential
V (r) + E − Mf (r):
1
2
M ṙ2 + V (r) = E; 2.26
whose solution is also obtained by variable separation:
dr
Z
q = t; 2.27
2
M [E − V (r)]
which is formally identical to Eq. 2.24. It is obvious that the function f (”) must remain positive during the motion, since
it appears in a square root. Therefore, considering the distribution of the polynomial roots and the behaviour of f (”) for
large ”’s, we must have ˛ 6 ” 6 ¸, as indicated by Figure 3. The waves are then trapped in this potential:
9
In the mobile new frame, see above.
”
d”
Z
„ = „˛ + p ; 2.28
˛ −2 (” − ¸) (” − ˛) (” − ‚)
where „˛ is the phase for which ” reaches its minimum ” = ˛.
f (η)
a)
η
γ β α
f (η)
b)
η
γ=β α
f (η)
c)
η
γ β≈α
Figure 3 Shape of the function f (”) defined by 2.22. a): general cnoidal wave; b) : soliton limit; c): linear wave limit. The shaded areas show the
“potential” trapping the wave.
Let us now proceed to the change of variable ” = ˛ + (¸ − ˛) cos2 , with ∈ 0; ı2 . We get an implicit solution:
ˆ ˜
” = ˛ + (¸ − ˛) cos2 ’; 2.29
s Z ’
2 d
„= :
¸−‚ 0
q
¸−˛
1 − ¸−‚ sin2
For the following, it is useful to define
1
r1 + 2 (¸ + ˛) ; 2.30
1
r2 + 2 (¸ + ‚) ;
1
r3 + 2 (˛ + ‚) :
The solution given by Eq. 2.29 can now be rewritten in the following explicit form:
” (x; t) = ” ⊥ + Hcn2 (k ? „ | m) ; 2.31
” ⊥ + ˛ = r1 − r2 + r3 ;
H + ¸ − ˛ = 2 (r2 − r3 ) ;
q √
k ? + 12 (¸ − ‚) = r1 − r3
„ + x − ct;
c + 2 (¸ + ˛ + ‚) = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) ;
¸−˛ r3 − r2
m+ = ;
¸−‚ r3 − r1
where cn stands for Jacobi’s elliptic cosine (see Appendix B). The origin of „ was defined as the locus of one of the wave
maxima ” = ¸. We thus arrive at a three-parameter family of solutions. These waves are periodic, and their wavelength
d”
can be computed by observing10 that d„ = ”„
:
I
L= d„ 2.32
Z ¸
d”
=2 p
˛ 2f (”)
2K (m)
= ;
k?
where the curvilinear integral should be understood as covering a wave period, K (m) being the complete elliptic integral
of the first kind (see Appendix B). This result is in agreement with the fact that the function cn has period 4K (m), so
that cn2 has period 2K (m). Figure 4 shows what these waves look like. They are called cnoidal (by analogy with Airy’s
sinusoidal waves): we can see that they are very flat in the central part when the parameter m is close to 1. Such waves
(at least waves with visually close shape) can be observed in the nature, as one can see on Figure 5.
η (x, 0)
5
m = 0.05 m = 0.99
4 m = 0.40 m = 1.00
m = 0.80
3
2
1
0 x
-10 -5 0 5 10
Figure 4 Theoretical KdV cnoidal wave ” (x; 0) according to 2.31, for 5 values of m obtained by varying ˛ with ¸ = 3 and ‚ = 1. The black line is a
quasi-linear wave while the red one is a KdV soliton.
Two limit cases must be investigated. First the case ˛ −→ ¸, i.e. r2 −→ r3 , or m −→ 0, see Figure 3 c). Eq. 2.31 shows
that in this case, waves have a very small amplitude: we are in the harmonic wave limit (also said linear limit). Because
10
The factor 2 on the second line of Eq. 2.32 results from the integration over one space period, thus from ˛ to ¸ and back.
Figure 5 Examples of cnoidal-like waves in nature. Top: offshore the Panama’s coast (photo by US Army). Bottom: crossed sea waves near the Île de
Ré island (photo by Michel Griffon, SLCO team, Laboratoire interdisciplinaire Carnot de Bourgogne, France).
ı
K (0) = 2
(cf. Appendix B), we therefore have
H ≪ ”h⊥ ; 2.33
” ⊥ = ”h⊥ + ¸ = r1 ;
c = ch + 2 (2¸ + ‚) = 2 (r1 + 2r3 ) ;
2ı ı
L = Lh + p = √ ;
2 (¸ − ‚) r1 − r3
√
indices h referring to “harmonic”. Since ! = ck et k = 2ı
L = 2 r1 − r3 , we also have
! − 6r1 k + k 3 = 0; 2.34
a dispersion relation that is identical to Eq. 2.8, for a wave propagating on a reference level over-elevated by ”h⊥ = r1 with
respect to the rest level. This is not surprising, since the free surface elevation is now given by the limit of Jacobi’s cosine
when m −→ 0 (cf. Appendix B, Eq. 8.38):

` √ ´
” (x; t) = r1 + (r2 − r3 ) cos 2 r1 − r3 „ : 2.35
This confirms that we have a linear wave superimposed to a non-zero reference level (warning: this is not Airy’s wave11 ,
since the dispersion relation is non-linear). An example (m = 0:05) is visible on Figure 5.
The second limit case that we have to look at corresponds to ˛ −→ ‚, i.e. r2 −→ r1 , or m −→ 1, see Figure 3 b). In this
case,
H = Hs + ¸ − ‚ = 2 (r1 − r3 ) 2.36
” ⊥ = ”s⊥ + ‚ = r3 ;
c = cs + 2 (2¸ + ‚) = 2 (2r1 + r3 ) ;
L −→ +∞;
where indices s mean “soliton”. Here there is no dispersion relation since k = 0. We thus have a solitary wave (shown by
Figure 5), with shape given by the limit12 of Jacobi’s cosine when m −→ 1 (Appendix B, Eq. 8.39):
” (x; t) = r3 + 2 (r1 − r3 ) sech2

`√ ´
r1 − r3 „ : 2.37
This wave propagates on the reference level ”s⊥ = r3 and keeps its shape unchanged. It is important to understand that
this situation results from the equilibrium between non-linear and dispersive terms. It is known that non-linearity tends
to make a wave front steeper, while dispersion tends to separate the waves of different wavelengths (because they prop-
agate with different celerities). It is therefore the coexistence of both terms which allows a wave to keep its shape while
propagating, where the two effects are cancelling each other. One can also understand that with the following analogy:
think about a group of children walking together on a trampoline. The tallest are the fastest and tend to walk in front of the
others (this is dispersion), but they are also the heaviest: they increase the trampoline’s curvature (this is non-linearity),
accelerating the motion of the smallest children behind. The group of children (the “wave packet”, so to speak) therefore
moves as a whole. One important consequence of this reasoning is that there exists no solitary wave solution to the SV
equations, since they are non-dispersive.
For a given reference level, we see that the solitary wave celerity Eq. 2.37 depends on the wave amplitude. Such waves
exist in nature, since Euler’s equations also possess a solitary wave-like free-surface solution, with shape close to KdV’s
one13 (Tanaka, 1986; Clamond and Dutykh, 2013), but it does not have a simple analytical expression. Figure 6 shows such
waves in a laboratory channel. They were called solitons when scientists noticed, from early numerical simulations, that
they could cross each other without changing their respective shapes, like individual particles14 . We will come back to
this feature in the next chapter.
3 Benjamin and Lighthill’s theory

In a seminal paper, Benjamin and Lighthill (1954) interpreted some of the features of cnoidal waves under a new light. We
will explain here some of their findings (with a few modifications), to clarify the concepts that we have introduced in the
last two sections.
11
Except in the limit of long waves (k −→ 0).
12 1
Recall the function hyperbolic secant is defined by sech x = cosh x.
13
The dispersion property of the free-surface Euler equations lies in the pressure gradient term, as well as in the kinematic surface
boundary condition.
14
Many improvements in the understanding of the KdV equation have been obtained since the 1960’s in the framework of the physics
of plasmas, where similar principles can be applied (Landau and Lifshitz, 1981).
Figure 6 Free-surface solitons crossing each other in an experimental channel (source: Institut Carnot de Bourgogne). Times goes on from top to
bottom.
Assume a steady, spanwise-invariant flow in a flat-bed channel with negligible energy dissipation. In case a wave is prop-
agating, we assume a travelling wave (i.e. with constant shape) with constant celerity Ũ + C̃ + c˜ and we observe it in its
moving frame, so that the flow remains steady. The Euler equations, integrated on a control volume between two arbi-
trary vertical planes perpendicular to the channel axis, lead to the conservation of mass flux q̃, linear momentum flux S̃
and energy flux R̃ through such a section:

Z h̃+”˜
q̃ + ũdz̃ = cst; 2.38
0
h̃+”˜
„ «
p̃
Z
2
S̃ + ũ + dz̃ = cst; 2.39
0 ̃
Z h̃+”˜ „ «
1 2 p̃
q̃ R̃ + ũ 2 ũ + + g z̃ dz̃ = cst; 2.40
0 ̃
the origin of the vertical axis z̃ being fixed on the channel bed, p̃ and ̃ being the fluid pressure and density. It is essential
to keep in mind that neglecting energy dissipation means that there is no singular head losses like hydraulic jumps, but
also that we neglect linear head losses, i.e. we contemplate the flow on relatively small horizontal distances, say a few
wavelengths.
As a first attempt, suppose the flow is very slowly varying in space, so that the SV equations are valid. This means that the
horizontal velocity ũ (x̃; z̃) profile is constant (equal to Ũ in the absolute frame, thus equal to Ṽ + −C̃ − c˜ in our relative
frame) and that the pressure profile is hydrostatic. Hence, denoting d˜ (x̃) + h̃ + ”˜ (x̃) the total water depth we obtain
q̃ = d˜Ṽ = cst; 2.41

S̃ = d˜Ṽ 2 + 21 g d˜2 = cst; 2.42
R̃ = 21 Ṽ + g d˜ = cst:
2
2.43
´1=3
We now use the critical depth15 h̃c + q̃ 2 =g
`
to eliminate Ṽ and make S̃ and R̃ dimensionless:
!2
2 S̃ 2 h̃c 1 d˜
S+3 = 3 +3 = cst; 2.44
g h̃c2 d˜ h̃c
!2
2 R̃ 1 h̃c d˜
R+3 = 3 + 32 = cst: 2.45
g h̃c d˜ h̃c
Note that the local Froude number F (x̃) = (h̃c =d)

˜ 3=2 can also be used to write the later two equations as follows:
S = 32 F2=3 + 31 F−4=3 = cst; 2.46

R = 31 F4=3 + 32 F−2=3 = cst: 2.47
This system can be solved for F2=3 and gives

√
R2 − S R±
F = 2=3
; 2.48
S
which implies R2 > S at any position and time. Substituting Eq. 2.48 into Eq. 2.44–2.45 yields, after some algebra, a
relation between R and S which is valid regardless of q̃ (or h̃c or F):
−4 R3 + S 3 + 3R2 S 2 + 6RS − 1 = 0:
` ´
2.49
Eq. 2.49 can be seen as a polynomial of the third order in S (or R). It implies that among the three degrees of freedom q̃,
S and R, only two are independent (in the particular case of a uniform flow the two degrees of freedom are e.g. the water
depth and the flowrate). Next, from Eq. 2.46–2.47 we can write
“ ”“ ”2
S − 1 = 13 F−4=3 2F2=3 + 1 F2=3 − 1 > 0; 2.50
“ ”“ ”2
R − 1 = 13 F−2=3 F2=3 + 2 F2=3 − 1 > 0; 2.51
15
This critical depth does not have the usual meaning, since the flowrate is defined here in a moving frame.
3 ` 2 ´3
so that the discriminant of the polynomial in Eq. 2.49, ∆ = 432 (R − 1) R + R + 1 , is always strictly positive, thus
there are three16 real roots S (R), but it is found that only two of them satisfy S > 1. These roots correspond to the
possible values of the water depth that can be observed in a steady, homogeneous flow on a flat, frictionless bed for
given flowrate. Moreover, from Eq. 2.46–2.47 we obtain
“ ” “ ”
S − R = 32 F2=3 − F−2=3 + 1
3 F−4=3 − F4=3 ; 2.53
thus we can write
ln F > sinh 43 ln F :
`2 ´ ` ´
S > R ⇐⇒ 2 sinh 3 2.54
The sign of S − R thus depends on the convexity of the function sinh: we get S > R for ln F < 0, or F < 1, and conversely.
The two branches of Eq. 2.46–2.47 (or, equivalently, Eq. 2.49) are depicted on Figure 7, which is called the Benjamin and
Lighthill’s diagram. The consequence of the above developments is that any steady, slowly space-varying flow on a flat,
frictionless bed should have constants S and R lying on one of the two branches of this diagram, according to the value
of the Froude number in the frame where the flow is steady.
1.5
0.4
1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3
1.25
0.5
S
F=2.2
1.2
1.15
1.8
1.1
0.7
1.05
1.4
1
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5
R
Figure 7 The Benjamin–Lighthill diagram. Steady, slowly space-varying flows correspond to the two branches of the curve, given by Eq. 2.46–2.47 or
Eq. 2.49. Weakly dispersive waves reside in the white area (Eq. 2.69). Benjamin and Lighthill’s conjecture states that all steady flows remain within this
area. All figures are Froude numbers, the critical value F = 1 being spotted by the red disc.
Now, still following Benjamin and Lighthill, we will look at the case of weakly dispersive waves. Let us consider waves
of shorter wavelength than above, but the flow being irrotational; we will recover the form of the KdV equation through
16
Using Viète’s resolution method, they read
!
R6 − 20R3 − 8
q
1 2 1 1 −1 2ı
S= 4R + R (R3 + 8) cos
2 3 cos 3=2
− 3 k ; 2.52
(R (R3 + 8))
with k = 0; 1. But these are not necessary to plot Figure 7, which can be parameterised through Eq. 2.46–2.47. Further analysis shows
that F < 1 corresponds to the branch k = 0.
another method17 . The stream function is defined as for all two-dimensional incompressible flows:
ũ = ˜z̃ ; 2.55
w̃ = − ˜x̃ ; 2.56
where w̃ is the vertical velocity. The stream function is harmonic (irrotational flow) and constant on the channel bed
(bottom kinematic condition), this constant being set to zero without loss of generality. To satisfy these properties, a
Taylor expansion of ˜ with respect to z̃ must be written as
˜ = z̃(Ṽ + f (x̃)) − 1 z̃ 3 f ′′ (x̃) + O z̃ 5
` ´
6 2.57
where f is an unknown function. Its derivatives are

˜x̃ = z̃f ′ (x̃) − 1 z̃ 3 f ′′′ (x̃) + O z̃ 5 ;
` ´
6 2.58
˜z̃ = Ṽ + f (x̃) − 1 z̃ 2 f ′′ (x̃) + O z̃ 4 :
` ´
2
2.59
The function f can be estimated by integrating Eq. 2.55 along a water column, which gives q̃ = ˜(z̃ = d).
˜ Therefore,
Eq. 2.57 yields
q̃ h i
Ṽ + f = 1 + 61 f ′′ d˜2 + O(d˜4 ) : 2.60
d˜
Differentiating twice, we get

2q̃ ˜′2
f ′′ = d + O(d˜2 ); 2.61
d˜3
and resubstituting this result in Eq. 2.60 we obtain
q̃ h i
Ṽ + f = 1 + 13 d˜′2 + O(d˜4 ) : 2.62
d˜
Now, the the Bernoulli law for a steady, irrotational flow reads
˜x̃2 + ˜z̃2 + p̃ + g z̃ = r;
“ ”
1
2 2.63
̃
where the constant value r of the head should not be claimed equal to R̃ without care. Indeed, at a first glance it would
be wrong to apply Eq. 2.63 far upstream, where the flow is uniform, because we neglected linear head losses. However, a
deeper analysis shows that r = R̃ up to the order of the previous Taylor expansions. To prove it, let us substitute Eq. 2.55
and Eq. 2.63 in Eq. 2.40 and use Eq. 2.58, Eq. 2.59, Eq. 2.61 and Eq. 2.62:
Z h̃+”˜ h
` í
q̃ R̃ = r Ṽ + f − 21 z̃ 2 f ′′ + O z̃ 4 dz̃ 2.64
h0 i
= r d( ˜ Ṽ + f ) − 1 d˜3 f ′′ + O(d˜5 )
6
h i
= r q̃ 1 + O(d˜5 ) :
The second invariant Eq. 2.39 can then be estimated as

Z d˜ “ ”
S̃ = − 12 ˜x̃2 + 21 ˜z̃2 − g z̃ + R̃ d z̃ 2.65
0
Z d˜ h “ ” ` í
= + f )2 + R̃ − g z̃ − 21 z̃ 2 f ′2 + (Ṽ + f )f ′′ + O z̃ 4 d z̃
1
2 (Ṽ
“0 ” “ ”
= 21 (Ṽ + f )2 + R̃ d˜ − 12 g d˜2 − 61 f ′2 + (Ṽ + f )f ′′ d˜3 + O(d˜5 ):
17
What follows resembles Korteweg and de Vries’ original derivation.
Rearranging and removing the higher order terms leads to

1 2 ˜′2
3 q̃ d = −g d˜3 + 2R̃d˜2 − 2S̃ d˜ + q̃ 2 : 2.66
The values of q̃, S̃ and R̃ are taken from the flow far upstream, where d˜ = h̃; Eq. 2.66 then factorises to give
1 2 ˜′2
3 q̃ d = (d˜ − h̃)2 (Ṽ 2 − g d);
˜ 2.67
so that d˜′ = 0 far upstream as expected. On the other hand, Eq. 2.66 can be written in a dimensionless form as
!3 !2
1 ˜′2 d˜ d˜ d˜
3
d = − + 3R − 3S + 1; 2.68
h̃c h̃c h̃c
which is a KdV equation. Therefore, we guess that the coefficients in the original KdV equation are linked to the conserved
quantities, i.e. mass, momentum and energy fluxes. A deeper investigation is proposed by Ali and Kalish (2014).
Finally, for the wave to be cnoidal, the polynomial in the right-hand side of Eq. 2.66 should have three real roots, thus a
positive discriminant, which gives
−4 R3 + S 3 + 3R2 S 2 + 6RS − 1 > 0:

` ´
2.69
We see that under weakly dispersive conditions, R and S must satisfy Eq. 2.69, to be compared with the SV case Eq. 2.49.
Graphically on the Benjamin and Lighthill’s diagram, Eq. 2.69 says that we must be in between the two curves Eq. 2.49
(white area). Benjamin and Lighthill (1954) explain how energy dissipation is related to the kind of waves at stake. They
conjectured that Eq. 2.69 is valid for all smooth solutions of the steady Euler free-surface equations. So far, this conjecture
could not be proved, though progress has been made (see e.g. Kozlov et al., 2017). A generalisation to arbitrary cross-
section channels was initiated by Fenton (1973).
CHAPTER 3
Inverse Scattering Transform (IST)

1 Notion of Lax pair
Let us forget the KdV equation for a while, and consider two PDEs with the following generic form:
L [”] ffi = –ffi; 3.1
ffit = A [”] ffi: 3.2
In this formalism, ” (x; t) is a given function, – a complex eigenvalue of the operator L [”], while L [”] and A [”] are two
linear differential operators, depending on ” (x; t) and acting on the unknown function ffi (x; t). Such a system is generally
overconstrainded, as we can see by differentiating Eq. 3.1 with respect to time (from now on we omit the dependence of
L and A with ” for the sake of simplicity):
Lt ffi + Lffit = –t ffi + –ffit : 3.3
Substituting Eq. 3.2 we obtain

Lt ffi + (LA − AL) ffi = –t ffi: 3.4
The first term Lt refers to the operator L differentiated with respect to time t (it implicitly depends on time via ” (x; t)).
Eq. 3.4 is a compatibility condition of Eq. 3.1 and Eq. 3.2. In particular, this condition is fulfilled if the following two relations
hold:
Lt + [L; A] = 0; 3.5
–t = 0: 3.6
where we used the commutator bracket [L; A] + LA − AL. Assume Eq. 3.5 is satisfied. Replacing Lt by − [L; A] in Eq. 3.3
and using ALffi = –Affi, we obtain
(L − –) (ffit − Affi) = –t ffi: 3.7
Now, suppose that L is self-adjoint (with respect to the scalar product h·; ·i defined as the integral on R of the product of
two functions), giving – ∈ R. Taking the scalar product of Eq. 3.7 with ffi we have:
2
–t kffik = hffi; (L − –) (ffit − Affi)i 3.8
= h(L − –) ffi; ffit − Affii
= 0:
Thus –t must vanish, hence the second condition given by Eq. 3.6 is satisfied. To conclude, the compatibility relation of
Eq. 3.1 and Eq. 3.2 reads, when L is self-adjoint:
Lt + [L; A] = 0: 3.9
The spectrum of L (i.e. the set of its eigenvalues) is then constant with time since –t = 0 (such a problem is said isospec-
tral). Operators L and A air said to be a Lax pair of equation Lt + [L; A] = 0.
As an illustration, let us consider the following two operators:

2
L [”] + −@xx − ”; 3.10
3
A [”] + −4@xxx − 6”@x − 3”x ; 3.11
where one should understand ” as the operator consisting in multiplying by ”. The operator in Eq. 3.10 is self-adjoint.
It is proved in Appendix C that their compatibility condition Eq. 3.9 is the KdV equation Eq. 2.7. therefore, Eq. 3.10–3.11
Inverse Scattering Transform (IST) IAHR Water Monographs
constitutes a Lax pair of the KdV equation18 . The interest of this formalism is that these equations are linear with respect
to both functions ffi and ”. The system Eq. 3.1–3.2 indeed reads19 , with the choice Eq. 3.10–3.11:
2
@xx ffi + ”ffi = −–ffi; 3.12
3
@t ffi = −4@xxx ffi − 6”@x ffi − 3”x ffi: 3.13
We can understand Eq. 3.12–3.13 as a way to write a third-order PDE (KdV) as the set of two PDEs of lower orders. On the
other hand, we now have another unknown ffi(x; t).
2 Principle of IST
As we will see, the properties demonstrated above allow solving the KdV equations in some cases, through three steps
(Gardner et al., 1967):
• Step 1. Suppose that an initial condition is given to us: ” (x; 0). Eq. 3.12, taken for t = 0, is the Schrödinger stationary
equation20 (SSE) applied to the auxiliary function ffi (x; 0), ” (x; 0) being the initial “potential”. In a way, the wave ffi must
cross over the potential barrier given by the initial free surface elevation. One can solve this problem and calculate the
eigenvalues (the “energy levels”) – along with their eigenfunctions ffi (x; 0). For that purpose we know that the spectrum
of the SSE can generally be split into two parts: one called the continuous spectrum, including positive eigenvalues, the
other one called the discrete spectrum, including negatives eigenvalues – = −»2 , » ∈ R+ (Landau and Lifshitz, 1977,
§18). One can also prove that the continuous spectrum contributes to the KdV solutions through radiative waves whose
amplitude decreases like t −1=3 (Segur, 1973). Therefore, in what follows we will concentrate on the discrete spectrum
(corresponding to what is called bound states in quantum mechanics).
• Step 2. Eq. 3.13 is a linear equation with respect to ffi which will provide the temporal evolution of ffi (x; t). The eigen-
values will remain constant with time (isospectral problem). However, a difficulty subsists when doing this part of the
work: solving Eq. 3.13 requires knowing ” (x; t), which is our final unknown (the original non-linearity of KdV remains
in this difficulty). On the other hand, the boundary conditions impose ” (x; t) −→ 0 at all times when x −→ ±∞.
Therefore we will be in a position to determine the behaviour of ffi (x; t) when x −→ ±∞ at all times, and this will be
enough as we will see.
• Step 3. It will remain solving the eigenvalues problem given by Eq. 3.12 for arbitrary times, in order to deduce from
ffi (x; t) the “potential” ” (x; t). This can be done using a linear integral equation known in quantum mechanics as
the Gel’fand–Levitan–Marchenko equation (GLM). In some special but important cases, the result will highlight a set
of individual waves equal to the (finite) number of eigenvalues. These waves will become, as time goes on, a train
of separated solitary waves. The latter result is not surprising if we look for the spectrum of Eq. 3.12 at t = 0 in the
particular case of a KdV solitary wave-like initial potential Eq. 2.37 propagating on a zero reference level (r3 = 0, see
Chapter 2):
2
@xx ffi + 12 —2 sech2 (—x) ffi = »2 ffi; 3.14
√
with — + 2 r1 . Landau and Lifshitz (1977, §23, problem 5; 1990, §39) and Lekner (2007) prove that in this case there
is only one eigenvalue, thus one real value of », and that this value is » = —. We will prove this result differently in the
next section, and extend it to a more general initial condition.
To summarise, one has transformed a non-linear problem into a series of three quasi-linear problems. Step 1 is a particle
“diffusion” problem in an initial given potential, while Step 3 is an “inverse diffusion” problem, hence the name Inverse
18
The KdV equation is also regarded as a compatibility relation in its derivation of Appendix A.
19
In the following we could use the notation ffix in lieu of @x ffi. Nevertheless we will keep notation @x ffi in order to insist on the operator
nature of @x .
20
This equation belongs to the category of Sturm-Liouville problems.
Scattering Transform (IST) for this technique. It is worth mentioning that IST (and its variations), as well as Whitham’s
modulation theory explained in the next Chapter, can be applied to many systems of non-linear dispersive equations,
including other physical branches.
Let us end this section with the following remark. It is sometimes relevant to use KdV in its linearised form, called the Airy
equation:
”t + ”xxx = 0; 3.15
with the dispersion relation Eq. 2.8. In such a situation the Fourier transform makes it possible to solve the problem as
follows, starting from the initial condition ” (x; 0):
Z +∞
F [” (x; 0)] (k) eik (x+k t ) dk;
2
” (x; t) = √1 3.16
2ı
−∞
being F the Fourier transform with respect to x. Behind Eq. 3.16, the solving strategy is as follows:
• Step 1. Calculate the space Fourier transform of the initial condition, i.e. F [” (0; t)] (k; t).
3
• Step 2. Propagate it along time, by multiplying it by eik t .
• Step 3. Go back to the ordinary space domain using the inverse Fourier transform.
This strategy resembles the three steps described above for IST, though the linearised case is much simpler. In a way, IST
is a kind of non-linear Fourier transformation. The IST strategy is illustrated by Figure 8.
Figure 8 Principle of the Inverse Scattering Transform (IST). Steps 1, 2 and 3 are described in the text and illustrated by the subsequent example.
3 Example: characterisation of a spectrum

In this section, we want to illustrate the principle of IST with an example, based on the following initial condition: the free
surface is horizontal, with zero elevation near ±∞, and makes a plateau for x ∈ [−‘; ‘] (see 9):
” (x; 0) = ”0 [Y (x + ‘) − Y (x − ‘)] ; 3.17
Y denoting Heaviside’s step function and ”0 > 0. We first observe that the solutions of SSE are always continuous. More-
over, with the above initial condition the SSE reads, at t = 0:
2
@xx ffi + ”0 [Y (x + ‘) − Y (x − ‘)] ffi = −–ffi: 3.18
η0
0
x
−ℓ 0 ℓ
Figure 9 Initial condition used to illustrate the IST technique. The solid line depicts the initial free surface.
Integrating on a little segment around −‘ or ‘, we can see that @x ffi is also continuous at t = 0. According to the previous
section, we look for negative eigenvalues – = −»2n < 0 (»n ∈ R+ ). We denote them with an integer subscript because
they belong to a countable (and even finite) set, as we will demonstrate. The SSE now reads (at t = 0)
2
x < −‘; @xx ffi = »2n ffi; 3.19
2
ffi = »2n − ”0 ffi;
` ´
|x| < ‘; @xx
2
‘ < x; @xx ffi = »2n ffi:
Therefore, the general solution that does not diverge when going to ±∞ is
x < −‘; ffi (x; 0) = an e»n x ; 3.20

|x| < ‘; ffi (x; 0) = fn eizn x + gn e−izn x ;
‘ < x; ffi (x; 0) = bn e−»n x ;
with
p
zn + ”0 − »2n : 3.21
The continuity properties of the wave function21 and of its derivative for x = ±‘ read
an e−“n = fn e−i‰n + gn ei‰n ; 3.22

fn ei‰n + gn e−i‰n = bn e−“n ;
an »n e−“n = izn fn e−i‰n − izn gn ei‰n ;
izn fn ei‰n − izn gn e−i‰n = −»n bn e−“n :
where
“n + »n ‘ > 0; 3.23
‰n + zn ‘ > 0:
The system given by Eq. 3.22 is linear, homogeneous with unknowns {an ; fn ; gn ; bn }, thus its determinant must vanish:
“n − i‰n
= ±e2i‰n : 3.24
“n + i‰n
√
It is not difficult to see that we must have zn ∈ R+ (hence »n ; zn 6 ”0 ), for this relation to be valid. Eq. 3.24 also reads,
according to the right-hand side sign:
“n = ‰n tan ‰n ; 3.25
or “n = −‰n cot ‰n : 3.26
21
We call it that way by analogy with quantum mechanics. It is difficult to give it a physical interpretation here.
(both cases are possible, since the cot function takes negative values). One also introduces the initial Ursell number:
U0 + ”0 ‘2 ; 3.27
which gives the non-linearity/dispersion ratio at t = 0 (comparing it with Eq. 2.10, we see that ‘˜D = ‘h̃, according to the
non-dimensional rule Eq. 2.5). The definition Eq. 3.21 then rewrites
“n = U0 − ‰n2 :
p
3.28
Now, one can deduce from Eq. 3.25–3.26 two closed equations on ‰n . The results may be summarised as follows:
“n = Φ (‰n ) ; 3.29
Ψ (‰n ) = U0 ; 3.30
with
Φ (‰) + ‰ tan ‰ if tan ‰ > 0; 3.31
−‰ cot ‰ if tan ‰ < 0;
and
„ «2
‰
Ψ (‰) + si tan ‰ > 0; 3.32
cos ‰
„ «2
‰
si tan ‰ < 0:
sin ‰
U0
200
150
100 U0 = 100
50
ξ7 ξ1
0 ξ
0 π π 3π 2π 5π 3π 7π 4π 9π
2 2 2 2 2
Figure 10 Function U0 = Ψ (‰) as in Eq. 3.32. Black lines: tan ‰ > 0; red lines: tan ‰ > 0. The blue dashed line represents the envelope U0 = ‰2 .
The function U0 = Ψ (‰) is displayed on Figure 10. Transitions from one branch to another occur at every multiple of ı
2
2
on the ‰ axis. The minimum value of each branch is reached at the transition point, and is given by (pı=2) where p is an
integer. Therefore the lower envelope of the branches is given by U0 = ‰2 . When increasing U0 , we see new eigenvalues,
thus new waves, as we will explain in the next section. When U0 is increased so that one more branch appears, one more
wave appears too, but with infinitesimal amplitude as long as U0 is not noticeably greater than this threshold value (the
amplitude of subsequent solitons will be calculated later). The number of waves (i.e. the number of eigenvalues of the
discrete spectrum) is thus given by
l p m
N= 2
ı U0 ; 3.33
where ⌈·⌉ stands for the ceiling integer. As an example, N (100) = 7, as we can check on Figure 10. This counting is
confirmed by Hammack and Segur (1974), who could roughly check it with laboratory experiments.
√
Finally, an important feature stems from the above analysis: Eq. 3.28 prescribes the condition ‰n ; “n 6 U0 . It is even
visible on Figure 10 that, when the number of eigenvalues is large, the smallest ‰n is almost equal to ı=2, thus the largest
√
“n is close to U0 :
N ≫ 1 : “max ≈ U0 :
p
3.34
In what follows we will need to calculate the transmission coefficients bn in Eq. 3.20. This must be done in normalising
the eigenfunctions, so that the above-mentioned GLM method can be applied:
Z +∞
ffi2 (x; 0) dx = 1: 3.35
−∞
After conducting some algebra, and using Eq. 3.23–3.32, we obtain

“ n e“ n
bn = ∓ √ ; 3.36
U0 ‘
the sign being that of − tan ‰n , i.e. the sign in Eq. 3.24.
4 Propagation and wave reconstruction

To continue the IST illustration on the very same example, we need to see how the wave function propagates. For that
purpose we use Eq. 3.13. With help from Eq. 3.12, it can be rewritten as follows:
@t ffi = ”x ffi + (4– − 2”) @x ffi: 3.37
We will see later that only the transmission coefficients of ffi are useful, i.e. the function bn (t) such that (see Eq. 3.20):
‘ < x; ffi (x; t) ∼ bn (t) e−»n x : 3.38
x−→+∞
This choice is made possible by the fact that the eigenvalues are time-independent. We have bn (0) = bn . Taking advan-
tage of – = −»2n and considering large values of x, for which ” and ”x tend towards 0, Eq. 3.37 leads to
@t ffi ∼ −4»2n @x ffi: 3.39
x−→+∞
Then, substituting Eq. 3.38 into the above equation, we obtain

bn′ (t) ∼ 4»3n bn : 3.40
x−→+∞
But the terms of the latter equation do not depend on x, thus Eq. 3.40 is an equality. Integrating with respect to time, we
find
3
bn (t) = bn e4»n t : 3.41
This equation gives the time evolution of the transmission coefficients. In order to deduce the potential ” (x; t) (in other
words, the free surface elevation), we apply the GLM theorem (see Agranovich and Marchenko, 1963), which allows finding
the potential from the asymptotic behaviour Eq. 3.38 of the diffused wave function. For doing so, one defines the following
auxiliary function:
N
X
F (x; t) + bn2 (t) e−»n x 3.42
n=1
N
X 3
= bn2 e8»n t−»n x ;
n=1
then we look for a function K (x; y ; t) such that

Z +∞
K (x; y ; t) + F (x + y ; t) + K (x; y ′ ; t) F (y + y ′ ; t) dy ′ = 0: 3.43
x
The potential is then given by
” (x; t) = 2@x K (x; x; t) : 3.44
Illustrating this method22 , let us first consider the case of one single eigenvalue (N = 1), i.e. U0 6 ı2
4
(see Eq. 3.33):
3
F (x; t) = b 2 e8» t−»x
; 3.45
(we drop the subscript n = 1 for the sake of clarity). We try K (x; y ; t) = M (x; t) e−»y ; inputting this ansatz in Eq. 3.43,
one finds
3
e8» t−»x−»y
K (x; y ; t) = − 1 1 8»3 t−2»x : 3.46
b 2 + 2» e
Eq. 3.44 finally gives
b2
» „ «–
1
” (x; t) = 2»2 sech2 » x − ln − 4»2 t : 3.47
2» 2»
The initial transmission coefficient b has no more effect than a phase shifting (e.g. a change of the origin), and is thus of
little interest. We got a KdV soliton (compare with 2.37) propagating on a zero level (”s⊥ = r3 = 0) with dimensionless
celerity cs = 4»2 , while Eq. 2.36 gives here c = 2 (2r1 + r3 ) = 4r1 . Therefore, we have r1 = »2 = −–, and the coefficient
√
in front of „ in Eq. 2.37 is indeed r1 − r3 = » while the amplitude is Hs = 2 (r1 − r3 ) = 2»2 as expected.
In the general case of an arbitrary number N of eigenvalues, a similar process gives the following result, found by Kay and
Moses (1956, see the proof in Appendix D):
K (x; x; t) = @x ln det A; 3.48

3
bn2 e8»n t−(»n +»m )x
Amn + ‹mn + :
»n + »m
With Eq. 3.48, Eq. 3.44 yields
2
” (x; t) = 2@xx ln det A: 3.49
22
Compare the exponential term in Eq. 3.45 to that of Eq. 3.16.
b 2 8»3 t−2»x
For one single eigenvalue, the matrix A is equal to the scalar A = 1 + 2»
e , and Eq. 3.48–3.49 give23 3.47 back
again. In the case N = 2, one finds (Segur24 , 1973) :
H1 csch2 (»1 „1 ) + H2 sech2 (»2 „2 )
” (x; t) = (H1 − H2 ) ˆ√ √ ˜2 ; 3.50
H1 coth (»1 „1 ) + H2 tanh (»2 „2 )
Hn + 2»2n ; 3.51
„n + x − xn(0) − x12 − cn t; 3.52

1 b2 1
xn(0) + ln n ; x12 + ln »12 3.53
2»n 2»n 2»n
»n − »m
»nm + ; 3.54
»n + »m
cn + 4»2n : 3.55
Remember that we have classified the ‰n ’s by increasing order (see last section), thus Eq. 3.28 shows that the “n ’s (thus
the »n ’s) are ranked in ascending order: here »1 > »2 (consequently »12 > 0). The solution Eq. 3.50–3.55 degenerates
to Eq. 3.47 when »2 = 0. An important point should now be noticed: as time increases, the quantities »n „n become very
large, and a few lines of algebra show that Eq. 3.50 can be simplified to
h “ ”i
(0)
” (x; t) ∼ H1 sech2 »1 x − x1 − c1 t 3.56
t−→+∞
h “ ”i
(0)
+H2 sech2 »2 x − x2 − x12 − c2 t :
Accordingly, the free surface Eq. 3.50, which contains two peaks (two waves) takes the form of two separated solitons.
This results from the fact that the first one propagates faster than the second, as evidenced by Eq. 3.55. However, it may
be surprising that an initial superposition of solitary waves does not affect their individual shapes after a long time. This
is a remarkable feature of the KdV solitons, which constitute reflectionless potentials (Lekner, 2007). With different initial
conditions, two or more solitons may cross each other without being impacted (though they experience a phase shifting
during their “collision”, like the term x12 in Eq. 3.56). More generally, we will admit that under certain conditions, an initial
state gives birth to waves that separate in solitons while time goes on. The long time asymptotic solution is then given by
(El, 2014):
N
X
” (x; t) ∼ = Hn sech2 [»n (x − xn − cn t)] ; 3.57
t−→+∞
n=1
n−1 N
!
1 X X
xn = xn(0) + ln »nm − ln »mn ;
2»n m=1 m=n+1
with the same notations as above. For N = 2, the solution Eq. 3.50–3.55 is plotted on Figure 11 at various time instances,
with »1 = 2 et »2 = 1, giving H1 = 8, H2 = 2, c1 = 8 and c2 = 4. We have set the transmission coefficients such that the
(0)
dimensionless phases xn + x12 in Eq. 3.52, given by Eq. 3.53, all vanish:
r
2»n
bn = : 3.58
»12
One can see that during their “collision”, the two solitons only weakly interact, but nevertheless there is a non-linear
interaction: for t = 0, at the heart of the crossing stage, the maximum of ” is lower than the amplitude of the highest
soliton.
“ ”
23 2
This is because @xx ln 1 + e2x = sech2 x.
24
We give here a more appealing form than that of Segur.
η
8
t = −0.5
6
4
2
0
x
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
η
8
t = −0.1
6
4
2
0
x
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
η
8
t = 0.0
6
4
2
0
x
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
η
8
t = 0.1
6
4
2
0
x
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
η
8
t = 0.5
6
4
2
0
x
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Figure 11 KdV double soliton: analytical solution given by Eq. 3.50–3.55 at five time dimensionless instances t, with »1 = 2 and »2 = 1.
Now, let us come back to our initial condition, the rectangle with height ”0 and width 2‘ centered on the origin. Choose
”0 = 1:0 and ‘ = 2:0. The initial Ursell number, given by Eq. 3.27, is thus equal to U0 = 4:0. The number of eigenvalues,
given by Eq. 3.33, is thus N = 2. Eq. 3.29–3.32 then give us ‰1 = 1:030 (tan ‰1 > 0) and ‰2 = 1:895 (tan ‰2 < 0),
then “1 = ‰1 tan ‰1 = 1:715 and “2 = −‰2 cot ‰2 = 0:6369. The definition in Eq. 3.23 finally leads to »1 = 0:8575 and
»1 = 0:3185. The wave amplitudes are H1 = 1:471 and H2 = 0:2029, and their celerities are c1 = 2:941 and c2 = 0:4058.
As for the transmission coefficients given by Eq. 3.36, substituting them into Eq. 3.53 yields
„ «
1 “n
xn(0) =‘ 1+ ln ; 3.59
2“n 2U0
(0) (0)
which gives x1 = 1:610 and x2 = 0:2748. A few snapshots of the solution are depicted in Figure 12. It can be noticed
that, at the initial time, the free surface does dot have the expected rectangular shape. This is because we neglected
radiative waves corresponding to the continuous spectrum and propagating essentially upstream (our initial condition is
not a reflectionless potential).
η
2
1.5 t=0
1
0.5
0
x
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
η
2
1.5 t=1
1
0.5
0
x
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
η
2
1.5 t=2
1
0.5
0
x
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
η
2
1.5 t=4
1
0.5
0
x
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
η
2
1.5 t=8
1
0.5
0
x
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
Figure 12 Analytical solution Eq. 3.50–3.55 with »1 = 0:8575 and »2 = 0:3185, i.e. for the initial condition described by Figure 9 with ”0 = 1:0 and
‘ = 2:0. The graph at t = 0 does not fit the initial condition of Figure 9 (which is superimposed with a dashed line) because of the approximations done
while solving the KdV equation with the IST technique (radiative waves were neglected).
√ √ √
In the case of large N, Eq. 3.34 gives “1 ≈ U0 = ”0 ‘, hence25 »1 ≈ ”0 . As soon as the solitons are separated, Eq. 3.57
shows us that the amplitude of the leading soliton (the highest one) is given by
N ≫ 1 : Hmax = 2»21 ≈ 2”0 ; 3.60
while its celerity is
N ≫ 1 : cmax = 4»21 ≈ 4”0 : 3.61
We will come back later on these very important results.
Applying IST to more realistic initial conditions is not easy, when it is possible. This is because initial conditions often
include rigid boundaries or variable bottom (dams, sluices, beach slope, etc.). This would require solving KdV on a
bounded domain, a very difficult task26 with variable rest water depth. More generally, it is noteworthy that the suc-
cess of IST depends on the boundary conditions; applying it to the half-line is much more difficult. Notwithstanding, the
latter analysis made it possible to highlight some results that will be useful in what follows, like Eq. 3.60and Eq. 3.61. Note
that the case N = 2 analysed above does not agree with these estimations, because N = 2 is not large enough to justify
Eq. 3.34.
In nature, the solitons of the Euler equations with a free surface behave similarly to those of the KdV equation, propagat-
ing all the faster the higher they are, and being able to cross each other without a change in their shape, as we already
observed on Figure 6.
25 (0)
With Eq. 3.59, it can be deduced that x1 ≈ ‘: the leading soliton starts from the right-hand end of the initial rectangle.
26
Some attempts have been proposed when the bounded domain is fixed (see e.g. Camassa and Wu, 1989; Marchant and Smyth, 1991).
However, they are of little interest for practical applications since we work in a mobile frame.
CHAPTER 4
Dispersive Shock Waves (DSW)

1 Whitham modulation
A fundamental feature that will allow us to build a model for undular bores is the idea of wave modulation. This essential
concept is at the heart of modern wave theories, and consists of seeing a wave train as an oscillation whose amplitude
and phase vary in space and time, giving to the envelopes of crests and troughs an oscillatory shape, but with much larger
space and time scales which determine wave groups (see Figure 13).
η (x, 0)
Figure 13 Principle of wave modulation: amplitude and phase vary slowly in space and time. The dashed lines depict the envelopes of the wave train.
Such a wave train can be described by the following formula:
” (x; t) = H (x; t) f (Θ (x; t)) ; 4.1
where f is a periodic function (e.g. a cosine or a Jacobi cosine), while the amplitude H (giving their shapes to the dashed
envelopes on Figure 13) and phase Θ depend slowly on space and time (Janssen, 2004). By analogy with the purely peri-
odic phase of a wave, i.e. Θ (x; t) = kx − !t, one can define local wavenumber, angular frequency and celerity as
k (x; t) + Θx ; 4.2
! (x; t) + −Θt ;
! (x; t)
c (x; t) + :
k (x; t)
The quantities {H; k; !} make a triplet of modulation parameters. However, one cannot act on them independently and
arbitrarily, for they must satisfy physical constraints. Thus, taking advantage of partial derivatives commutation, these
quantities must obey kt = −!x , in other words:
kt + (ck)x = 0: 4.3
This is a wave conservation equation (Kamchatnov, 2016). The wave number represents the “density” of waves per unit
length, and Eq. 4.3 shows that this quantity is transported at the speed c. In order to establish a modulation theory applied
to the KdV equation (among others), Whitham (1965) explains that we need three conservation equations, since KdV is a
third-order equation with respect to x, so that in principle it may be separated in a set of three first-order equations. Having
Eq. 4.3, we just need two more conservation equations, which will determine two more relations between the modulation
parameters. Luckily, KdV has infinitely many conservation laws. The simplest can be obtained by writing directly Eq. 2.7
Dispersive Shock Waves (DSW) IAHR Water Monographs
in the following way:
(”)t + 3” 2 + ”xx x = 0:
` ´
4.4
Moreover, multiplying Eq. 4.4 by ” it is easy to show that

` 2´
” t + 4” 3 + 2””xx − ”x2 x = 0:
` ´
4.5
Now, in order to get the relations between the modulation parameters, we need an averaging operator, defined as an
integral over a period, and acting on every quantity ’:
1
I
h’i + ’ („) d„ 4.6
L
2 ¸ ’ (”)
Z
= p d”
L ˛ 2f (”)
Z ı=2 `
’ ˛ + (¸ − ˛) cos2
´
1
= p d ;
K (m) 0 1 − m sin2
where „ and L are defined by Eq. 2.19 and Eq. 2.32. The definition in Eq. 4.6 ensures that a constant remains unchanged
by taking its average. To obtain the last two lines of Eq. 4.6, we used the definition of f Eq. 2.22, those of m Eq. 2.31 and
the functions of Appendix B.
It is important to observe that space and time derivatives almost commute with the averaging operator,27 because aver-
aged quantities depend slowly on x and t. Therefore, the conservation laws Eq. 4.3, Eq. 4.4 and Eq. 4.5 can be rewritten
as28
h”it + 3 ” 2 + h”xx i x = 0;
` ˙ ¸ ´
4.7
˙ 2¸
” t + 4 ” 3 + 2 h””xx i − ”x2 x = 0;
` ˙ ¸ ˙ ¸´
4.8
hkit + hckix = 0: 4.9
To obtain Eq. 4.7–4.9, we assumed that the commutation property is exact. Nonetheless, one should keep in mind that
Whitham’s theory in only an approximation, like all theories of wave modulation. The modulation triplet, by vertue of the
definition in Eq. 4.6, is now {A; B; c} (they appear in the definition of f Eq. 2.22), or the constants {¸; ˛; ‚} (Eq. 2.23),
or even the constants {r1 ; r2 ; r3 } (Eq. 2.30). We will successively pass from one triplet to another, and we will see the
advantages of this process. Let us first try to introduce explicitly A and B. By making use of Eq. 2.21 we may write
h”xx i = h”„„ i 4.10

= B + c h”i − 3 ” 2 ;
˙ ¸
then
h””xx i = h””„„ i 4.11

= B h”i + c ” 2 − 3 ” 3 :
˙ ¸ ˙ ¸
Eventually, using Eq. 2.22:

˙ 2¸ ˙ 2¸
”x = ”„ 4.12
= −2 ” 3 + c ” 2 + 2B h”i − 2A:
˙ ¸ ˙ ¸
27
Their commutator is non zero but small compared to the averaged quantities. One may build an appropriate formalism by taking
two space-time scales, a slow one and a fast one (see e.g. Janssen, 2004).
D This
E process is used in Appendix A to prove the KdV equation.
28
Whitham, in his seminal 1967 paper, uses an energy equation with ”3 in place of Eq. 4.9, but that does not change the results.
From the last three equations, the system of Eq. 4.7–4.9 now reads29
h”it + (B + c h”i)x = 0; 4.13
˙ 2¸
” t + 2A + c ” 2 x = 0;
` ˙ ¸´
4.14
kt + (ck)x = 0: 4.15
In fact, it is possible to calculate explicitly the averages of ” and ” 2 ; with help from Eq. 8.49 of Appendix B, we get30
E (m)
h”i = ‚ + (¸ − ‚) ; 4.16
K (m)
E (m)
= r1 − r2 − r3 + 2 (r3 − r1 ) ;
K (m)
» –
c E (m)
” = ‚ 2 + 13 (¸ − ‚)2 m − 1 +
˙ 2¸
; 4.17
¸ − ‚ K (m)
» –
E (m)
= 14 c 2 + 23 2cr1 + 2 r12 − r2 r3 + c (r3 − r1 )
` ´
:
K (m)
It is worth noting that we write these formulae for a later use; in the present chapter we will not need them. In order to
write the system Eq. 4.13–4.15 as a function of the triplet {¸; ˛; ‚}, it is more convenient to introduce Whitham’s state
function31 :
I p
W (A; B; c) + − 2f (”)d”: 4.18
Here again, it is possible to calculate explicitly Whitham’s function from the definition of the averaging operator and using
Eq. 8.49 and Eq. 8.50 of Appendix B (Gurevich and Pitaevskii, 1987):
√
«5=2
¸−˛
„
8 2
(1 − m) 1 − 21 m K (m) − 1 − m + m2 E (m) :
ˆ ` ´ ` ´ ˜
W = 15 4.19
m
However, we prefer writing it as a function of the triplet {A; B; c}, as Whitham did. We will come back later on its expres-
sion in Eq. 4.19 as a function of {¸; ˛; ‚}. Starting from the definitions in Eq. 4.18 and Eq. 2.22, we can easily calculate the
partial derivatives (here referred to by subscripts) of W with respect to its three variables, by making use of Eq. 2.32 and
Eq. 4.6:
d” 1
I
WA = p = = L; 4.20
2f (”) »
”d” h”i
I
WB = − p =− ; 4.21
2f (”) »
I 1 2 ˙ 2¸
2 ” d” ”
Wc = − p =− ; 4.22
2f (”) 2»
29
By definition, the wavenumber is already an average quantity.
30
These
D formulae
E are in agreement with Gurevich et Pitaevskii (1987), but there is a typo in the above-mentioned paper in the formula
giving ”2 .
31
It is an adiabatic invariant, by analogy with quantities of the following type:
I
pdq;
which are useful in Hamiltonian mechanics (Landau and Lifshitz, 1976). The KdV equation can indeed be derived from a Hamiltonian
variational principle:
@ ‹H
”t = ;
@x ‹”
with Z “ ”
1 2 3
H+ 2 ”x − ” dx;
R
(Zakharov and Fadeev, 1971). The modulation technique presented here may, in a way, be regarded as an application of the KAM theory
(Kolmogorov–Arnol’d–Moser) to this principle for quasi-periodic mechanical systems (Arnol’d, 1963).
k
where » + 2ı
. From these three relations, the system given by Eq. 4.13–4.15 is rewritten as follows:
WB;t + cWB;x − WA Bx = 0; 4.23
Wc;t + cWc;x − WA Ax = 0; 4.24
WA;t + cWA;x − WA cx = 0; 4.25
where WB;t denotes @t @B W , etc. Note that the “continuity" equation Eq. 4.15 was used to remove » from the partial
derivatives, i.e to get conservative forms of the equations. We also used Eq. 4.20 to cancel out ». Now, one can define a
“total” derivative:
D @ @
+ +c ; 4.26
Dt @t @x
and the system given by Eq. 4.23–4.25 finally reads
DWA
= WA cx ; 4.27
Dt
DWB
= WA Bx ; 4.28
Dt
DWc
= WA Ax : 4.29
Dt
In itself, the simplicity and the symmetry of this system is remarkable. In order to finish these manipulations, we expand
the total derivatives in the left-hand sides as functions of the triplet {¸; ˛; ‚}, then we write cx , Bx et Ax in the right-hand
sides using Eq. 2.23 to get
D¸ D˛ D‚
WA;¸ + WA;˛ + WA;‚ = 2WA (¸x + ˛x + ‚x ) 4.30
Dt Dt Dt
D¸ D˛ D‚
WB;¸ + WB;˛ + WB;‚ = −WA ((˛ + ‚) ¸x + (¸ + ‚) ˛x + (¸ + ˛) ‚x ) 4.31
Dt Dt Dt
D¸ D˛ D‚
Wc;¸ + Wc;˛ + Wc;‚ = −WA (˛‚¸x + ¸‚˛x + ¸˛‚x ) 4.32
Dt Dt Dt
This is a system of PDEs governing the modulation triplet {¸; ˛; ‚}. It is useful to rewrite it as a diagonal form, which
necessitates cumbersome computations32 , summarised in Appendix E. We finally obtain
D (˛ + ‚) WA
=− (˛ + ‚)x ; 4.33
Dt WA;¸
D (‚ + ¸) WA
=− (‚ + ¸)x ; 4.34
Dt WA;˛
D (¸ + ˛) WA
=− (¸ + ˛)x : 4.35
Dt WA;‚
This elegant system is hyperbolic, and can thus be treated through the method of characteristics. This is the topic of the
next section.
2 Riemann invariants
The system of Eq. 4.33–4.35 explicitly highlights the triplet {r1 ; r2 ; r3 } defined by Eq. 2.30. Consequently, these are the
Riemann invariants of the modulation problem of the KdV equation. By writing the total derivatives extensively, we get
„ «
@r1 WA @r1
+ c+ = 0; 4.36
@t WA;‚ @x
„ «
@r2 WA @r2
+ c+ = 0; 4.37
@t WA;˛ @x
„ «
@r3 WA @r3
+ c+ = 0: 4.38
@t WA;¸ @x
32
Whitham himself does not give the detail of these calculations, but says that he obtained Eq. 4.33–4.35 “after considerable manipu-
lations”, and we confirm that they are considerable. The main lines are indicated by Kamchatnov (2016).
In order to write this system as an explicit quasi-linear system with variables {r1 ; r2 ; r3 }, we start by using Eq. 4.20 and
Eq. 2.30 and find
1
WA;¸ = L¸ = 2 (Lr1 + Lr2 ) ; 4.39
1
WA;˛ = L˛ = 2 (Lr1 + Lr3 ) ;
1
WA;‚ = L‚ = 2
(Lr2 + Lr3 ) :
Eq. 8.77 of Appendix E then tells us that L¸ + L˛ + L‚ = 0, whence we have Lr1 + Lr2 + Lr3 = 0. It is easy to deduce that
WA;¸ = L¸ 4.40
= − (L˛ + L‚ )
= − 12 (Lr1 + Lr2 + 2Lr3 )
= − 21 Lr3 ;
with similar relations for WA;˛ et WA;‚ . Finally, the system of Eq. 4.36–4.38 can be written in a short, elegant form:
@ri @ri
+ vi = 0; i = 1; 2; 3; 4.41
@t @x
2L
vi + c − ;
L ri
with, as a reminder of Chapter 2:
c = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) ; 4.42
2K (m)
L= √ ; 4.43
r1 − r3
r3 − r2
m+ : 4.44
r3 − r1
It still remains to calculate the derivatives Lri . The definition in Eq. 4.44 of m gives
„ «
1 dK
L r1 = √ 3 2m + K (m) ; 4.45
r1 − r3 dm
2 dK
L r2 = − √ 3 dm ;
r1 − r3
„ «
1 dK
L r3 = √ 3 2 (1 − m) − K (m) :
r1 − r3 dm
The derivative of K (m) is given in Appendix B (Eq. 8.45). And we finally get
(1 − m) K (m)
v1 = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) + 4 (r2 − r3 ) ; 4.46
mE (m)
(1 − m) K (m)
v2 = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) − 4 (r2 − r3 ) ; 4.47
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)
K (m)
v3 = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) + 4 (r2 − r3 ) ; 4.48
E (m) − K (m)
m depending of the ri ’s via Eq. 4.44. The systems given by Eq. 4.41 and Eq. 4.46–4.48 are called the Whitham equations of
the KdV equation.
It is useful to look at the limit cases m −→ 0 (harmonic wave) and m −→ 1 (soliton), introduced in § 2. For m −→ 0
(r2 −→ r3 ), Eq. 8.52 of Appendix B lead to the following result:
v1 = 6r1 ; 4.49
v2 = v3 = 6 (2r3 − r1 ) :
It is normal to find v2 = v3 , since the invariants r2 and r3 coincide in this case. Therefore, under the hypothesis m −→ 0,
Whitham’s hyperbolic system Eq. 4.41 degenerates towards two equations. After a few algebra (using Eq. 2.33), they read
` ⊥´
”h t + 6”h⊥ ”h⊥ x = 0;
` ´
4.50
(kh )t + (ch kh )x = 0; 4.51
2ı
with kh = Lh
. Thus, we found that the reference level ”h⊥ of linear waves is governed by Hopf’s equation Eq. 2.18. Moreover,
it is nice to see that the equation governing r2 = r3 is finally than the wave conservation equation Eq. 4.3. Now, for m −→ 1
(r2 = r1 ) one obtains
v1 = v2 = 2 (2r1 + r3 ) = c; 4.52
v3 = 6r3 :
Unsurprisingly, we have v1 = v2 . Then, Whitham’s system Eq. 4.41 degenerates once again to give, if we use Eq. 2.36 and
Eq. 2.37, and considering that ”x vanishes at the top of a soliton:
` ⊥´
”s t + 6”s⊥ ”s⊥ = 0;
` ´
4.53
(Hs )t + cs (Hs )x = 0: 4.54
The first of the above equations is similar to Eq. 4.50 for the reference level ”s⊥ of the soliton. The second one tells us that
the leading soliton amplitude Hs is advected with the velocity cs of the KdV solitons (note that the celerity cs is now inside
the space derivative).
It is important to remember that the two cases we have just presented are only locally valid, where and when the modu-
lation parameter m tends to the corresponding value, either 0 or 1.
3 Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution

The choice of initial conditions that we used to illustrate IST in the last chapter, to be precise a rectangular over-elevation
of the free surface, was dictated by the fact that most undular bores appear when a “compression” wave is forming, such
a wave making a hydraulic jump in the SV theory. As said in Chapter 1, undular bores are formed in place of a breaking
process under special conditions (§ 1 will confirm this idea). Hence, following this approach, we now exhibit an application
of the previous section’s results, where the initial condition, as depicted on Figure 14, is described by
” (x; 0) = ”0 Y (−x) ; 4.55
that is to say a semi-infinite step. the following developments were proposed by Gurevich and Pitaevskii (1973) in the
framework of the theory of plasmas.
η0
0
x
0
Figure 14 Initial condition used to build Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution. The solid line shows the initial free surface elevation.
We will look for a solution as a modulated KdV cnoidal wave train. The KdV cnoidal wave Eq. 2.31 is recalled below, for the
sake of clarity, with the notation referring to the triplet {r1 ; r2 ; r3 }:
” (x; t) = r1 − r2 + r3 + 2 (r2 − r3 ) cn2
`√ ´
r1 − r3 „ | m ; 4.56
„ + x − ct;
c = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) ;
r3 − r2
m= ;
r3 − r1
2K (m)
L= √ :
r1 − r3
As a reminder, we also repeat the two limit cases, i.e. the linear wave (m = 0, hence r2 = r3 ):
` √ ´
m = 0 : ” (x; t) = r1 + (r2 − r3 ) cos 2 r1 − r3 „ ; 4.57
Hh −→ 0;
ch = 2 (r1 + 2r3 ) ;
ı
Lh = √ ;
r1 − r3
and the soliton (m = 1, thus r2 = r1 ):
m = 1 : ” (x; t) = r3 + 2 (r1 − r3 ) sech2
`√ ´
r1 − r3 „ ; 4.58
Hs = 2 (r1 − r3 ) ;
cs = 2 (2r1 + r3 ) ;
Ls −→ +∞:
Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s idea is to modulate the cnoidal wave thanks to the parameter m, the latter varying continuously
between 0 and 1. On the left (the trail of the wave train), m = 0 corresponds to small harmonic waves propagating on a
reference level r1 = ”0 , while on the right (the leading edge of the wave train), m = 1 is associated to a soliton propagating
on the water level r3 = 0. Importantly, we note that the proposed initial condition does not involve any characteristic time
scale nor any horizontal length scale. In other words, it is invariant through a simultaneous homothety of time and space,
i.e. x → Cx; t → Ct, for any positive constant C. But we can see that Whitham’s equations for KdV Eq. 4.41 fulfill the very
same property, thus the problem solution must have this property as well. For this reason, we must obtain a centered
x
wave, i.e. being dependent on x and t through the combination ffl + t
. Therefore, Whitham’s equations Eq. 4.41 are
simplified to
dri
(vi − ffl) = 0; i = 1; 2; 3: 4.59
dffl
Yet the velocities vi are a priori different to each other, hence a given ffl can only equate one of the vi ’s. Consequently,
@ri
at least two of the derivatives @ffl
must vanish. Since r1 = ”0 behind the wave and r3 = 0 in front of the wave, the two
constant Riemann invariants must be r1 and r3 , and we must have
x
v2 = ffl + : 4.60
t
With the definition of m, we then obtain

r1 = ”0 ; 4.61
r2 = m”0 ;
r3 = 0:
Next, with Eq. 4.47, v2 = ffl reads

2m (1 − m) K (m)
» –
x
’ (m) + 2 m + 1 − = : 4.62
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m) ”0 t
This implicit equation gives m as a function of x and t. The function ’ (m) that it defines is plotted on Figure 15. Eq. 4.56
and Eq. 4.61 also give
” (x; t) √
= 1 − m + 2m cn2 ( ”0 (x − 2 (1 + m) ”0 t) | m) : 4.63
”0
Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution procedure is thus as follows: for given x and t (or rather for a given ffl), Eq. 4.62 gives33 m,
then Eq. 4.63 gives ” (x; t). One can also, from Eq. 4.56 and Eq. 4.61, calculate the variation of the wavelength with m:
2K (m)
L= √ : 4.64
”0
m
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
x
0.0 η0 t
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4
x
Figure 15 Behaviour of the modulation parameter m for Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution as a function of ”0 t
= ’ (m), according to Eq. 4.62.
Linear waves, near m = 0, can be deduced from Eq. 4.57 and Eq. 4.61:
√
m −→ 0 : ” (x; t) = ”0 + m”0 cos (2 ”0 (x − 2”0 t)) ; 4.65
ı
L= √ :
”0
√
Their amplitude Hh = m”0 tends towards 0, and their wavenumber is kh = 2 ”0 . The solitary wave located at m = 1 is
deduced from Eq. 4.58 and Eq. 4.61:
√
m = 1 : ” (x; t) = 2”0 sech2 ( ”0 (x − 4”0 t)) ; 4.66
L −→ +∞:
Eq. 4.65 and Eq. 4.66 are consistent with Eq. 4.63 and Eq. 4.64. One can notice that the leading soliton amplitude is Hs =
2”0 , in agreement with Eq. 3.60. Therefore, the crest of the first wave has an elevation twice as high as the initial step.
33
Although Eq. 4.62 is implicit, it is not necessary to perform a numerical resolution to get m, except if we need to know one partic-
ular value only, ” (x0 ; t0 ). When plotting the curve ” (x; t) as a function of x for given t (for example), one considers m as the curve
parameter; Eq. 4.62 is then used to calculate ”x0 t explicitly, from which we deduce x.
Les us now determine the spatial bounds of the modulated wave train. For this purpose we use Eq. 4.62. Along with Eq. 8.52
of Appendix B, the two limits are given by
x
m = 0: = −6; 4.67
”0 t
x
m = 1: = 4;
”0 t
and Eq. 4.63 allows checking that ” (−6”0 t; t) = ”0 and ” (4”0 t; t) = 2”0 . Hence, the two limits propagate (in KdV’s
relative frame, as a reminder) with celerities −6”0 and 4”0 , respectively34 . For m = 1, we are thus at the top of the leading
soliton; plotting the free surface requires continuing slightly after m = 1 to reach the toe of the wave train where ” = 0.
The celerity of the leading soliton is 4”0 , in agreement with Eq. 3.61, and thus corresponds to the celerity of the wave train
leading edge. This result agrees with Eq. 4.54. On the contrary, the trail of the wave train does not propagate at the celerity
of linear waves: new waves appear there continuously, with a rate that we will calculate later. As a boundary of a wave
group, the trailing edge of the undular bore propagates with the group velocity of linear waves, i.e., looking at Eq. 2.34 and
using the values in Eq. 4.61 for r1 and r3 :
„ «
x @!
m = 0: = 4.68
t @k √
k=2 r1 −r3
3k 2 k=2√r1
` ´
= 6r1 −
= −6”0 ;
in agreement with Eq. 4.67.
Eq. 4.67 show that the total length of the undular bore, in this theory, is given by
‘ (t) = 10”0 t: 4.69
We will now search for the mean elevation of the free surface, as well as the wave envelopes. With Eq. 4.61, the general
formula in Eq. 4.16 leads to
h”i (x; t) E (m)
=m−1+2 : 4.70
”0 K (m)
As for the envelopes, the function cn2 varying between 0 and 1, Eq. 4.63 yields
”min (x; t)
= 1 − m; 4.71
”0
”max (x; t)
= 1 + m;
”0
m (x; t) being given by Eq. 4.62.
Contrary to the case that we investigated with the IST in § 4, the present wave train gets longer and longer as times goes on,
thus the number of waves is increased with time. This is due to the birth of new oscillations on the trailing edge (m = 0),
since the leading edge propagates at the celerity of the leading wave. We can calculate the number of waves within the
modulated train as a function of time. For that purpose, we consider the phase at m = 0, taken from Eq. 4.65:
√ 3=2
[2 ”0 (x − 2”0 t)]x=−6”0 t = −16”0 t: 4.72
Since the period of the cosine is 2ı, the time passed between two consecutive new waves is
ı
fi = 3=2 : 4.73
8”0
34
Warning: these celerities do not correspond to v1 and v3 , given by Eq. 4.49 and Eq. 4.52 along with Eq. 4.61. We will explain why later
on.
Thus, the total number of waves at time t is given by

t
N (”0 ; t) ≈ 4.74
lfi m
8 3=2
= ı ”0 t :
We can check the validity of the above formula on the example of Figure 16, where ”0 = 1 (note that this is the only free
parameter in this problem). The figure shows the surface elevation as a function of x at times35 t = 3, 6 and 9, according
to Eq. 4.62 and Eq. 4.63. The mean elevation and envelopes are also plotted for the last time instance, following Eq. 4.70
and Eq. 4.71. the envelopes are almost linear; this is due to Eq. 4.71, and to the fact that the function ’ (m) given by
Eq. 4.62 has the same property (see Figure 15)36 . Numerically, Eq. 4.74 yields N (1:3) = 8, N (1:6) = 16 et N (1:9) = 23,
in perfect agreement with the figure37 . Note that applying IST in a naive way with an “initial step” of variable length given
by Eq. 4.69, the estimation Eq. 3.33 of the number of waves, with the definition 3.27, would give
˚ √
N (”0 ; t) = ı2 ”0 ‘ (t)
ˇ
4.75
l m
3=2
= 20
ı ”0 t :
This crude estimation is qualitatively in accord with the exact counting Eq. 4.74.
We must also observe that Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s (GP) model is only an approximation, being a solution to Whitham’s
approximate equations. The solution in Eq. 4.62–4.63 is thus not an exact solution to KdV, and numerical simulations of
the KdV equation show that GP’s model fail to reproduce the trail of the undular bore (near m = 0), where the wave
amplitude decreases slowly with KdV instead of the abrupt end of GP’s theory (see Figure 16). The number of small waves
is thus considerably larger with KdV, so that Eq. 4.69 has a very limited meaning. Figure 18 shows two complete views of
GP’s solution in both frames, absolute and relative.
The solution of GP described above is an example of a dispersive shock wave (DSW). Figure 19 summarises the anatomy of
GP’s DSW, according to the above-mentioned features. Such wave trains exist in the nature, as shown on Figure ??: estuary
undular bores as well as the final stage of some tsunamis can be described, at least qualitatively, by similar equations.
It is interesting to calculate the local Ursell number of the DSW. As a reminder, the initial Ursell number U0 introduced in
§ 1 only represents an estimation of the ratio of the non-linear and dispersion terms at time t = 0, and would provide
no information here since we have no characteristic horizontal length scale at t = 0. In order to estimate this ratio at the
local scale of a wave, we come back to the original definition in Eq. 2.10, repeated below:
H̃ ‘˜2
U + 23 3D : 4.76
h̃
With dimensionless lengths, this gives, as in Eq. 3.27:

U = ”0 ‘2D ; 4.77
where ‘D is a dimensionless length which is characteristic of the horizontal free surface variations. It would be clumsy
to choose ‘D = L, because the wavelength tends to infinity when m = 1. However, one can define an appropriate local
35
Recall all is dimensionless
“ ” here.
36 x x 1 1
If the function m ”0 t was exactly linear, the slope of its curve at ”0 t = −6 would be 10 , rather than its actual value 9 .
37 3 3=2
Marchant and Smyth (2012) proposed, for large times, the approximation N (t) = 4 ”0 t, which considerably underestimates
the
number of waves, as they confess. On the other hand, Matsuno et al. (2007) proposed a general counting procedure, based on the
definition of the wavenumber (i.e. of the number of waves per unit length):
Z 4”0 t Z 1 ′
1 3=2 ’ (m)
N (”0 ; t) = 2ı kdx = 21 ”0 t dm:
−6”0 t 0 K (m)
The resulting integral is far from being trivial. One can obtain the same result more simply by computing the temporal derivative of N
and using the wave conservation equation Eq. 4.3.
η/η0
2
1.5 t=3
1
0.5
x
-60 -30 0 30 60
η/η0
2
1.5 t=6
1
0.5
x
-60 -30 0 30 60
η/η0
2
1.5 t=9
1
0.5
x
-60 -30 0 30 60
Figure 16 Gurevich et Pitaevskii’s solution ” (x; t) for three values of t, after Eq. 4.62–4.63 with ”0 = 1. We are in the relative frame. The curves have
been extended on the left of the trailing edge x=”0 t = −6 (m = 0) by ” = 1 and on the right of the leading edge x=”0 t = 4 (m = 1) by ” = 0, see
Eq. 4.67. At t = 9, the dashed lines represent h”i, ”mi n and ”max , after Eq. 4.70 and Eq. 4.71.
length, such that the integral of ” („) − ”min on a wave period is equal to 2‘D (”max − ”min ):
H
1 [” („) − ”min ] d„
‘D + 2 4.78
”max − ”min
L h”i − ”min
=
2 ”max − ”min
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)
= √ :
”0 m
Combining the last two equations gives

–2
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)
»
U (m) = : 4.79
m
Numerically, U (0) = ı2
16 ≈ 0:619 (this estimation is based on the Taylor series of the elliptic integrals presented in
Appendix B), while U (1) = 1. We observe that U (m) is therefore of the order of magnitude of unity, confirming that the
x=
0t
4η
−6
x=
η0
t
x
t˜
x̃
Figure 17 Gurevich et Pitaevskii’s solution ” (x; t) for several values of t, after Eq. 4.62–4.63 with ”0 = 1. We are in the relative (top) and absolute
(bottom) frames.
DSW is driven by an equilibrium between the non-linear and dispersive terms of the KdV equation, as expected. This equi-
librium resembles the inertia/dissipation that controls the size of the smallest turbulent eddies in Kolmogorov’s theory.
Figure 18 Examples of dispersive shock waves. Top: arrival of the historical tsunami of Sumatra (2004) on the coasts of the Koh Jum island, offshore
the coasts of Thailand (photo by Anders Grawin). Bottom: estuary undular bore (“mascaret” in French) in Alaska (photo by Scott Dickerson).
4 Characteristic curves
We must now explain the role of Whitham’s equations in the behaviour of the transported quantities. To do so, let us come
back to Hopf’s equation Eq. 2.18 :
”t + 6””x = 0: 4.80
This equation explains that ” is transported with the velocity 6”. Therefore, with the Hopf equation the initial condition
Eq. 4.55 considered here results in a serious issue, since near the initial surface discontinuity, the transport velocity is dis-
continuous as well. The part of the free surface (with zero elevation) that was near 0+ at t = 0 is propagated with a zero
velocity, and is thus very soon “covered” by the part of the surface (with elevation ”0 ) that was near 0− at t = 0, propagat-
ing at the constant, non-zero velocity 6”0 . Hence, the solution of this problem is non-physical because it is multivariate
(see Figure 20).
−6η0 4η0
η0
Hs = 2η0
0
ℓ = 10η0 t
m=0 m=1
H −→ 0 k −→ 0
Figure 19 Anatomy of a dispersive shock wave as Gurevitch and Pitaeevski’s solution to the Whitham modulation equations of KdV.
With the dispersive term of KdV, on the contrary, Eq. 4.46–4.48 give
(1 − m) K (m)
» –
v1
= 2 1+m+2 ; 4.81
”0 E (m)
» –
v3 mK (m)
= 2 1+m+2 : 4.82
”0 E (m) − K (m)
Eq. 4.49 and Eq. 4.61 show that ”0 = r1 is propagated at the constant velocity v1 = 6r1 = 6”0 as long as m = 0 (i.e. on
the left of the DSW), like with Eq. 4.80. However, as soon as we enter the DSW, v1 is given by Eq. 4.81, and we thus have
v1 (m = 1) = 4”0 = v2 (m = 1). At the leading edge of the wave train, the two invariants r1 and r2 collapse in space-time.
There is no discontinuity in this place and at this time because they equal each other (as it should be for a soliton; their
value here is ”0 ). Moreover, with Eq. 4.52 and Eq. 4.61 one can see that 0 = r3 is propagated with the constant velocity
v3 = 6r3 = 0 immediately after the DSW, like with Eq. 4.80, once again. But as soon as we enter the undular bore, Eq. 4.82
gives a negative propagation velocity, and v3 (m = 0) = −6”0 = v2 (m = 0). Here again, the invariants r2 and r3 meet in
space-time with no discontinuity since at this time and place they are equal (as expected for the linear cnoidal wave; here
their common value is 0). Therefore, the fact that we have three invariants instead of one, the behaviour of which is given
by Whitham’s equations Eq. 4.41, avoid the problem solution to be multivariate. This is illustrated by Figure 20.
Whitham’s hyperbolic model may be graphically represented in terms of characteristic curves in space-time. Suppose that
the DSW is developed on an initial flow well described by the SV equations, with a wave propagating towards positive
values of x. Eq. 2.15 and Eq. 2.17 define a Riemann invariant and characteristic curves relative to the SV equations, valid
upstream and downstream the DSW. Since all the parameters are functions of ”, Eq. 2.17 now reads
(r+ )t + v+ (r+ )x = 0; 4.83
„q «
v+ + 18 1 + 23 ” − 1 4.84
≈ 6”: 4.85
The last approximation is valid for small values of ”. By this way one defines, in the space-time diagram (x; t), the char-
acteristic curves C+ by
dx
C+ : = v+ (x; t) ; 4.86
dt
dr+
= 0:
dt
η
η0
η/η0
1
0
η/η0 x
η0 t
-6 0 4
r
η0
r1 /η0
1
r2 /η0 = m
0
r3 /η0 x
η0 t
-6 0 4
v
η0
v1 /η0
6
0 v2 /η0
v3 /η0
-6
x
η0 t
-6 0 4
Figure 20 Explanation of the dispersive action of the KdV equation, with initial condition of Figure 14: the Hopf equation Eq. 4.80 leads to a multivariate
solution (top picture), while the Whitham equations of KdV Eq. 4.41 give birth to three invariants ri that propagate with velocities vi .
The edges of the DSW have velocities given by Eq. 4.67, which allows us to define their trajectories in space-time as two
straight lines:
dx
Dt : = st + −6”0 ; 4.87
dt
dx
Dl : = sl + 4”0 ;
dt
(subscripts t and l refer to the trailing edge and leading edge, respectively). In the present case, ” = ”0 on the left and
” = 0 on the right. Therefore, the C+ curves are in fact parallel straight lines with slopes given by
x
v+ = 0 si ≤ st 4.88
„q « t
x
= 18 1 + 32 ”0 − 1 ≈ 6”0 si ≥ sl :
t
Inside the DSW, the Whitham equations Eq. 4.41 allow us to define the following characteristic curves:
dx
Ci ; i = 1; 2; 3 : = vi (x; t) ; 4.89
dt
dri
= 0;
dt
with v2 = xt , v1 and v3 being given by Eq. 4.81–4.82; these are also functions of xt through the implicit formula in Eq. 4.62.
The curves C2 are thus straight lines centered on the origin of space-time, as on Figure 21. The latter also depicts the C+
lines, as well as Dt et Dl . The theoretical trajectory of the hydraulic jump resulting from the SV equations is also plotted,
with the following equation:
dx
Dj :
= s; 4.90
dt
and we will see in the next chapter how to calculate the speed s. Note that on Figure 21, we are in the absolute frame, with
a slightly different convention for non-dimensionalisation than Eq. 2.5, allowing visualisation of the downstream motion
if the DSW:
C̃ t˜
tˆ + ; 4.91
h̃
x̃
x̂ + :
h̃
Thus, velocities (in particular the slopes of the caracteristic curves) are simply non-dimensionalised with the long wave
celerity C̃. With this convention, the velocities v̂ are connected to the velocities v that were used so far by
v Ũ
v̂ = + + 1: 4.92
6 C̃
Figure 21 shows that38 the slopes of the C1 lines are getting closer to Dl when m −→ 1, and that the slopes of the C3 lines
are getting wloser to that of Dt when m −→ 0. One can check it directly from Eq. 4.49, Eq. 4.52 and Eq. 4.87, knowing that
r1 = ”0 and r3 = 0:
v1 (m = 1) = 4”0 = sl ; 4.93
v3 (m = 0) = −6”0 = st :
Besides, for m = 0 we have v2 = v3 and the hyperbolic system degenerates, as we have seen at the end of § 2. For that
reason, the line Dl is a double characteristic curve. The same property holds as regards Dt , since v1 = v2 when m = 1.
Figure 21 also tells us that the slopes of the C1 curves (red lines) look identical to those of the C+ when they meet on Dt ,
while the slopes of the C3 curves (green lines) look identical to those of the C+ when they meet on Dl . The latter property
is exact, because one has ” (m = 1) = 0, hence Eq. 4.88 and Eq. 4.52 lead to v+ (m = 1) = 0 = v3 (m = 1) (this value
corresponds to the relative frame). However, the first of these apparent properties is only true to the leading order in ”0 :
Eq. 4.88 and Eq. 4.49 give v+ (m = 0) ≈ 6”0 = v1 (m = 0) in this case. Graphically, the difference is hard to see. In that
sense, one can say that the Whitham equations of the KdV equation are compatible with the SV equations at the interfaces
coinciding with the DSW edges, as long as the initial disturbance ”0 is moderate. This is consistent with the fact that the
degenerate equations Eq. 4.50 and Eq. 4.53 are identical to Eq. 2.18.
38
Plotting the lines C1 and C3 was done by using Eq. 4.60 and Eq. 4.89 to find
dt dffl ”0
= dm;
t dm vi − v2
dx dt vi
= ;
x t v2
with the following rule, from Eq. 4.62, Eq. 8.45, Eq. 8.47 and Eq. 8.52:
dffl (1 − m) (2 − 3m) K (m) − 2 (1 − 2m) E (m)
= K (m) :
dm 3 [E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)]2
From that, one can integrate numerically these equations by parameterising the curves with m.
tˆ
C2
Dt
Dj
C+ Dl
C+
x̂
tˆ
C1
C+
C3
C+
x̂
Figure 21 Space-time diagrams with families of characteristic curves C+ and C2 , as well as Dt , Dl and Dj (left panel), and the families C1 and C3 (right
panel). We are in the absolute frame.
CHAPTER 5
Application to the Favre waves

1 Initial state
We will now apply the above developments to the prediction of the Favre waves. It is first necessary to describe the flow
just before the birth of the waves. We consider the conditions of Figure 22, the upstream side being towards the large
values of x̃. For t˜ < 0, the water depth is h̃ and the section-averaged velocity Ũ < 0. At time t˜ = 0, the dam sluice gates
close at point x̃ = 0 with a rather small closing time T̃ . The SV theory of long waves says that a compression wave is
then formed, travelling upstream, hence following the C+ characteristic curves. As a reminder, the SV characteristics are
defined by
dx
C± : = v± (x; t) ; 5.1
dt
dr±
= 0;
dt
the Riemann invariants of the SV equations being defined by Eq. 2.15, repeated below for convenience:
r “ ”
r± + ũ ± 2 g h̃ + ”˜ ; 5.2
while their propagation velocities are given by

r “ ”
v± + ũ ± g h̃ + ”˜ : 5.3
h̃ + η̃
h̃ + η̃0
h̃
Ũ
x̃
0 x̃j
Figure 22 Initial state for an application of GP’s theory to the Favre waves: a compression wave is formed after the dam gate closure, leading to a
dispersive shock wave, whose initial state is depicted as in Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s solution.
The invariant r− is conserved during the compression wave propagation, which permits to write the water depth h̃1 after
the wave has passed, i.e. immediately upstream of the dam, in the form h̃ + ”˜0 , with
”˜0
= Fa 1 + 41 Fa ;
` ´
5.4
h̃
where the upstream Froude number, in the absolute reference frame, is defined as Fa + |Ũ|
C̃
.
It is now time to make a crucial remark. Since we proved that the Whitham equation of KdV are compatible with the SV
on the edges of the DSW, it is important to prescribe the initial state using the SV equations. In particular, the water depth
Eq. 5.4 must be prescribed after the trailing edge of the DSW, i.e. on the dam side. On the other hand, there is no reason
why this water depth should be compatible with the Rankine–Hugoniot (RH) relations through the hydraulic jump when
Application to the Favre waves IAHR Water Monographs
there is one. These relations give

“ ” “ ”
q̃ + h̃ Ũ − s˜ = − h̃ + ”˜0 s˜; 5.5
“ ”“ ”
q̃ 2 = 21 g h̃ h̃ + ”˜0 2h̃ + ”˜0 ; 5.6
s˜ being the (dimensional) jump velocity, and q̃ the flow rate per unit width in the frame of the jump. Eq. 5.5 gives
h̃
s˜ = − Ũ: 5.7
”˜0
Combining Eq. 5.5–5.6 and the conservation property of r− , we find

„ «3 „ «2
”˜0 ”˜0 ”˜0
+2 − 2F2a − 2F2a = 0; 5.8
h̃ h̃ h̃
whose only positive solution is
2 0 1 3
”˜0 8 − 9Fa
2
q
= 23 4 6F2a + 4 cos @ 31 tan−1 q ` ıA
´ + 6 −1
5 5.9
h̃ Fa 27 8Fa + 13Fa + 16
4 2
= Fa + 14 F2a − 32
3 3
Fa + O F4a :
` ´
We see that RH predicts a water level ”˜0 that is different than that of SV Eq. 5.4 with a third order difference with respect
to Fa . Consequently, a small expansion wave appears between the dam and the jump, when the latter exists (this small
wave always propagates towards the dam). Since the difference between Eq. 5.4 and Eq. 5.9 is very small, the horizontal
and vertical extensions of this wave are actually almost invisible. However, for the sake of rigor it is better not to use the
RH when the jump is replaced by a DSW (El et al., 2006). Figure 23 (plotted in the absolute frame, with the dimensionless
convention Eq. 4.91) shows the principle of this mechanism in the space-time plane: the area where r− is constant is
0
limited by the characteristic C− , behind which the water depth is given by RH in case of a hydraulic jump, or by Eq. 5.4 in
case of a DSW.
It is interesting to check that the KdV equation predicts a depth h̃1 compatible with Eq. 5.4. For doing so, let us integrate
Eq. 2.4 along the whole line of x̃, as if the dam was not here and assuming that the space derivatives vanish far away
upstream and downstream:
„Z +∞ «
C̃ ˆ 2 ˜+∞
+ (1 − Fa ) C̃ [˜
+∞ 3
@t˜ ”˜dx̃ ”]−∞ + 4 ”˜ −∞ = 0: 5.10
−∞ h̃
The first term is the temporal variation of the total volume in the domain, and thus is equal to −h̃Ũ. With the boundary
conditions ”˜ = ”˜0 when x −→ −∞ and ”˜ = 0 when x −→ +∞, this gives
„ «2
”˜0 ”˜0
3
4
+ (1 − Fa ) − Fa = 0; 5.11
h̃ h̃
with the following only positive solution
„q «
”˜0 2
= 3 1 + Fa + Fa − 1 + Fa
2
5.12
h̃
= Fa + 14 F2a − 18 F3a + O F4a :
` ´
This is indeed consistant, up to the second order, with Eq. 5.4 (recall that the compatibility of KdV with SV is only true for
moderate amplitudes). Nevertheless, Eq. 5.12 is no more accurate than RH (5.9). To summarise, we will consider Eq. 5.4
as the water depth on the dam side.
tˆ
RH
2
C− Dj
1
C−
SV
1
C+
0 0
C+ C−
x̂
ẑ
ŝ
−Fa
x̂
tˆ
Dt
Dl
KdV
1
C−
SV
1
C+
0 0
C+ C−
x̂
ẑ
ŝl
ŝt
−Fa
x̂
Figure 23 Diagram of characteristic curves for the Favre waves. The compression wave carried by the straight lines C+ 0 and C 1 gives birth to a jump
+
(left case) if the upstream Froude number Fa is greater than Fa;c = 0:39, or to a DSW in the opposite case (right case). Colours indicate the area of
influence of the equations: with a jump, the Rankine–Hugoniot (RH) relations are used to specify the water depth after the jump; with a DSW the water
depth is given by the SV equations. The green area is the intersection area between SV and KdV–Whitham theories, which are compatible for moderate
amplitude waves, while a very small expansion wave separates SV from RH in the jump case.
One can deduce the theoretical hydraulic jump height39 , thanks to Eq. 5.7:
C̃
s˜ = : 5.13
1 + 14 Fa
Let us write, in a dimensionless form, the main information that we determined Eq. 2.5:
”0 = 32 Fa 1 + 41 Fa ;
` ´
5.14
3 + Fa
s = 23 Fa : 5.15
1 + 14 Fa
It is interesting to compare the theoretical jump speed to that of the DSW leading edge sl , given by Eq. 4.93 and Eq. 5.14. We
will do that using the non-dimensionalisation Eq. 4.91 in the absolute reference frame, as we did to display the space-time
diagrams:
1
= sˆ < sˆl = 1 + 41 F2a : 5.16
1 + 14 Fa
The slope40 of the characteristic Dj is thus slightly smaller than that of Dl , as on Figure 21. As for the celerity of the DSW
trailing edge, still non-dimensional and in the same frame of reference, it is given by
sˆt = 1 − 52 Fa − 38 F2a : 5.17
This velocity can be negative, in principle. Therefore, the DSW trailing edge can travel towards the dam. This happens
if41 Fa > 23
`√ ´
31 − 5 ≈ 0:379.
We thus know the initial state of Figure 22, which we will use to calculate the Favre waves from Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s
solution. The initial discontinuity is located at the initial position of the theoretical jump x̃j (i.e. at the breaking point). The
later position is deduced from an analysis of the compression wave, doing the crude assumption that the chacteristics C+
converge to a single point. The time t˜j of the shock birth is also deduced:
(1 − Fa ) (2 + Fa )
x̃j = C̃ T̃ ; 5.18
3Fa
2 + Fa
t˜j = T̃ :
3Fa
For the numerical applications, one can place the space-time origin at the point (x̃j ; t˜j ), when these values are known. It
will not be the case in the following.
2 Theory and validation

We now take a look at Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s (GP) solution given by Eq. 4.62–4.63, written below in a dimensional form
in the relative frame and using Eq. 2.5:
2m (1 − m) K (m)
» –
ffl = 2”0 m + 1 − ; 5.19
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)
√
”˜ (x̃; t˜) = 32 ”0 h̃ 1 − m + 2m cn2 ( ”0 „ | m) ;
ˆ ˜
5.20
ffl − 2 (1 + m) ”0 x̃ ffl − 2 (1 + m) ”0 C̃ t˜
„= = : 5.21
ffl + 6 (1 − F) h̃ 6 h̃
39
Whatever the situation, the formula Eq. 5.4 should be used to calculate s˜ from Eq. 5.7, even when there is a jump.
40
According to the above definition of the characteristics, it is in fact the inverse of the usual geometrical slope, with the axes convention
of the previous figures.
41
Using Eq. 5.12 instead of Eq. 5.4, one would find
q
sˆt = 2 (1 − Fa ) − 1 + Fa + F2a ;
which has a third order term different
√
to that of Eq. 5.17, with respect to Fa . The condition for the trailing edge to travel in direction of
dam would then read Fa > 3−2 5 ≈ 0:382.
The free surface elevation is parameterised with m, varying between 0 and 1. Eq. 5.19 allows calculating ffl = xt for each
m, then Eq. 5.20 gives ”˜. In Eq. 5.21, „ is written as a function of x̃ or t˜ according to the way one wants to plot ”˜. The two
free parameters of the present model are h̃ and Fa (the latter being deduced from Ũ and h̃). As for ”0 , it is given by Eq. 5.14.
In order to compute the functions K, E and cn, one can use the series given at the end of Appendix B. The Froude number
associated with the Favre waves, in the frame relative to the theoretical hydraulic jump, is defined as
s˜ − Ũ
F+ 5.22
C̃
1
= Fa + :
1 + 41 Fa
It is linked to the absolute frame Froude number Fa by the following formula:
Fa = 12 F + 12 F (F + 8) − 2:
p
5.23
Favre waves exist if F < Fc = 1:3 (see Chapter 1), hence for Fa < Fa;c = 0:39. It is worth mentioning that the latter
condition matches quite well the condition that the trailing edge does not travel upstream, explained in the last section
(Fa < 0:38). However, one should remember that in the real DSW, the trailing edge is not well defined (see last Chapter).
But if these two phenomena are linked, one may ask: is there any mechanism that forces the leading soliton to break in
order to prevent any information to travel upstream?
In order to validate this simple theoretical model, we consider the experimental data by Soares-Frazão and Zech (2002). In
fact these experiments consist of waves resulting from the quasi-instantaneous opening of a gate separating a reservoir
and a canal, the latter being initially filled up to the elevation h̃ = 0:25 m, giving C̃ = 1:57 m/s. The reservoir is large
enough to keep a constant level on the “dam side” to the constant value h̃ + ”˜0 = 0:285 m. The value of the Froude
number that should be imposed in the canal to obtain this value of ”˜0 is Fa = 0:135 (see Eq. 5.4). We thus consider this
value in our calculation, though there is no background velocity in the experimental canal. Note however, that the velocity
of the theoretical hydraulic jump would be given by Eq. 5.5–5.6 and Eq. 5.4 (with Ũ = 0), instead of Eq. 5.13:
´q
s˜ = 1 + 2 Fa
1
1 + 21 Fa + 81 F2a C̃;
`
5.24
which leads to a larger value than Eq. 5.13. In what follows we take a look at gauges C1 and C4 depicted on Figure 24.
h̃ + η̃
h̃ + η̃0
C4 C1
h̃
Ũ = 0
x̃(m)
0 13.15 20.65
Figure 24 Principle of Soares-Frazão and Zech’s experimental facility (2002). The vertical line is the gate; C1 and C4 are the measurement gauges.
Figure 25 shows that the model in Eq. 5.19–5.20 gives a decent prediction, but that the wave train front velocity and the
wave amplitudes are overestimated. The measured wave propagates with a celerity closer to the velocity of the theoretical
jump than to that of GP’s model. One may object that the time of gate opening T̃ is unknown, but it is certainly small.
Another explanation is that GP’s model assumes an initial condition with a step-like shape while in the experiments the
waves develop in a different manner. But the Figure, with two graphs at different locations C4 and C1, clearly shows that
GP’s model overestimates the propagation velocity.
η̃(m)
0.32
0.30 C4
0.28
0.26
0.24 t̃(s)
6 10 14 18
η̃(m)
0.32
0.30 C1
0.28
0.26
0.24 t̃(s)
6 10 14 18
Figure 25 Soares-Frazão and Zech’s experiment (2002). We show the time evolution of the free surface elevation on the two gauges C4 and C1. Blue
symbols: experiments; black lines: GP’s model Eq. 5.19–5.20; orange dashed lines: theoretical hydraulic jump Eq. 5.24.
As for the overestimation of the wave amplitudes, a deeper investigation is needed. When writing the maximum elevation
of the leading soliton as a function of the Froude number, one gets
H̃s
= 34 ”0 5.25
h̃
= 2Fa 1 + 41 Fa
` ´
“ ”
= 14 F F + 4 + F (F + 8) − 2
p
= 83 (F − 1) + O F2 :
` ´
A plot of this formula is shown on Figure 26 and compared to the present experiment, as well as to other published labora-
tory data (Favre, 1935; Treske, 1994). One observes that Eq. 5.25 is almost a straight line and that it matches quite well the
experiments as long as the hydraulic jump is not concerned (i.e. F < Fc = 1:3). Nonetheless, the dispersion of data makes
it difficult to estimate their accuracy for small values of F. This is the case here, the data considered for the validation of
Figure 25 being spotted by a yellow disc. It is unfortunate that Soares-Frazaão and Zech’s article (2002) does not provide
detailed measurements for a larger value of F.
The above-cited experiments mention a wavelength, which is understood as the distance separating the first two peaks.
Note that GP’s model shows that this length Λ should increase continuously with time, a result that can be deduced from
Matsuno et al.’s wave counting (2007). To do so, one considers the leading soliton (m = 0) and the second wave (with
m = m2 ):
Z 4”0 t
1
1= 2ı kdx 5.26
4”0 t−Λ
Z 1
1 3=2 ’′ (m)
= ”
2 0
t dm
1−m2 K (m)
3=2
∼ 2 (1 − m2 ) ”0 t;
˜s
H
˜
h
1
0.5
Fc F
0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
Figure 26 Variation of the leading soliton height with the Froude number. Symbols: measurements (blue: Favre, 1935; red: Treske, 1994; green: Soares-
Frazão and Zech, 2002). Lines: Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s theoretical predictions (black: without dissipation, see Eq. 5.25; red: with dissipation, see
Eq. 6.47). The yellow disc shows the data considered here for the validation of the theoretical models.
where
“ ”
Λ
m2 + m ffl = 4 − ”0 t : 5.27
The estimation in Eq. 5.26 gives the time variation of m2. The distance Λ for large t’s is then given, as a first approximation,
by the wavelength for this value of m, knowing that K (1 − ›) ∼ − 21 ln › if › is small (see Appendix B):
Λ = L (m = m2 ) 5.28
2K (m2 )
= √
”0
1
∼ √ ln t:
”0
The above result is qualitatively confirmed by Chassagne et al.’s simulations (2019), done with another system of nonlin-
ear dispersive waves: the Serre–Green–Naghdi equations (M. Ricchiuto, personal communication). This confirms that a
soliton tends to separate from its (smaller) followers, as demonstrated by our analysis of the IST technique (Chapter 3).
Despite these drawbacks, the above results are interesting, since the dynamics of the wave train is correctly predicted by
GP’s model. The fact that the celerity and amplitude be overestimated suggests that a more appropriate model should
include energy dissipation. This will be the topic of the next chapter.
CHAPTER 6
Dissipation effects
1 The Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation (KdVB)
We saw in Chapter 2 that the KdV equation, written in the form Eq. 2.22, is similar to Eq. 2.26 for the motion of a material
point. It is thus easy to build a dissipative variant by adding to the equation a friction “force”. The simplest form of such a
force is linear with respect to the “velocity” ”„ :
”„„ = −3” 2 + c” + B + ”„ ; 6.1
where is a dimensionless friction factor. After differentiating and coming back to the space-time variables, this leads to
”t + 6””x + ”xxx − ”xx = 0; 6.2
which is called the Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation (KdVB). The new term being proportional to the second derivative
(the Laplacian) of the free surface elevation, the coefficient is thus a dimensionless viscosity.
It is interesting to start by looking at the behaviour of the solutions to Eq. 6.2 by prescribing the boundary conditions
used in Gurevich–Pitaevskii’s (GP) problem as examined in Chapter 4, i.e. ” −→ ”0 when x −→ −∞ and ” −→ 0 when
x −→ +∞, with vanishing derivatives far away on both sides. Eq. 6.1 then shows that B = 0 and that c is constant:
c = 3”0 : 6.3
Let — + ”„ ; Eq. 6.1 then leads to the following system:

”„ = —; 6.4
—„ = 3” (”0 − ”) + —:
The latter system allows dropping the variable „, by working in the phase space (”; —) where „ does not appear explicitly
(it is a curvilinear parameter of the phase portrait):
d— 3” (”0 − ”) + —
= : 6.5
d” —
Next, we look for the asymptotic behaviour near the boundary conditions, by linearising:
! ! !
” ”ref ”
˚
= + ; 6.6
— 0 —˚
T T
being (”ref ; 0) one of the two limit states (with ”ref = ”0 or 0), while (˚ ˚) denotes a small perturbation. The linearisa-
”; —
tion of Eq. 6.5 thus gives
d—
˚ ”
˚
= 3 (”0 − 2”ref ) + : 6.7
d˚
” —
˚
This equation suggests looking for a solution in the form — ” , giving

˚ ∼ –˚
–2 − – − 3 (”0 − 2”ref ) = 0; 6.8
with solutions given by
1“ p ”
–= ± 2 + 12 (”0 − 2”ref ) : 6.9
2
”
˚„
The evolution of the perturbation ”
˚ („) is then found by integrating ”
˚
∼ –, hence
–„
” ∼ Ne ;
˚ 6.10
where N is a constant that is small before ”0 . For the following we will set
p
0 + 12”0 ; 6.11
which plays the role of a critical viscosity. Let us first consider the case ”ref = 0 (the origin of the phase space), corre-
sponding to the condition when „ −→ +∞. In this case the fact that ˚
” must decrease when |„| is increased imposes the
Dissipation effects IAHR Water Monographs
“minus” sign in Eq. 6.9:

„ «
1
q
–= − 2 + 02 < 0: 6.12
2
Therefore, —
˚ decreases towards zero while keeping a real ratio with ˚
” . We deduce that the phase trajectory converges
towards the origin with a slope that tends to the real constant –.
Now let us investigate the case ”ref = ”0 (a point denoted A in the phase space), corresponding to the condition when
„ −→ −∞. In this case the fact that ˚
” must decrease when |„| is increased imposes the sign of the real part of – as being
positive. The latter condition is always satisfied, but two behaviours are possible. First, if > 0 , Eq. 6.9 yields
„ «
1
q
–= ± 2 − 02 > 0: 6.13
2
Irrespective of the sign before the square root, we obtain the same behaviour as previously, since – is real. On the other
hand, if < 0 we get
„ «
1
q
–= ± i 02 − 2 : 6.14
2
The convergence towards point A thus exhibits oscillations (it is said to be a metastable behaviour). To be precise, that
means that a train wave appears when the viscosity is lower than its critical value. These behaviours are depicted in the
phase space of Figure 3042 .
In case of a high viscosity (quite higher than 0 ), one may consider that the stabilising property of KdVB’s viscous term has
such a smoothing effect on the free surface that we can neglect the dispersion term, so that Eq. 6.2 rewrites
”t + 6””x − ”xx = 0: 6.15
This is called the Burgers equation, which is to KdVB what the Hopf equation is to KdV. With the abovementioned boundary
conditions, one can build a solution as a travelling wave. Indeed, Eq. 6.4 is then rewritten as
3
”„ = ” (” − ”0 ) ; 6.16

which can be integrated to give
” 1
= ; 6.17
”0 1 + exp „−„
‘
0
”0
with the caracteristic length ‘ + 3 . This free surface decreases more or less rapidly according to the value of ‘ . When
tends towards zero, ‘ does likewise and one would recover the initial step of Figure 14 in the absence of the dispersive
term. The latter, being now dominant, gives birth to the oscillations mentioned above. We will plot the solution in Eq. 6.17
on the next paragraph, after analysing the dispersive wave train.
2 Dissipative and dispersive shock wave

We will now apply Whitham’s modulation method to the KdVB equation, with the very same boundary conditions as pre-
viously43 . For this purpoe, we consider the weak viscosity case, so that the dispersion term acts despite the dissipation
term. With this assumption, we suppose that the KdV cnoidal wave Eq. 4.56 remains unchanged with KdVB. We will write
42
For the sake of rigor, one should plot a three-dimensional phase space, since the system state is parameterised by three quantities (for
example ”, ”„ and ”„„ ), which is a consequence of the third order of the KdVB equation. However, a three-dimensional representation
would provide no more information here.
43
Other approaches are possible. Feng (2007) analyses the solitary waves of KdVB.
it here in a slightly different formalism, more practical for the following developments, based on the celerity c and ampli-
tude H (both assumed slowly variable as previously):
r !
c H 2H H
”= + − + Hcn2 „|m ; 6.18
6 3m 3 2m
c = 2 (¸ + ˛ + ‚) = 2 (r1 + r2 + r3 ) ;
H = ¸ − ˛ = 2 (r2 − r3 ) ;
„ = x − ct;
¸−˛ r3 − r2
m= = :
¸−‚ r3 − r1
The technique presented in §1 applies to KdVB similarly than to KdV, with the difference that the viscous term is now a
source term in the conservation equations. It is easy to see how the system of Eq. 4.23–4.25 is modified. For that, it is
convenient to come back to Eq. 2.22, which reads here Z
1 2
2 ”„ = f (”) + ”„2 d„: 6.19
Now, the “conservation” equations Eq. 4.4–4.5 are modified as follows:

(”)t + 3” 2 + ”xx − ”x x = 0;
` ´
6.20
` 2´ ` 3
” + 4” + 2””xx − ”x2 − ””x x = −”x2 :
´
6.21
It is now important to make the following observation. With the hypothesis of small viscosity, the additional terms in the
right-hand sides of Eq. 6.21 only have a small influence. Therefore, taking the period average of the last two equations the
only new term comes from the right-hand side of Eq. 6.21 and reads, as a first approximation and neglecting the viscous
term of Eq. 6.19:
−h”x2 i = −h”„2 i 6.22
p
≈ −h 2f (”)”„ i
I p
= − 2f (”)d”
= W:
Thus, the system of Eq. 4.27–4.29 is modified as

DWA
= WA cx ; 6.23
Dt
DWB
= WA Bx ; 6.24
Dt
DWc
= WA Ax − W: 6.25
Dt
The subsequent algebraic calculations are not presented here (their detail is given by Gurevich and Pitaevskii (1987) and
lead to the following Whitham equations:
@ri @ri
+ vi = i ; 6.26
@t @x
which differ by the Whitham equation of KdV by the right-hand sides, given by
r
3W m
1 = ; 6.27
E (m) 2H
r
3W m
2 = ;
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m) 2H
r
3W m
3 = ;
E (m) − K (m) 2H
where Whitham’s state function W (H; m) is defined by Eq. 4.19. The source terms makes it impossible to find generalised
analytical solutions. Moreover, contrary to the Whitham equations of KdV, Eq. 6.27 is not invariant with respect to space-
time dilation, precisely because of the source terms. Thus, the case of the initial semi-infinite step, treated in §3 with KdV,
does not provide centered wave-like solutions, i.e. functions of the phase ffl + xt . However, Gurevich and Pitaevskii (1987)
propose a different resolution approach (see also Myint et Grimshaw, 1995). For this purpose, we search for a stationary
solution in the frame moving with velocity c; the fact that c is a constant for the non-modulated case of the previous
section makes it sensible. This amounts to saying that in Eq. 6.23–6.25, the “total” derivatives are null. This gives
cx = 0; 6.28
Bx = 0; 6.29
WA Ax = W: 6.30
The first of the above equations says that c is indeed a constant in the present case. The second one claims that B = 0 as
before. Finally, thanks to Eq. 6.30 we can write
W„ = Wx 6.31
= WA Ax + WB Bx + Wc cx
= W;
with the following solution:
W („) = W („0 ) exp [ („ − „0 )] : 6.32
Now, let us take the more general formula in Eq. 4.10. It is obvious that h”„„ i is null44 , since it is the integral of a derivative
over a closed contour. We thus obtain, with help from Eq. 6.3:
˙ 2¸
” = ”0 h”i : 6.33
Taking the general formulae in Eq. 4.16–4.17, Eq. 6.33 leads to

3m
H= ”0 ; 6.34
2R (m)
where we define
p
R (m) + 1 − m + m2 : 6.35
Substituting this into Eq. 6.18, we obtain the free surface elevation:
“q ”
3 ”0
” 1 − 2m + 3m cn2 4 R(m) „|m
= 21 + : 6.36
”0 2R (m)
One can deduce the mean elevation as well as its envelopes:

0 1
E(m)
h”i 2 − m − 3 K(m)
= 21 @1 − A; 6.37
”0 R (m)
1 − 2m
„ «
”min
= 12 1 + ;
”0 R (m)
„ «
”max 1+m
= 12 1 + ;
”0 R (m)
44
To be precise, it is null to the first order. Recall that derivatives commute with the averaging operator up to this order.
(we can check that ”max − ”min = H). The wavelength reads
s
R (m)
L = 4K (m) : 6.38
3”0
We must now determine the distribution of the modulation parameter m as a function of the space-time variables. This is
enabled by Eq. 4.19 and Eq. 6.32, giving
2
R (m) E (m) − (1 − m) 1 − 12 m K (m)
` ´
exp [ („ − „0 )] = 5=2
; 6.39
R (m)
(we chose „0 = „ (m = 1) =). Having the choice of the space origin, we can also set „0 = 0, from which we finally have
2
R (m) E (m) − (1 − m) 1 − 21 m K (m)
` ´
’ (m) + ln = x − ct; 6.40
R (m)5=2
which is analogous to Eq. 4.62 for the non dissipative solution. Therefore, from m we can calculate „ = x − ct, instead of
x
ffl= t
like in the non-viscous case.
Let us analyse the solution defined by Eq. 6.36 and Eq. 6.40. First, as a function of „, this is a wave travelling at the speed
c = 3”0 with no change in its shape, instead of the non dissipative GP solution that is getting longer while time goes on.
Its propagation speed is less than that of the non dissipative wave, which is 4”0 , as a reminder. As for the amplitude of its
leading soliton, it is given by Eq. 6.34 and Eq. 6.35 with m = 1:
Hs = 32 ”0 : 6.41
We thus get a smaller leading wave than with the non dissipative solution (Hs = 2”0 ). Note that the function ’ varies
much more rapidly than ’, as depicted by Figure 27. The very small values of m are rejected far away up to −∞, therefore
there is no well defined trailing edge like in the non dissipative case45 .
m
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0 x − ct
-200 -100 0
Figure 27 Modulation parameter m for Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s dissipative solution, as a function of x − ct = ’ (m), according to Eq. 6.40.
√
Figure 28 shows the effect of viscosity with respect to the non dissipative case. We set ”0 = 1, thus 0 = 12 = 3:46.
the figure shows the oscillatory case with = 0:05 = 0:01440 and the non oscillatory case = 5 = 1:440 . Figure 30
45
Recall that Gurevich and Pitaevskii’s non dissipative model, from this point of view, is a crude approximation. Numerical simulations
of KdV show a progressive decrease of the oscillation amplitude at the tail of the DSW, which is qualitatively closer to the present
dissipative solution.
displays their evolutions in the phase space (”; ”„ ), in agreement with the analysis done in the lest section46 . Figure 29
shows the influence of on the free surface profile. We can see that the leading soliton is unchanged, the viscosity having
an effect on the wavelengths and on the rate of decrease of the following waves.
η/η0
2
1.5 t = 10
1
0.5
0
x
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100
η/η0
2
1.5 t = 20
1
0.5
0
x
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100
Figure 28 Non viscous DSW (black lines, Eq. 4.62–4.63), viscous DSW (red lines, Eq. 6.36 and Eq. 6.40, = 0:05) and more viscous DSW (blue lines,
Eq. 6.17, = 5), at two time instances with ”0 = 1.
η/η0
2
1.5
0.5
x
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0
Figure 29 Viscous DSW according to Eq. 6.36 and Eq. 6.40, for = 0:02 (black line), = 0:05 (red line) and = 0:10 (blue line), with ”0 = 1.
The Riemann “invariants” here have the following behaviour:

2−m
„ «
r1 1
= 2 1+ ; 6.42
”0 2R (m)
2m − 1
„ «
r2
= 21 1 + ;
”0 2R (m)
„ «
r3 1+m
= 21 1 − :
”0 2R (m)
46
One may find it odd that the non viscous model is characterized by infinitely many curves covering a closed set of the plane, while
each choice of gives a unique curve. This is explained by the fact that in the viscous case m is written as a function of „, while in the
non-viscous case it is a function of ffl = ”x0 t , giving one curved parameterised by ffl for each value of x or t (see Eq. 5.21). A a given time
instance, the phase trajectory links the origin to point A as in the viscous case, but it changes with time to fill all the gray domain on the
figure, while for the viscous case, the phase trajectory remains frozen.
ηθ
3/2
η0
m=1
soliton
m = 0.75
1 m = 0.5
η
0 η0
ν=5
-1
ν = 0.2
-2
0 1 2
Figure 30 Hodograph (phase plane) (”; — = ”„ ). The black closed curves depict the non dissipative case for several values of m (linear wave for the
smallest curves, the soliton near the boundary). Red and blue lines are the dissipative case for two values of , m being a mere function of „.
They are depicted on Figure 31 (to be compared with Figure 20). The limit values of the ri ’s are, for m −→ 0: {r1 ; r2 ; r3 } −→
˘ 1 1¯
1; 4 ; 4 ”0 , and for m = 1 : {r1 ; r2 ; r3 } −→ 34 ; 43 ; 0 ”0 .
˘ ¯
Table 2 presents a comparison of the typical features of the two kinds of DSW explained above. We should keep in mind
that the viscous solution relies on more assumptions than the non-viscous case; observe that the viscous case does not
give the non-viscous case back when the viscosity is decreased to zero. However, it is satisfying to find a DSW that is less
high and less fast than the non-dissipative one, as we expected.
Let us now come back to the experimental data by Soares-Frazão and Zech (2002). The solution given by Eq. 6.36 and
Eq. 6.40 reads, in a dimensional form:
2
R (m) E (m) − (1 − m) 1 − 12 m K (m)
` ´
„ = ln 5=2
; 6.43
R (m)
x̃ − ṽ t˜
» „r «–
”0 h̃ 3 ”0
”˜ (x̃; t˜) = R (m) + 1 − 2m + 3m cn2 4 R (m) | m ; 6.44
3R (m) h̃
ṽ + 1 − F + 21 ”0 C̃:
` ´
6.45
r
η0
r1 /η0
1
0.75
0.5 r2 /η0
0.25
r3 /η0
0
x − ct
-150 -100 -50 0
Figure 31 Phase portrait of the quantities ri for a dissipative DSW, according to Gurevich and Pitaevskii (1987). Compare with the non-dissipative case
on Figure 20.
Figure 32 shows that in this case, the latter model can fix the issues of the non dissipative model, with a non-dimensional
viscosity calibrated at = 0:15: the amplitude and wave speed are now in good agreement with the measurements.
In particular, the laboratory DSW seems to propagate without a change in its shape, which confirms that the celerity
should be constant vs time and space. However, a deeper analysis against a larger set of data would help in getting more
convincing conclusions.
Figure 32 shows that the dissipative wave seems to propagate at a velocity close to the theoretical hydraulic jump, con-
trary to the non viscous one that goes slightly faster. This can be checked by the following calculus, denoting sˆd the speed
of the leading edge of the dissipative DSW in the absolute reference frame, deduced from Eq. 5.14 and Eq. 6.45:
ṽ
sˆd = 6.46
C̃
= 1 − Fa + 21 ”0
= 1 − 41 Fa + F
3 2
16 a
;
which is to be compared to Eq. 5.16. We see that sˆd coincides with sˆ to the first order with respect to Fa , contrary to sˆl . This
is the consequence of the factor 3 instead of the factor 4 in the non dissipative model (in the relative frame, cs = 3”0 with
Table 1 Comparison of the features of the two kinds of DSW proposed by GP. Symbols E, K and R mean E (m), K (m) et R (m), respectively.
Model Non dissipative Dissipative
R2 E−(1−m)(1−m=2)K
h i
2m(1−m)K
(x; t) ←→ m 2 m + 1 − E−(1−m)K = ”x0 t + ffl ln R5=2
= x − ct + „
» „q «–
”(x;t) `√ 3 ”0
1 − m + 2m cn2 1 1 2
´
”0 ”0 (x − 2 (1 + m) ”0 t) | m 2 + 2R 1 − 2m + 3m cn 4 R„|m
“ ”
h”i(x;t) E 1
”0 m − 1 + 2K 2 − 1 E
2 − m − 3K
“ 2R ”
”min (x;t) 1 1−2m
”0 1−m 2 1+ R
“ ”
”max (x;t) 1 1+m
”0 1+m 2 1+ R
c(x;t)
”0 2 (1 + m) 3
cs
”0 4 3
H(x;t) 3m
”0 2m 2R
Hs 3
”0 2 2
√
q
R
”0 L (x; t) 2K 4K 3
dissipation instead of 4”0 ). Likewise, Treske (1994) observed in its experimental flume with a rectangular section, that the
speed of the leading wave is very close to that of the theoretical jump.
3
As for the wave amplitude, Eq. 5.25 is now multiplied by 4 :
H̃s
= 2 (F − 1) + O F2 :
` ´
6.47
h̃
Figure 26 of Chapter 5 shows this formula with a red line. The yellow disc corresponding to the presently examined mea-
surements explains the good agreement between the dissipative GP model and the observations in this case. However,
there is no clear evidence that the dissipative model is better than the non dissipative one when looking at the measure-
ments as a whole.
η̃(m)
0.32
0.30 C4
0.28
0.26
0.24 t̃(s)
6 10 14 18
η̃(m)
0.32
0.30 C1
0.28
0.26
0.24 t̃(s)
6 10 14 18
Figure 32 Soares-Frazão and Zech’s experiment (2002). The temporal evolution of the free surface elevation is presented at gauges C4 and C1. Blue
symboles show the measurements, black dashed lines GP’s non viscous model Eq. 5.19–5.20, red lines their viscous model Eq. 6.43–6.45 with = 0:15,
orange dashed lines the theoretical hydraulic jump Eq. 5.24.
CHAPTER 7
Summary and conclusions

To summarise, the above chapters have outlined the following results:
• Undular bores like Favre waves are non-linear and dispersive wave trains, i.e. a series of waves with relatively high ampli-
tude and relatively short length, with respect to the rest water depth. Their dispersive property makes it impossible to
model them with the Saint-Venant (SV) equations, and their non-linearity makes traditional methods like the Fourier
transform useless. They occur in place of a hydraulic jump when the lower water level Froude number (in the relative
reference frame) is lower than the critical value Fa;c = 0:39. Otherwise they break to give birth to the classical jump.
• We described the Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV), the simplest depth-averaged wave equation including both non-
linearity and dispersion. This equation possess exact travelling wave-like solutions referred to as cnoidal waves. They
depend on a parameter denoted m, varying between 0 and 1. When it is close to 0, these waves are almost lin-
ear, thus with weak amplitude. When m equals 1, a single wave propagates with a conserved shape under the non-
linearity/dispersion balance: the KdV soliton, whose speed depends on its amplitude.
• The KdV equation can, under certain initial conditions, be analytically solved using a kind of non-linear version of the
Fourier transform: Inverse Scattering Transform (IST). One can then prove that an initial condition with a local elevation
”0 with respect to the rest level gives birth to waves that separates into a finite collection of solitons, the higher being
the fastest with hight 2”0 . Unfortunately the IST seems unable to be applied to the prediction of undular bores.
• Whitham’s theory of wave modulation was successfully applied by this author to KdV, yielding Riemann invariants that
propagate following the KdV Whitham equations, explaing the dynamics of a cnoidal wave train modulated by the
parameter m. One can then show that, at the edges of this wave train, the KdV equation is, to the first level with respect
to the amplitude, compatible with the SV equations.
• Gurevich and Pitaevskii (GP) built a mathematical model for dispersive shock waves (DSW), based on Whitham’s equa-
tions of KdV. This wave train gets longer with time while propagating, and its most important features can be calculated
analytically. The leading soliton has a height that is twice the initial water depth discontinuity, in agreement with IST,
while the trailing edge is made of waves with smaller and smaller amplitude. This, however, is only an approximate
solution to the KdV equation.
• The same authors proposed a second approximate model taking into account energy dissipation through the Witham
equations of the Korteweg–de –Burgers equation (KdVB), including a viscous term. The presence of source terms in the
Witham equations does not allow the same kind of solution, but under the assumption of a stationary wave train (in a
certain frame) one can put in evidence a DSW with infinite length propagating with a constant speed, smaller than with
KdV. The leading soliton also has a smaller amplitude, even when the viscosity tends to zero. On the other hand, the
viscosity should not be too large to get an oscillatory DSW.
• The above two GP theories can be applied to describe undular bores. An attempt to apply them to Favre waves leads
to a pretty good agreement with experimental observations, KdV giving the correct leading wave amplitude in a wide
range of tests, but KdVB being closer to measurements (amplitude and propagation speed) for the set of data more
closely analysed, corresponding to a small Froude number, with an ad hoc viscosity value.
The two models being perfectible, it is useful to mention existing variants that may improve the description of undular
bores:
Summary and conclusions IAHR Water Monographs
• GP’s non viscous model overestimates the propagation velocity, while their viscous model may underestimate the
amplitude at large Froude number. There exists more sophisticated equations than KdV, sometimes with a Whitham
treatment available in the literature. As an example, Kamchatnov et al. (2012) propose the same kind of approach for
the Gardner equation, but it is more complex and includes bright solitons that are not observed in free surface flows.
El et al. (2006) show that the Serre–Green–Naghdi equations, while not being completely solved by Whitham and GP’s
approaches, give birth to DSW that propagate a bit slower that that of KdV. Other works exist with the modified KdV
equation, generalised KdV equation, etc.
• In a real channel, the section is often trapezoidal, or more generally of arbitrary cross-section. The shape of the later
can be included by modifying the coefficients of KdV. The solution of Whitham’s equation can then be taken from GP’s
one through a change of the non-dimensionalisation rules (Teng and Wu, 1997). However, in such a case waves are not
invariant with respect to the transvers direction of the channel, with a higher elevation and a smaller speed near the
banks, in agreement with experiments l’expérience (Treske, 1994). A breaking is also sometimes visible near the channel
sides (see Figure 33), due to a purely geometrical dispersion effect. This phenomenon was numerically observed with
the Serre–Green–Naghdi equations (including a breaking model) by Chassagne et al. (2019).
• Other attempts were made to make the theoretical predictions closer to reality. El et al. (2007) proposed a way to include
bottom slope and bottom shear effects, with less detailed analytical solutions. More generally, the reader will find an
analysis of KdV with a variable bottom level in Grimshaw and Yuan (2016).
• In a curvilinear channel, the theory presented here is not applicable. Reflected waves appear (see Figure 33) giving
birth to interférences47 , and a simple theoretical treatment seems impossible. Various numerical models exist in the
literature, solving KdV or more complex systems, as said in the introduction chapter.
Figure 33 Propagation of Favre waves upstream the Manosque dam (France, photos EDF). The strong curvature of this channel section limits the
application of the developments presented here.
It is interesting to mention a variant of the KdV equation called the Whitham equation:
”t + 6””x + D”x = 0; 7.1
Df + 6F −1 [c] ? f 7.2
= 6c (k ≡ −i@x ) f : 7.3
47
Treske (1994) also mentions such interferences in its straight channel with a trapezoidal section and large Froude number, because
of the refraction caused by the space variability of the wave celerity.
With respect to KdV, Eq. 7.1 has a different dispersive term, representing exactly the dispersion of Euler’s linearised equa-
tions. The operator D is defined in Eq. 7.2 as the convolution product with the inverse Fourier transform of the small wave
celerity in Euler’s free surface equations:
r
tanh k
c (k) + : 7.4
k
A taylor series of the dispersive term D”x gives 6”x + ”xxx + :::, i.e. the second and last terms of Eq. 2.1, in agreement with
Eq. 2.4. This term being a space convolution, the Whitham equation is an integro-differential equation, thus it is non-local.
The fact that the dispersion term in Eq. 7.3 can be written as a formal differential operator is demonstrated in Violeau et
Fonty (2019). To date, it seems there is no integration method for the Whitham equation, nor any travelling wave explicit
solutions. However, numerical simulations show that its solutions resemble those of KdV, with a special feature: they have
a limited amplitude, which can be interpreted as a way to account for wave breaking, while KdV allows waves of arbitrary
amplitude (Sanford et al., 2014).
One can also generalise Whitham’s equation with less binding forms of advection and dispersion terms:
”t + V ′′ (”) ”x + D”x = 0; 7.5
where V is a twice differentiable function and D an integro-differential operator (KdV corresponds to V = ” 3 and D = @xx
2
,
3
p
Whitham to V = ” and D = 6 (tan @x ) = tan @x ). It is then possible to prove the following results:
• Eq. 7.5 derives from a Hamiltonian principle, V representing the potential.

• There are at least three conservation laws depending on V and D.
• In the case a modulated wave train, the cycle-average equations are unchanged with respect to KdV, in other words
they are independent on V and D.
2
• In the particular case D = @xx (as with KdV), equations Eq. 4.27–4.29 are unchanged regardless of the function V.
Nevertheless, Whitham’s state function W depends not only on the triplet {A; B; c} but also to the function V. There is
no way, in general, to write explicitly the solutions as travelling waves, and the system of Eq. 4.27–4.29 cannot a priori
be diagonalised explicitly (except in some special cases like KdV).
Summary and conclusions IAHR Water Monographs
CHAPTER 8
Appendices
1 Appendix A: Rigorous derivation of the KdV equation
We propose here a derivation inspired by Johnson48 (2010) to demonstrate the KdV equation in its dimensionless form
Eq. 2.7 (see also Friedrichs, 1948). We start from the Euler equations for a free surface flow varying along x˜ and z̃ (the latter
being the vertical component, with the origin on the flat bottom):
ũt˜ + ũ ũx̃ + w̃ ũz̃ = −P̃x̃ ; 8.1
w̃t˜ + ũ w̃x̃ + w̃ w̃z̃ = −P̃z̃ ; 8.2
ũx̃ + w̃z̃ = 0; 8.3
p̃
where P̃ + ̃ + g z̃ is the dynamic pressure (g is the acceleration of gravity), ũ and w̃ denoting the velocity field compo-
nents. The free surface boundary conditions read
P̃ (z̃ = ”˜) = g ”˜ (x̃; t˜) ; 8.4
“ ” “ ”
w̃ z̃ = h̃ + ”˜ = ”˜t˜ + ũ z̃ = h̃ + ”˜ ”˜x̃ ;
”˜ being the free surface perturbation, i.e. the elevation measured from the rest free surface with altitude h̃. The bottom
impermeability reads
w̃ (z̃ = 0) = 0: 8.5
We introduce the dispersion parameter ‹ and the non-linearity parameter ›:

h̃
‹+ ; 8.6
L̃
H̃
›+ :
h̃
Having in mind weakly non-linear and weakly dispersive flows, these two quantities are assumed small. Moreover, we look
at situations where they have the same order of magnitude, hence U = O (1), which gives ‹ 2 = O (›). These relations will
be used to remove ‹ from all subsequent calculations. We use here the following non-dimensionalising convention49 :
C̃ t˜ ũ
t+ ; u+ ; 8.7
L̃ C̃
x̃ P̃
x+ ; P + ;
L̃ C̃ 2
z̃ ”˜
z+ ; ”+ :
h̃ H̃
The continuity equation Eq. 8.3 suggests non-dimensionalising the vertical velocity as follows:
1 w̃
w+ : 8.8
‹ C̃
With these notations, Eq. 8.1–8.3 become

ut + uux + w uz = −Px ; 8.9
› (wt + uwx + w wz ) = −Pz ;
ux + wz = 0;
48
Korteweg and de Vries’s original derivation (1895) is quite different. Note also that the notations ũ, ”0 , ‰ and fi used here are limited
to the present appendix.
49
These are slightly different than in the main text, which simplifies our developments here. The main text conventions will be used at
the very end of this appendix.
Appendices IAHR Water Monographs
and their boundary conditions Eq. 8.4–8.5 rewrite as follows:

P (z = 1 + ›”) = ›” (x; t) ; 8.10
w (z = 1 + ›”) = › [”t + u (z = 1 + ›”) ”x ] ;
w (z = 0) = 0:
Now, if we neglected › the system and its boundary conditions would have the trivial state with constant, horizontal veloc-
ity as a solution50 U and with null dynamic pressure, with a flat free surface of elevation ”0 . We will thus search for a
higher-order solution. However, we must look for a quasi-periodic wave, i.e. with an amplitude that vary slowly in time.
We thus define the following quantities:
‰ + x − t; 8.11
fi + ›t:
‰ denotes the phase (for a wave propagating with speed C̃, here in dimensionless form), while fi stands for the slow time
scale51 . We then look for solutions depending on the phase, altitude and slow time, as Taylor expansions with respect to
›:
u (x; z; t) = ›u1 (‰; z; fi ) + ›2 u2 (‰; z; fi ) + O ›3 :
` ´
8.12
w (x; z; t) = ›w1 (‰; z; fi ) + ›2 w2 (‰; z; fi ) + O ›3 :
` ´
P (x; z; t) = ›P1 (‰; z; fi ) + ›2 P2 (‰; z; fi ) + O ›3 :

` ´
” (x; t) = ”0 (‰; fi ) + ›”1 (‰; fi ) + ›2 ”2 (‰; fi ) + O ›3 :

` ´
We limit our calculations to the second order in ›. We must insist that each quantity depends on time through ‰ and fi . As
an example:
u1;t = −u1;‰ + ›u1;fi : 8.13
Substituting Eq. 8.12 in Eq. 8.9 we obtain

−›u1;‰ + ›2 (u1;fi − u2;‰ + u1 u1;‰ + w1 u1;z ) = −›P1;‰ − ›2 P2;‰ ; 8.14
−›2 w1;‰ = −›P1;z − ›2 P2;z ;
› (u1;‰ + w1;z ) + ›2 (u2;‰ + w2;z ) = 0;
while the boundary conditions Eq. 8.10 yield
›P1 z = 1 + ›”0 + ›2 ”1 + ›2 P2 z = 1 + ›”0 + ›2 ”1 = ›”0 + ›2 ”1 ;
` ´ ` ´
›w1 z = 1 + ›”0 + ›2 ”1 + ›2 w2 z = 1 + ›”0 + ›2 ”1 =

` ´ ` ´
8.15
− ›”0;‰ + ›2 −”1;‰ + ”0;fi + u1 z = 1 + ›”0 + ›2 ”1 ”0;‰ ;
ˆ ` ´ ˜
›w1 (z = 0) + ›2 w2 (z = 0) = 0:
At the first order in ›, this gives

−u1;‰ = −P1;‰ ; 8.16
0 = −P1;z ; 8.17
u1;‰ + w1;z = 0; 8.18
50
Since U is adimensionalised by C̃, this is in fact a Froude number. This solution corresponds to the background velocity, and must in
fact be added to C̃ in the above non-dimensionalisation. As already said that will be done at the end.
51
In the theory of quasi-periodic mechanical systems, this framework is useful to get rid of the so-called secular terms (see i.e. Janssen,
2004).
and
P1 (z = 1) = ”0 ; 8.19
w1 (z = 1) = −”0;‰ ; 8.20
w1 (z = 0) = 0: 8.21
Eq 8.17 and Eq. 8.19 lead to
P1 = ”0 ; 8.22
then Eq. 8.16 leads to
u1 = ”0 ; 8.23
(up to a constant that can be ignored using Galilean invariance). Finally, Eq. 8.18, Eq. 8.20 and Eq. 8.21 give
w1 = −”0;‰ z: 8.24
At the second order in ›, and using the solutions found at the first order, Eq. 8.14 and Eq. 8.15 give
”0;fi − u2;‰ + ”0 ”0;‰ = −P2;‰ ; 8.25

”0;‰‰ z = −P2;z ; 8.26
u2;‰ + w2;z = 0; 8.27
and
P2 (z = 1) = ”1 ; 8.28
w2 (z = 1) = −”1;‰ + ”0;fi + 2”0 ”0;‰ ; 8.29
w2 (z = 0) = 0: 8.30
Integrating Eq. 8.26 and Eq. 8.28 leads to
P2 = ”1 + 12 ”0;‰‰ 1 − z 2 ;
` ´
8.31
then Eq. 8.25 and Eq. 8.27 give us
w2;z = −”0;fi − ”0 ”0;‰ − 21 ”0;‰‰‰ 1 − z 2 − ”1;‰ :

` ´
8.32
Integrating the last formula, and considering Eq. 8.30, we find
w2 = −”0;fi z − ”0 ”0;‰ z − 21 ”0;‰‰‰ z − 13 z 3 − ”1;‰ z:

` ´
8.33
With this formula, Eq. 8.29 then yields
”0;fi + 32 ”0 ”0;‰ + 61 ”0;‰‰‰ = 0: 8.34
Finally, using the convention Eq. 2.5 instead of Eq. 8.7, t is divised by 6 and ”0 by 32 , which gives us Eq. 2.7 in assimilating
{”0 ; ‰; fi } to {”; x; t}. The dimensional KdV equation Eq. 2.4 is found by using again Eq. 2.5 the other way around, including
x.
2 Appendix B: Elliptic functions and integrals

We introduce here Jacobi’s elliptic functions and complete elliptic integrals of the first and second kind, as required tools
for solving the KdV equation. Jacobi’s elliptic cosine and sine are defined as
cn (x | m) + cos ’; 8.35
sn (x | m) + sin ’;
Z ’
d
où x = p ;
0 1 − m sin2
with 0 6 m 6 1. They are similar to ordinary trigonometric functions but refer to ellipses rather than to the circle52 , and
satisfy cn2 + sn2 = 1. The curves cn(x | m) and sn(x | m) as functions of x are plotted on Figure 34 for various values of
m. They are all periodic, with periods 4K (m), where
ı=2
d
Z
K (m) + p ; 8.36
0 1 − m sin2
is called complete elliptic integral of the first kind. One also defines the complete elliptic integral of the second kind:
Z ı=2 q
E (m) + 1 − m sin2 d : 8.37
0
The functions K (m) and E (m) are plotted on Figure 35.
As we can see on 34, for not too small values of m, the curves of the functions cn have a rather flat shape except for
relatively small x’s (with respect to the periodicity). When m −→ 0, cn(x | m) we approach an ordinary cosine:
m −→ 0 : cn (x | m) ≈ cos x; 8.38
while for m −→ 1, cn(x | m) is closer to a hyperbolic secant:
m −→ 1 : cn (x | m) ≈ sech x: 8.39
It is useful to calculate the derivatives of cn(x | m), K (m) et E (m). We first have
d cn (x | m)
= −sn (x | m) dn (x | m) ; 8.40
dx
with
p
dn (x | m) + 1 − m sn2 (x | m): 8.41
Then, differentiating Eq. 8.36 yields

ı=2
dK sin2
Z
1
= 2 3d : 8.42
dm
p
0 1 − m sin2
We can then use the following identity:

!
d sin cos 1−m
q
m p = 1 − m sin2 −p 3; 8.43
d 1 − m sin2 1 − m sin2
which after integration by parts between 0 and ı=2 gives
Z ı=2
d
(1 − m) p 3 = E (m) : 8.44
0 1 − m sin2
52
One can define at least ten other functions with elliptic trigonometry properties. In a historical perspective, these functions were
invented to describe analytically the motion of an ordinary oscillating bob in the non-linear regime, i.e. without the assumption of
small oscillation amplitude.
cn(x | m)
1
m=0
m = 0.25
m = 0.6
m = 0.9
0.5 m=1
0 x
-0.5
-1
-10 -5 0 5 10
sn(x | m)
1
0.5
0 x
-0.5 m=0
m = 0.25
m = 0.6
m = 0.9
m=1
-1
-10 -5 0 5 10
Figure 34 Graphs of Jacobi’s elliptic cosine cn(x | m) (top) and sine sn(x | m) (bottom) for five values of m. All curves were plotted with Eq. 8.53 and
Eq. 8.54.
By combining Eq. 8.42 and Eq. 8.44 we find

» –
dK 1 E (m)
= − K (m) : 8.45
dm 2m 1 − m
As for the derivative of E (m), a direct differentiation of Eq. 8.37 gives

ı=2
dE sin2
Z
= − 21 p d ; 8.46
dm 0 1 − m sin2
which, after simple algebra, yields
dE 1
= [E (m) − K (m)] : 8.47
dm 2m
K, E
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 m
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ı
Figure 35 Graphs of the complete elliptic integrals K (m) and E (m). We have K (0) = E (0) = 2
, E (1) = 1. Both curves where plotted with
Eq. 8.53 and Eq. 8.54.
The method in Eq. 8.43 that we used to calculate the derivative of K is generally useful. Doing the same with the functions
q
1 − m sin2 cos sin ; 8.48
q 3
1 − m sin2 cos sin ;
one can prove the following identities:

ı=2
sin4 1
Z
d = [(2 + m) K (m) − 2 (1 + m) E (m)] ; 8.49
3m2
p
0 1 − m sin2
ı=2
1 ˆ
Z q
sin4 1 − m sin2 d 2 (1 − m) (1 + 2m) K (m) − 2 + 3m − 8m2 E (m) :
` ´ ˜
= 8.50
0 15m2
ı ı
It is easy to see that K (0) = E (0) = 2
, while K ′ (0) = −E ′ (0) = 8
. Going a bit further in the Taylor series near the
origin, one can write
2
ı
1 + 14 m + 9
+ O m3 ;
` ` ´´
K (m) = 2 64 m 8.51
ı
1 − 14 m − 3
m2 + O m3 :
` ` ´´
E (m) = 2 64
The above two developments allow writing useful additional relations:
m (1 − m) K (m)
= 2 + O (m) ; 8.52
E (m) − (1 − m) K (m)
mK (m)
= −2 + O (m) :
E (m) − K (m)
On the other side of the definition domain of these two functions (m −→ 1), we have K (m) ∼ − 21 ln (1 − m) −→ +∞,
(1 − m) K (m) −→ 0 and E (1) = 1.
The graphs of cn, sn, K and E are difficult to plot correctly. We recommend using the method proposed by Fenton and
Gardiner-Garden (1982) (see also Fukushima, 2009), who propose to develop them as series based on two auxiliary vari-
ables q and z, by making the distinction between two cases according to the value of m (in what follows we define
m′ + 1 − m:
1 1 − m′1=4
0 ≤ m < m0 : –+ 2 ; 8.53
1 + m′1=4
q + – + 2–5 + 15–9 + 150–13 + 1707–17 + 20910–21;
∞
!
n2
X
ı
K (m) = 2 1 + 2 q ;
n=1
∞
" «2 !#
2−m q 2n
„
ı 1
X
E (m) = K (m) +2 24 − ;
3 K (m) n=1 (1 − q 2n )2
ıx
z+ ;
2K (m)
„ ′ «1=4 P∞ n2 +n
mq n=0 q cos ((2n + 1) z)
cn (x | m) = 2 P ∞ n n2 ;
m n=1 (−1) q cos 2nz
“ q ”1=4 P∞ (−1)n q n2 +n sin ((2n + 1) z)

n=0P
sn (x | m) = 2 ∞ n n2 ;
and
1 1 − m1=4
m0 ≤ m < 1 : –+ 2
; 8.54
1 + m1=4
q + – + 2–5 + 15–9 + 150–13 + 1707–17 + 20910–21;
∞
!
n2
X
′ ı
K (m ) = 2 1 + 2 q ;
n=1
ln q
K (m) = − ı1 ;
K (m′ )
∞
" «2 !#
2 − m′ q 2n
„
′ ′ ı 1
X
E (m ) = K (m ) +2 24 − 2 ;
3 K (m′ ) n=1 (1 − q 2n )
E (m′ )
» –
1 ı
E (m) = K (m) + 2 − ;
K (m′ ) K (m)
ıx
z+ ;
2K (m′ )
„ ′ «1=4 P∞ n2 +n
m n=0 q cos ((2n + 1) z)
cn (x | m) = 2 q P ∞ n n2 ;
“ q ”1=4 P∞ (−1)n q n2 +n sin ((2n + 1) z)
n=0P
sn (x | m) = 2 ∞ n n2 :
Fenton and Gardiner-Garden propose m0 = 0:5, while Fukushima prefers m0 = 0:9. We recommend the latter value.
Readers should be careful with the notations in the literature as these functions are concerned. It is common to set m = k 2
while writing K (k) in place of K k 2 , for example, which induces confusion. Many online published documents are thus
` ´
full of typos.
3 Appendix C: A Lax pair of KdV

Recall Eq. 3.10 and Eq. 3.11 defining the operators L and A considered here:
2
L [”] + −@xx − ”; 8.55
3
A [”] + −4@xxx − 6”@x − 3”x : 8.56
The time partial derivative of L thus reads
Lt = −”t ; 8.57
2
(one should not differentiate @xx , which does not explicitly depend on time). As for the commutator of the two operators,
we start by expanding it by linearity:
ˆ 2 3
˜
[L; A] = @xx + ”; 4@xxx + 6”@x + 3”x 8.58
ˆ 2 3 ˜ ˆ 2 ˜ ˆ 2 ˜
= 4 @xx ; @xxx + 6 @xx ; ”@x + 3 @xx ; ”x
3
ˆ ˜
+4 ”; @xxx + 6 [”; ”@x ] + 3 [”; ”x ] :
In order to calculate all these terms without making a mistake, the best is to apply them to a test function ffi:
ˆ 2 3 ˜ 2
` 3 ´ 3
` 2 ´
@xx ; @xxx ffi = @xx @xxx ffi − @xxx @xx ffi 8.59
= 0;
by commutation of partial derivatives. Next we have

ˆ 2 ˜ 2
` 2 ´
@xx ; ”@x ffi = @xx (”@x ffi) − ”@x @xx ffi 8.60
2 3
` ´
= @x ”x @x ffi + ”@xx ffi − ”@xxx ffi
2 2 3 3
= ”xx @x ffi + ”x @xx ffi + ”x @xx ffi + ”@xxx ffi − ”@xxx ffi
2
= ”xx @x ffi + 2”x @xx ffi:
For the last terms, we omit the intermediate steps:

ˆ 2 ˜ 2 2
@xx ; ”x ffi = @xx (”x ffi) − ”x @xx ffi 8.61
= ”xxx ffi + 2”xx @x ffi;
then
3 3 3
ˆ ˜
”; @xxx ffi = ”@xxx ffi − @xxx (”ffi) 8.62
2
` ´
= − ”xxx ffi + 3”xx @x ffi + 3”x @xx ffi ;
and
[”; ”@x ] ffi = ” 2 @x ffi − ”@x (”ffi) 8.63

= −””x ffi;
and finally
[”; ”x ] ffi = ””x ffi − ”x ”ffi 8.64

= 0:
Combining Eq. 8.57 and Eq. 8.64, all the derivatives of ffi cancel out, and we obtain
Lt + [L; A] = − (”t + 6””x + ”xxx ) ; 8.65
which demonstrates that Eq. 3.10–3.11 is a Lax pair of the KdV equation Eq. 2.7.
4 Appendix D: Application of the GLM theorem to a discrete spectrum

We demonstrate here Eq. 3.48. For N eigenvalues, Eq. 3.42 and Eq. 3.43 give
N Z +∞ N
X 3 X 3 ′
K (x; y ; t) + bn2 e8»n t−»n x−»n y + K (x; y ′ ; t) bn2 e8»n t−»n y −»n y dy ′ = 0: 8.66
n=1 x n=1
By analogy with the case N = 1, we look for K (x; y ; t) in the following form:
X N
K (x; y ; t) = Mn (x; t) e−»n y ; 8.67
n=1
which literally gives us
N N Z +∞ N N
2 8»3n t−»n x −»n y 3
X X X X
−»n y −»m y ′ ′
Mn (x; t) e + bn e e + Mm (x; t) e bn2 e8»n t−»n y e−»n y dy ′ = 0: 8.68
n=1 n=1 x m=1 n=1
Swapping the dummy labels in the first two terms, we can gather them with the third one to obtain
N
" N 3
!# N
X X bn2 e8»n t−(»n +»m )x X
2 8»3m t−»m x −»m y
Mm (x; t) ‹mn + e−»n y = − bm e e : 8.69
n=1 m=1
» n + » m m=1
This formula can also be written in the following alternative form:

` T ´
U A · V = −W · V; 8.70
where U, V, W are three vectors with N components each, defined by
Un + Mn (x; t) ; 8.71
−»n y
Vn + e ;
8»3n t−»n x
Wn + bn2 e ;
while the matrix A is defined by Eq. 3.48. Eq. 8.70 must be true for all vectors V, hence:
UT A = −W; 8.72
from which we deduce
U · V = −WA−1 V: 8.73
With the definitions Eq. 8.67 and Eq. 8.71, this also writes
N X N 3
!−1
X
2 8»3m t−»m x−»n y b 2 e8»n t−(»n +»m )x
K (x; y ; t) = − bm e ‹mn + n : 8.74
m=1 n=1
»n + »m
And now, let us calculate K (x; x; t):

N X
N 3
!−1
X
2 8»3m t−(»n +»m )x b 2 e8»n t−(»n +»m )x
K (x; x; t) = − bm e ‹mn + n 8.75
m=1 n=1
»n + »m
N X
X N
=− (−@x Amn ) A−1
mn
m=1 n=1
N N
1 XX @ det A
= (@x Amn )
det A m=1 n=1 @Amn
1
= @x det A
det A
= @x ln det A:
5 Appendix E: Detail of Whitham’s calculations

We follow here Kamchatnov (2016), with minor additions where it is useful. In order to pass from the system of Eq. 4.30–
4.32 to Eq. 4.33–4.35, let us start by using the definition
I in Eq. 4.18 of W and that of f , Eq. 2.22:
d”
WA;¸ = 12 p ; 8.76
(” − ¸) 2f (”)
”d”
I
WB;¸ = − 21 p ;
(” − ¸) 2f (”)
1 2
” d”
I
1 2
Wc;¸ = − 2 p :
(” − ¸) 2f (”)
We have similar identities for the derivatives with respect to ˛ and ‚. We then deduce
I „ «
1 1 1 d”
WA;¸ + WA;˛ + WA;‚ = 21 + + 8.77
”−¸ ”−˛ ”−‚
p
2f (”)
I ′
f (”) d”
=− p 3
2f (”)
!
1
I
= d p = 0:
2f (”)
We still need other identities based on the vanishing of contour integrals. First of all:
p !
2f (”)
I
0= d 8.78
”−¸
I 2
” − 2¸” + ¸˛ − ˛‚ + ‚¸
=− p d”
(” − ¸) f (”)
= 2 [2Wc;¸ − 2¸WB;¸ − (¸˛ − ˛‚ + ‚¸) WA;¸ ] ;
with here again two similar laws obtained by permutation of the triplet {¸; ˛; ‚}. Next53 ,
p !
2f (”)
I
0= d 8.79
(” − ˛) (” − ‚)
I 2
” − 2¸” + ¸˛ − ˛‚ + ‚¸
= p d”;
(” − ˛) (” − ‚) 2f (”)
and the two similar laws obtained by permutation. Now, let us multiply Eq. 4.30by p + ¸˛ − ˛‚ + ‚¸, Eq. 4.31 by q + 2¸,
Eq. 4.32 by r + −2 and ad them all. Using Eq. 8.77 and Eq. 8.78, we get
‚WA;˛ + WB;˛ D˛ ˛WA;‚ + WB;‚ D‚
− = −WA (˛ + ‚)x : 8.80
¸−‚ Dt ˛−¸ Dt
One can still write, starting from the definitions of W and f :

(” − ‚) d”
I
‚WA;˛ + WB;˛ = − 21 p ; 8.81
(” − ˛) 2f (”)
(” − ˛) d”
I
˛WA;‚ + WB;‚ = − 21 p :
(” − ‚) 2f (”)
With help from Eq. 8.79, we conclude

‚WA;˛ + WB;˛ ˛WA;‚ + WB;‚
=− = WA;¸ : 8.82
¸−‚ ¸−˛
the last two identities allow rewriting Eq. 8.80 as

D (˛ + ‚) WA
=− (˛ + ‚)x ; 8.83
Dt WA;¸
which is the first of the equations of system of Eq. 4.33–4.35. The other two are obtained by permutation of the triplet
{¸; ˛; ‚}.
53
The following identity is necessary, but it is not disclosed by Kamchatnov in the article referred to at the beginning of this appendix.
References
1 Agranovich, Z.S., Marchenko, V.A. (1963). The inverse problem of scattering Theory, Gordon & Breach.
2 Arnol’d, V.I. (1963). Proof of a theorem of A.N. Kolmogorov on the preservation of conditionally periodic motions under a small perturbation of
the Hamiltonian, Russ. Math. Surv. 18:9.
3 Boussinesq, J. (1877). Essai sur la théorie des eaux courantes, mémoire présenté à l’Académie des Sciences, Paris (in French).
4 Bristeau, M.-O., Goutal, N., Saint-Marie, J. (2011). Numerical simulations of a non-hydrostatic shallow water model, Comput. Fluids 47:51.
5 Camassa, R., Wu, T.Y. (1989). The Korteweg-de Vries model with boundary forcing, Wave Motion 11:495.
6 Chanson, H. (2011). Tidal Bores, Aegir, Eagre, Mascaret, Pororoca: Theory and Observations, World Scientific, Singapore.
7 Chassagne, R., Filippini, A.G., Ricchiuto, M., Bonneton, P. (2019). Dispersive and dispersive-like bores in channels with sloping banks, J. Fluid Mech.
870:595.
8 Clamond, D., Dutykh, D. (2013). Fast accurate computation of the fully nonlinear solitary surface gravity waves, Comput. Fluids 84:35.
9 El, G.A., Grimshaw, H.J., Smyth, N.F. (2006). Unsteady undular bores in fully nonlinear shallow-water theory, Phys. Fluids 18:027104.
10 El, G.A., Grimshaw, H.J., Kamchatnov, A.M. (2007). Evolution of solitary waves and undular bores in shallow-water flows over a gradual slope with
bottom friction, J. Fluid Mech. 585:213.
11 El, G.A. (2014). Introduction to Inverse Scattering Transform, Summer school of Lille 1 University.
12 El, G.A., Hoefer, M.A. (2016). Dispersive shock waves and modulation theory, Phys. D 333:11.
13 Favre, H. (1935). Etude théorique et expérimentale des ondes de translation dans les canaux découverts, Dunod, Paris (in French).
14 Feng, Z. (2007). On travelling wave solutions of the Burgers–Korteweg–de Vries equation, Nonlinearity 20(2):343.
15 Fenton, J.D. (1973). Cnoidal waves and bores in uniform channels of arbitrary cross-section, J. Fluid Mech. 58(3):417.
16 Fenton, J.D., Gardiner-Garden, R.S. (1982). Rapidly-convergent methods for evaluating elliptic integrals and theta and elliptic functions, J. Austral.
Math. Soc. (Series B) 24:47.
17 Fukushima, T. (2009). Fast computation of complete elliptic integrals and Jacobian elliptic functions, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 105:305.
18 Gardner, C.S., Greene, S.M., Kruskal, M.P., Miura, R.M. (1967). Method for solving the Korteweg–de Vries equation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19:1095.
19 Gavrilyuk, S.L., Liapidevskii, V.Y., Chesnokov, A.A. (2016). Spilling breakers in shallow water: applications to Favre waves and to the shoaling and
the breaking of the solitary wave, J. Fluid Mech. 808:441.
20 Green, A.E., Naghdi, P.M. (1976). A derivation of equations for wave propagation in water of variable depth, J. Fluid Mech. 78:237.
21 Grimshaw, H.J., Yuan, C. (2016). The propagation of internal undular bores over variable topography, Phys. D 333:200.
22 Gurevich, A.V., Pitaevskii, L.P. (1973). Nonstationary structure of a collision less shock wave, Sov. Phys. JETP 38(2):291.
23 Gurevich, A.V., Pitaevskii, L.P. (1987). Averaged description of waves in the Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation, Sov. Phys. JETP 66(3):90.
24 Hammack, J.L., Segur, H. (1974). The Korteweg–de Vries equation and water waves. Part 2. Comparison with experiments, J . Fluid Mech. 65(2):289.
25 Janssen, P. (2004). The interaction of ocean waves and wind, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
26 Johnson, R.S. (2010). A Modern introduction to the mathematical theory of water waves, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
27 Kamchatnov, A.M., Kuo, Y.-H., Lin, T.-C., Horng, T.-L., Gou, S.-C., Clift, R., El, G.A., Grimshaw, H.J. (2012). Undular bore theory for the Gardner
equation, Phys. Rev. E 86:036605.
28 Kamchatnov, A.M. (2016). Whitham theory for perturbed Korteweg-de Vries equation, Phys. D 333:99.
29 Kay, I., Moses, H.E. (1956). Reflectionless transmission through dielectrics and scattering potentials, J . Appl. Phys. 27:1503.
30 Kharif, C., Abid, M. (2017). Whitham approach for the study of nonlinear waves on a vertically sheared current in shallow water,
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01580419.
31 Korteweg, D.J., de Vries, G. (1895). On the change of form of long waves advancing in a rectangular canal, and on a new type of long stationary
waves, Phil. Mag. 39(240):422.
32 Kozlov, V., Kuznetsov, N., Lokharu, E. (2017). On the Benjamin–Lighthill conjecture for water waves with vorticity. J. Fluid Mech. 825:961.
33 Landau, L., Lifchitz, E. (1976). Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 1: Mechanics, 3rd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann.
34 Landau, L., Lifchitz, E. (1977). Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 3: Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory, 3rd ed., Pergamon Press.
35 Lifshitz, E. M., Pitaevskii, L. P. (1981). Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 10: Physical Kinetics, 1st ed., Pergamon Press.
References IAHR Water Monographs
36 Lekner, J. (2007). Reflectionless eigenstates of the sech2 potential, Am. J. Phys. 75(12):1151.
37 Marchant, T.R., Smyth, N.F. (1991). Initial-boundary value problems for the Korteweg-de Vries equation, J. Appl. Math. 47:247.
38 Marchant, T.R., Smyth, N.F. (2012). Approximate techniques for dispersive shock waves in nonlinear media, J. Nonlin. Opt. Phys. Mat.
21(3):1250035.
39 Matsumo, Y., Shchesnovich, V.S., Kamchatnov, A.M., Kraenkel, R.A. (2007). Whitham method for the Benjamin-Ono-Burgers equation and disper-
sive shocks, Phys. Rev. E 75:016307.
40 Myint, S., Grimshaw, H.J. (1995). The modulation of nonlinear periodic wavetrains by dissipative terms in the Korteweg–de Vries equation, Wave
Motion 22:215.
41 Prüser, H.-H., Zielke, W. (1994). Undular bores (Favre Waves) in open channels. Theory and Numerical Simulation, J. Hydr. Res. 32(3):337.
42 Sanford, N., Kodama, K., Carter, J.D., Kalish, H. (2014). Stability of traveling wave solutions to the Whitham equation, Phys. Let. A 378(30–31):2100.
43 Segur, H. (1973). The Korteweg–de Vries equation and water waves. Part 1. Solutions of the equation, J. Fluid Mech. 59(4):721.
44 Serre, F. (1953). Contribution à l’étude des écoulements permanents et variables dans les canaux, La Houille Blanche 6:830 (in French).
45 Soares-Frazão, S., Zech, Y. (2002). Undular bores and secondary waves. Experiments and hybrid finite-volume modeling, J. Hydr. Res. 40(1):33.
46 Su, C.H., Gardner, C.S. (1969). Korteweg–De Vries equation and generalisations III. Derivation of the Korteweg–De Vries equation and Burgers
equation, J. Math. Phys. 10:536.
47 Tanaka, M. (1985). The stability of solitary waves, Phys. Fluids 29(3):650.
48 Teng, M.H., Wu, T.Y. (1997). Effects of channel cross-sectional geometry on long wave generation and propagation, Phys. Fluids 9(11):3368.
49 Treske, A. (1994). Undular bores (Favre waves) in open channels. Experimental studies, J. Hydr. Res. 32(3):355.
50 Violeau, D., Fonty, T. (2019). Calculating the smoothing error in SPH, Comput. Fluids 191:104240.
51 Whitham, G.B. (1965). Non-linear dispersive waves, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 283:238.
52 Zakharov, V.E., Faddeev, L.D. (1971). Korteweg–de Vries equation: A completely integrable Hamiltonian system, Funct. Anal. Appl. 5(4):280.
This is a very interesting book on the computations of undular bores using the Korteweg–de Vries equation.
The author is right in stating that the mathematical apparatus for the solution of this approach is not well known
in hydraulic engineering, given that it mainly was developed by mathematicians and physicists working on ocean
dynamics. From this perspective, I think it is a welcome idea to present this material under the umbrella of IAHR,
thereby making the material accessible to hydraulic engineers.
Oscar Castro-Orgaz
The raison d’être of this text is obvious: it is written simply in an accessible and clear language. The mathematical
literature may count only a few texts which could compete with the present manuscript in terms of clarity. The
exposition is very pedagogical, unsurprising if you had a chance to listen to Prof. Violeau’s lectures.
Denys Dutykh
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Damien Violeau was educated at Ecole des Ponts (literally, the ‘School of Bridges’), one of the most prestigious
French scientific educational institutes, where he is now full professor. Also, he is a senior Research engineer
at EDF, one of the biggest energy companies in the world. His main fields of interest are free-surface flows,
turbulent flows, numerical simulation, coastal protection and river-water works. In 2015, he was awarded
Arthur T. Ippen award by IAHR.
IAHR Global Secretariat Madrid Office Beijing Office

iahr@iahr.org Paseo Bajo Virgen del Puerto, 3 A-1 Fuxing Road, Haidian District
28005 Madrid, SPAIN 100038 Beijing, CHINA
IAHR.org
T +34 91 335 7908 T +86 10 6878 1128
F +34 91 335 7935 F +86 10 6878 1890

Contribution To The Theory of Undular Bores. A Journey Around The Korteweg de Vries Equation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contribution To The Theory of Undular Bores. A Journey Around The Korteweg de Vries Equation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WATER

IAHR International Association

Contribution to the Theory of Undular Bores

IAHR WATER MONOGRAPHS

ISBN (electronic version): 978-90-824846-9-4

Madrid Oﬀice Beijing Oﬀice

Chapter 2. The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) 5

Chapter 3. Inverse Scattering Transform (IST) 19

Chapter 4. Dispersive Shock Waves (DSW) 31

Chapter 5. Application to the Favre waves 49

Chapter 6. Dissipation eﬀects 57

Summary and conclusions 67

IAHR.org #WaterMonographs iii

Damien Violeau (IAHR member), 6th March 2022.

IAHR.org #WaterMonographs vii

Nomenclature IAHR Water Monographs

x̂ Absolute dimensionless horizontal space coordinate

viii #WaterMonographs IAHR.org

Introduction IAHR Water Monographs

2 The challenges of dispersive waves

Introduction IAHR Water Monographs

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV)

The corresponding behaviour of !=

We now proceed to the following non-dimensionalisation:

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

”t + 6””x + ”xxx = 0: 2.7

We can immediately make the following comments:

ﬂat bed and with no source terms:

If we consider Eq. 2.12 as a linear homogeneous system with unknowns (˜

2 KdV cnoidal wave and KdV soliton

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

Substituting this ansatz in Eq. 2.7 we obtain

Integrating once with respect to „ we get

Hence, we can separate the variables in Eq. 2.22:

For the following, it is useful to deﬁne

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

” (x; t) = ” ⊥ + Hcn2 (k ? „ | m) ; 2.31

c = ch + 2 (2¸ + ‚) = 2 (r1 + 2r3 ) ;

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

when m −→ 0 (cf. Appendix B, Eq. 8.38):

” (x; t) = r3 + 2 (r1 − r3 ) sech2

3 Benjamin and Lighthill’s theory

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

and energy ﬂux R̃ through such a section:

q̃ = d˜Ṽ = cst; 2.41

Note that the local Froude number F (x̃) = (h̃c =d)

S = 32 F2=3 + 31 F−4=3 = cst; 2.46

This system can be solved for F2=3 and gives

thus we can write

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

where f is an unknown function. Its derivatives are

Diﬀerentiating twice, we get

The second invariant Eq. 2.39 can then be estimated as

Rearranging and removing the higher order terms leads to

−4 R3 + S 3 + 3R2 S 2 + 6RS − 1 > 0:

The Korteweg–de Vries equation (KdV) IAHR Water Monographs

Inverse Scattering Transform (IST)

Substituting Eq. 3.2 we obtain

As an illustration, let us consider the following two operators:

Inverse Scattering Transform (IST) IAHR Water Monographs

3 Example: characterisation of a spectrum

” (x; 0) = ”0 [Y (x + ‘) − Y (x − ‘)] ; 3.17

Inverse Scattering Transform (IST) IAHR Water Monographs

”t + 6””x − ”xx = 0: 6.15

W („) = W („0 ) exp [ („ − „0 )] : 6.32