Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions
This study evaluates the capability of Navier–Stokes solvers in predicting forward and backward plunging breaking, including assessment of the effect of grid resolution, turbulence model, and VoF, CLSVoF interface models on predictions. For this purpose, 2D simulations are performed for four test ca...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Marine Science and Engineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/9/3/264 |
| _version_ | 1797416004963270656 |
|---|---|
| author | Shanti Bhushan Oumnia El Fajri Graham Hubbard Bradley Chambers Christopher Kees |
| author_facet | Shanti Bhushan Oumnia El Fajri Graham Hubbard Bradley Chambers Christopher Kees |
| author_sort | Shanti Bhushan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study evaluates the capability of Navier–Stokes solvers in predicting forward and backward plunging breaking, including assessment of the effect of grid resolution, turbulence model, and VoF, CLSVoF interface models on predictions. For this purpose, 2D simulations are performed for four test cases: dam break, solitary wave run up on a slope, flow over a submerged bump, and solitary wave over a submerged rectangular obstacle. Plunging wave breaking involves high wave crest, plunger formation, and splash up, followed by second plunger, and chaotic water motions. Coarser grids reasonably predict the wave breaking features, but finer grids are required for accurate prediction of the splash up events. However, instabilities are triggered at the air–water interface (primarily for the air flow) on very fine grids, which induces surface peel-off or kinks and roll-up of the plunger tips. Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) turbulence models result in high eddy-viscosity in the air–water region which decays the fluid momentum and adversely affects the predictions. Both VoF and CLSVoF methods predict the large-scale plunging breaking characteristics well; however, they vary in the prediction of the finer details. The CLSVoF solver predicts the splash-up event and secondary plunger better than the VoF solver; however, the latter predicts the plunger shape better than the former for the solitary wave run-up on a slope case. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T05:58:42Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d5a8e726bee7475db49caee8f311942b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-1312 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T05:58:42Z |
| publishDate | 2021-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Marine Science and Engineering |
| spelling | doaj.art-d5a8e726bee7475db49caee8f311942b2023-12-03T12:12:07ZengMDPI AGJournal of Marine Science and Engineering2077-13122021-03-019326410.3390/jmse9030264Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave PredictionsShanti Bhushan0Oumnia El Fajri1Graham Hubbard2Bradley Chambers3Christopher Kees4Center for Advanced Vehicular Systems, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39759, USACenter for Advanced Vehicular Systems, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39759, USACenter for Advanced Vehicular Systems, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39759, USACenter for Advanced Vehicular Systems, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39759, USAU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research & Development Center Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180, USAThis study evaluates the capability of Navier–Stokes solvers in predicting forward and backward plunging breaking, including assessment of the effect of grid resolution, turbulence model, and VoF, CLSVoF interface models on predictions. For this purpose, 2D simulations are performed for four test cases: dam break, solitary wave run up on a slope, flow over a submerged bump, and solitary wave over a submerged rectangular obstacle. Plunging wave breaking involves high wave crest, plunger formation, and splash up, followed by second plunger, and chaotic water motions. Coarser grids reasonably predict the wave breaking features, but finer grids are required for accurate prediction of the splash up events. However, instabilities are triggered at the air–water interface (primarily for the air flow) on very fine grids, which induces surface peel-off or kinks and roll-up of the plunger tips. Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) turbulence models result in high eddy-viscosity in the air–water region which decays the fluid momentum and adversely affects the predictions. Both VoF and CLSVoF methods predict the large-scale plunging breaking characteristics well; however, they vary in the prediction of the finer details. The CLSVoF solver predicts the splash-up event and secondary plunger better than the VoF solver; however, the latter predicts the plunger shape better than the former for the solitary wave run-up on a slope case.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/9/3/264air–water interface modelingplunging wave breakingvolume-of-fluid method |
| spellingShingle | Shanti Bhushan Oumnia El Fajri Graham Hubbard Bradley Chambers Christopher Kees Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions Journal of Marine Science and Engineering air–water interface modeling plunging wave breaking volume-of-fluid method |
| title | Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions |
| title_full | Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions |
| title_fullStr | Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions |
| title_short | Assessment of Numerical Methods for Plunging Breaking Wave Predictions |
| title_sort | assessment of numerical methods for plunging breaking wave predictions |
| topic | air–water interface modeling plunging wave breaking volume-of-fluid method |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/9/3/264 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shantibhushan assessmentofnumericalmethodsforplungingbreakingwavepredictions AT oumniaelfajri assessmentofnumericalmethodsforplungingbreakingwavepredictions AT grahamhubbard assessmentofnumericalmethodsforplungingbreakingwavepredictions AT bradleychambers assessmentofnumericalmethodsforplungingbreakingwavepredictions AT christopherkees assessmentofnumericalmethodsforplungingbreakingwavepredictions |