Simulating wave runup on an intermediate–reflective beach using a wave-resolving and a wave-averaged version of XBeach

A. F. de Beer; R. T. McCall; J. W. Long; M. F.S. Tissier; A. J.H.M. Reniers

doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788

Simulating wave runup on an intermediate–reflective beach using a wave-resolving and a wave-averaged version of XBeach

A. F. de Beer, R. T. McCall^*, J. W. Long, M. F.S. Tissier, A. J.H.M. Reniers

^*Corresponding author for this work

Environmental Fluid Mechanics

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Scientific › peer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)

80 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The prediction of wave runup, as well as its components, time-averaged setup and the time-varying swash, is a key element of coastal storm hazard assessments, as wave runup controls the transitions between morphodynamic response types such as dune erosion and overwash, and the potential for flooding by wave overtopping. While theoretically able to simulate the dominant low-frequency swash, previous studies using the infragravity-wave–resolving model XBeach (XBSB) have shown an underestimation of the observed swash variance and wave runup, which was in part related to the absence of incident-band swash motions in the model. Here, we use an incident-band wave-resolving, non-hydrostatic version of the XBeach model (XBNH) to simulate wave runup observed during the SandyDuck '97 experiment on an intermediate–reflective sandy beach. The results show that the XBNH model describes wave runup and the individual setup and swash components well. We subsequently examine differences in wave runup prediction between the XBSB and XBNH models and find that the XBNH model is a better predictor of wave runup than XBSB for this beach, which is due to better predictions of both the incident-band and infragravity-band swash. For a range of beach states from reflective to dissipative it is shown that incident-band swash is underestimated by XBSB relative to XBNH, in particular for reflective conditions. Infragravity-band swash is shown to be lower in XBSB than XBNH for most conditions, including dissipative conditions for which the mean difference is 16% of the deep water wave height. The difference in infragravity-band swash in XBNH relative to XBSB is shown to mainly be the result of processes occurring outside the swash zone, but approximately 15% of the difference is caused by explicitly resolving incident-band wave motions within the swash zone, such as swash-swash interactions, which inherently cannot be simulated by wave-averaged models.

Original language	English
Article number	103788
Pages (from-to)	1-13
Number of pages	13
Journal	Coastal Engineering
Volume	163
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788
Publication status	Published - 2021

Bibliographical note

Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.

Keywords

Infragravity waves
Non-hydrostatic modeling
Runup
Swash
XBeach

Access to Document

10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788

1-s2.0-S0378383920304749-mainFinal published version, 5.24 MB

Cite this

@article{63c0651dbbdb46aabbefef6deb8aca27,

title = "Simulating wave runup on an intermediate–reflective beach using a wave-resolving and a wave-averaged version of XBeach",

abstract = "The prediction of wave runup, as well as its components, time-averaged setup and the time-varying swash, is a key element of coastal storm hazard assessments, as wave runup controls the transitions between morphodynamic response types such as dune erosion and overwash, and the potential for flooding by wave overtopping. While theoretically able to simulate the dominant low-frequency swash, previous studies using the infragravity-wave–resolving model XBeach (XBSB) have shown an underestimation of the observed swash variance and wave runup, which was in part related to the absence of incident-band swash motions in the model. Here, we use an incident-band wave-resolving, non-hydrostatic version of the XBeach model (XBNH) to simulate wave runup observed during the SandyDuck '97 experiment on an intermediate–reflective sandy beach. The results show that the XBNH model describes wave runup and the individual setup and swash components well. We subsequently examine differences in wave runup prediction between the XBSB and XBNH models and find that the XBNH model is a better predictor of wave runup than XBSB for this beach, which is due to better predictions of both the incident-band and infragravity-band swash. For a range of beach states from reflective to dissipative it is shown that incident-band swash is underestimated by XBSB relative to XBNH, in particular for reflective conditions. Infragravity-band swash is shown to be lower in XBSB than XBNH for most conditions, including dissipative conditions for which the mean difference is 16% of the deep water wave height. The difference in infragravity-band swash in XBNH relative to XBSB is shown to mainly be the result of processes occurring outside the swash zone, but approximately 15% of the difference is caused by explicitly resolving incident-band wave motions within the swash zone, such as swash-swash interactions, which inherently cannot be simulated by wave-averaged models.",

keywords = "Infragravity waves, Non-hydrostatic modeling, Runup, Swash, XBeach",

author = "{de Beer}, {A. F.} and McCall, {R. T.} and Long, {J. W.} and Tissier, {M. F.S.} and Reniers, {A. J.H.M.}",

note = "Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository {\textquoteleft}You share, we take care!{\textquoteright} – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.",

year = "2021",

doi = "10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788",

language = "English",

volume = "163",

pages = "1--13",

journal = "Coastal Engineering",

issn = "0378-3839",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Simulating wave runup on an intermediate–reflective beach using a wave-resolving and a wave-averaged version of XBeach

AU - de Beer, A. F.

AU - McCall, R. T.

AU - Long, J. W.

AU - Tissier, M. F.S.

AU - Reniers, A. J.H.M.

N1 - Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - The prediction of wave runup, as well as its components, time-averaged setup and the time-varying swash, is a key element of coastal storm hazard assessments, as wave runup controls the transitions between morphodynamic response types such as dune erosion and overwash, and the potential for flooding by wave overtopping. While theoretically able to simulate the dominant low-frequency swash, previous studies using the infragravity-wave–resolving model XBeach (XBSB) have shown an underestimation of the observed swash variance and wave runup, which was in part related to the absence of incident-band swash motions in the model. Here, we use an incident-band wave-resolving, non-hydrostatic version of the XBeach model (XBNH) to simulate wave runup observed during the SandyDuck '97 experiment on an intermediate–reflective sandy beach. The results show that the XBNH model describes wave runup and the individual setup and swash components well. We subsequently examine differences in wave runup prediction between the XBSB and XBNH models and find that the XBNH model is a better predictor of wave runup than XBSB for this beach, which is due to better predictions of both the incident-band and infragravity-band swash. For a range of beach states from reflective to dissipative it is shown that incident-band swash is underestimated by XBSB relative to XBNH, in particular for reflective conditions. Infragravity-band swash is shown to be lower in XBSB than XBNH for most conditions, including dissipative conditions for which the mean difference is 16% of the deep water wave height. The difference in infragravity-band swash in XBNH relative to XBSB is shown to mainly be the result of processes occurring outside the swash zone, but approximately 15% of the difference is caused by explicitly resolving incident-band wave motions within the swash zone, such as swash-swash interactions, which inherently cannot be simulated by wave-averaged models.

AB - The prediction of wave runup, as well as its components, time-averaged setup and the time-varying swash, is a key element of coastal storm hazard assessments, as wave runup controls the transitions between morphodynamic response types such as dune erosion and overwash, and the potential for flooding by wave overtopping. While theoretically able to simulate the dominant low-frequency swash, previous studies using the infragravity-wave–resolving model XBeach (XBSB) have shown an underestimation of the observed swash variance and wave runup, which was in part related to the absence of incident-band swash motions in the model. Here, we use an incident-band wave-resolving, non-hydrostatic version of the XBeach model (XBNH) to simulate wave runup observed during the SandyDuck '97 experiment on an intermediate–reflective sandy beach. The results show that the XBNH model describes wave runup and the individual setup and swash components well. We subsequently examine differences in wave runup prediction between the XBSB and XBNH models and find that the XBNH model is a better predictor of wave runup than XBSB for this beach, which is due to better predictions of both the incident-band and infragravity-band swash. For a range of beach states from reflective to dissipative it is shown that incident-band swash is underestimated by XBSB relative to XBNH, in particular for reflective conditions. Infragravity-band swash is shown to be lower in XBSB than XBNH for most conditions, including dissipative conditions for which the mean difference is 16% of the deep water wave height. The difference in infragravity-band swash in XBNH relative to XBSB is shown to mainly be the result of processes occurring outside the swash zone, but approximately 15% of the difference is caused by explicitly resolving incident-band wave motions within the swash zone, such as swash-swash interactions, which inherently cannot be simulated by wave-averaged models.

KW - Infragravity waves

KW - Non-hydrostatic modeling

KW - Runup

KW - Swash

KW - XBeach

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093947769&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788

DO - 10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103788

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85093947769

SN - 0378-3839

VL - 163

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Coastal Engineering

JF - Coastal Engineering

M1 - 103788

ER -

Simulating wave runup on an intermediate–reflective beach using a wave-resolving and a wave-averaged version of XBeach

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this