English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 27228/39071
Visitors : 2413275      Online Users : 46
RC Version 4.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Adv. Search
LoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ntour.ntou.edu.tw:8080/ir/handle/987654321/25413

Title: Comparison of wave refraction and diffraction models
Authors: Jerome P.-Y. Maa;T.-W. Hsu;C.H. Tsai;W. J. Juang
Contributors: NTOU:Department of Marine Environmental Informatics
國立臺灣海洋大學:海洋環境資訊系
Keywords: Numerical models;model comparison;wave transformation;mild slope equation;elliptic equation solver
Date: 2000
Issue Date: 2011-10-20T08:23:09Z
Publisher: Journal of Coastal Research
Abstract: abstract:Six numerical models: (l)RCPWAVE, (2)Ref/Dif-1, (3)RDE, (4)PBCG, (5)PMH, and (6)MIKE 21's EMS module, were examined for their performance on the simulation of water wave shoaling, refraction, and diffraction. Experimental data for waves traveling across an elliptic shoal were used as a standard for comparison. Although the last four models (i.e., elliptic or hyperbolic model) are capable of simulating strong wave diffraction, reflection, and resonance, those capabilities were not compared because RCPWAVE, Ref/Dif-1, and the physical model experiment are only capable of simulating water wave shoaling, refraction, and weak diffraction. The Ref/Dif-1 had excellent accuracy in the prediction of wave height; the predicted wave direction, however, was not good. The RCPWAVE had accuracy problems in both wave height and direction. The next three models (RDE, PBCG, and PMH) all performed very well on the simulation of wave shoaling, refraction, and diffraction, and they practically provided the same results for the case study presented. The EMS module for Mike 21 was slightly different than the previous three. Regarding the simulation of the passing-through boundary, the PMH model was better because of the nearly exact solution for this boundary. The MIKE 21's EMS module had a faster computing pace, but no output for wave directions and was incapable of including tidal current effects were the major drawbacks.
Relation: 16(4) pp.1073-1082
URI: http://ntour.ntou.edu.tw/handle/987654321/25413
Appears in Collections:[海洋環境資訊系] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
index.html0KbHTML381View/Open


All items in NTOUR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

 


著作權政策宣告: 本網站之內容為國立臺灣海洋大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,請合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。
網站維護: 海大圖資處 圖書系統組
DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback