首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Coastal Engineering >UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DELFT3D ANDEMPIRICAL PREDICTIONS OF ALONGSHORE SEDIMENTTRANSPORT GRADIENTS
【24h】

UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DELFT3D ANDEMPIRICAL PREDICTIONS OF ALONGSHORE SEDIMENTTRANSPORT GRADIENTS

机译:了解Delft3D沿岸SedimentTransport梯度的Delft3D和疾病预测之间的差异

获取原文

摘要

Predictions of alongshore transport gradients are critical for forecasting shoreline change. At the previous ICCE conference, it was demonstrated that alongshore transport gradients predicted by the empirical CERC equation can differ substantially from predictions made by the hydrodynamics-based model Delft3D in the case of a simulated borrow pit on the shoreface. Here we use the Delft3D momentum balance to examine the reason for this difference. Alongshore advective flow accelerations in our Delft3D simulation are mainly driven by pressure gradients resulting from alongshore variations in wave height and setup, and Delft3D transport gradients are controlled by these flow accelerations. The CERC equation does not take this process into account, and for this reason a second empirical transport term is sometimes added when alongshore gradients in wave height are thought to be significant. However, our test case indicates that this second term does not properly predict alongshore transport gradients.
机译:沿岸运输梯度的预测对于预测海岸线变化至关重要。在以前的ICCE会议上,证明了经验验证型方程预测的沿海传输梯度可以基本上从基于流体动力学的模型Delft3D在映像上的模拟借款坑的情况下进行的预测不同。在这里,我们使用Delft3D动量平衡来检查这种差异的原因。我们Delft3D仿真中的沿海方向于流动加速度主要由波浪高度和设置的沿岸变化产生的压力梯度驱动,并且Delft3D传输梯度由这些流量加速来控制。 CERC等式不考虑该过程,因此,当沿着波浪高度的梯度被认为是显着的时,有时会添加第二个经验传输术语。但是,我们的测试案例表明,第二个术语没有正确预测沿岸运输梯度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号