Steep unidirectional wave groups - fully nonlinear simulations vs. Experiments

15Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A detailed quantitative comparison of fully nonlinear computations with the measurements of unidirectional wave groups is presented. Computational results on evolving wave groups were compared with previous available experiments. The local surface elevation variation, the evolution of envelope shapes, the velocity of propagation of the steepest crests in the group and their relation to the height of the crests were obtained numerically and experimentally. Conditions corresponding to incipient wave breaking were investigated in greater detail. The results shed additional light on mechanisms leading to the breaking of steep waves, as well as on the crucial importance of exact matching between initial conditions in computations and experiments. © Author(s) 2015.

References Powered by Scopus

Stability of periodic waves of finite amplitude on the surface of a deep fluid

2201Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Rogue wave observation in a water wave tank

1087Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Oceanic rogue waves

905Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

On a unified breaking onset threshold for gravity waves in deep and intermediate depth water

97Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

On the kinematic criterion for the inception of breaking in surface gravity waves: Fully nonlinear numerical simulations and experimental verification

32Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

From modulational instability to focusing dam breaks in water waves

29Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shemer, L., & Ee, B. K. (2015). Steep unidirectional wave groups - fully nonlinear simulations vs. Experiments. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 22(6), 737–747. https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-22-737-2015

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 14

64%

Professor / Associate Prof. 5

23%

Researcher 3

14%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 17

81%

Environmental Science 3

14%

Physics and Astronomy 1

5%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free