Wave overtopping at two-class armour berm breakwaters: an experimental study

IF 4.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Mohammed Al-Ogaili , Nick Cartwright , Sigurdur Sigurdarson , Amir Etemad-Shahidi
{"title":"Wave overtopping at two-class armour berm breakwaters: an experimental study","authors":"Mohammed Al-Ogaili ,&nbsp;Nick Cartwright ,&nbsp;Sigurdur Sigurdarson ,&nbsp;Amir Etemad-Shahidi","doi":"10.1016/j.coastaleng.2025.104824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the overtopping behaviour of two-class armour berm breakwaters by conducting 110 small-scale physical model tests. The investigation focuses on the influence of key parameters, such as wave steepness, dimensionless crest height, stability number, berm height, and the reshaped profile of the berm, on mean overtopping discharge. Among these, the dimensionless crest height emerged as the most influential factor. Furthermore, the results indicate a noticeable increase in overtopping discharge with decreasing wave steepness and increasing degree of reshaping. The results show that the EurOtop (2018) mode underestimates overtopping rates, with more scatter compared to the other formulas. In contrast, the formulas by Lykke Andersen (2006), Pillai et al. (2017), and Sigurdarson and Van der Meer (2012) provide more accurate predictions, though slight underestimations remain, except in the case of the Lykke Andersen (2006) one. The observed underprediction for the conducted tests highlights the need for modifying existing formulas to more accurately reflect the specific characteristics of two-class armour berm breakwaters. Recalibrating these formulas with the new dataset improved prediction accuracy, with the modified Lykke Andersen (2006) and Sigurdarson and Van der Meer (2012) models performing the best. Accuracy metrics such as <em>BIAS</em>, <em>RMSE</em>, <em>R</em><sup>2</sup>, and Discrepancy Ratio (<em>DR</em>) further confirmed the improvements, showing reduced <em>BIAS</em> and <em>RMSE</em> values compared to the original formulations. The findings emphasize the need for more refined formulas to predict overtopping for two-class armour berm breakwaters, particularly those with reshaped berms, under varying wave conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50996,"journal":{"name":"Coastal Engineering","volume":"202 ","pages":"Article 104824"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coastal Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378383925001292","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the overtopping behaviour of two-class armour berm breakwaters by conducting 110 small-scale physical model tests. The investigation focuses on the influence of key parameters, such as wave steepness, dimensionless crest height, stability number, berm height, and the reshaped profile of the berm, on mean overtopping discharge. Among these, the dimensionless crest height emerged as the most influential factor. Furthermore, the results indicate a noticeable increase in overtopping discharge with decreasing wave steepness and increasing degree of reshaping. The results show that the EurOtop (2018) mode underestimates overtopping rates, with more scatter compared to the other formulas. In contrast, the formulas by Lykke Andersen (2006), Pillai et al. (2017), and Sigurdarson and Van der Meer (2012) provide more accurate predictions, though slight underestimations remain, except in the case of the Lykke Andersen (2006) one. The observed underprediction for the conducted tests highlights the need for modifying existing formulas to more accurately reflect the specific characteristics of two-class armour berm breakwaters. Recalibrating these formulas with the new dataset improved prediction accuracy, with the modified Lykke Andersen (2006) and Sigurdarson and Van der Meer (2012) models performing the best. Accuracy metrics such as BIAS, RMSE, R2, and Discrepancy Ratio (DR) further confirmed the improvements, showing reduced BIAS and RMSE values compared to the original formulations. The findings emphasize the need for more refined formulas to predict overtopping for two-class armour berm breakwaters, particularly those with reshaped berms, under varying wave conditions.
两级护堤防波堤浪顶试验研究
通过110次小尺度物理模型试验,研究了两级护坡防波堤的过顶行为。重点研究了波浪陡度、无量纲波峰高度、稳定数、护堤高度和护堤形状等关键参数对平均过顶流量的影响。其中,无因次峰高是影响最大的因素。此外,随着波浪陡度的减小和重塑程度的增加,过顶流量显著增加。结果表明,EurOtop(2018)模型低估了超顶率,与其他公式相比更具分散性。相比之下,Lykke Andersen (2006), Pillai等人(2017)以及Sigurdarson和Van der Meer(2012)的公式提供了更准确的预测,尽管除了Lykke Andersen(2006)的情况外,仍然存在轻微的低估。在进行的试验中观察到的预估不足突出了修改现有公式以更准确地反映两级护坡防波堤的具体特性的必要性。用新的数据集重新校准这些公式提高了预测精度,其中Lykke Andersen(2006)和Sigurdarson and Van der Meer(2012)的修正模型表现最好。准确度指标如BIAS、RMSE、R2和差异比(DR)进一步证实了改进,显示与原始配方相比,BIAS和RMSE值降低。研究结果强调需要更精确的公式来预测两级护堤防波堤在不同波浪条件下的溢出,特别是那些具有重塑护堤的防波堤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Coastal Engineering
Coastal Engineering 工程技术-工程:大洋
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
13.60%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3.5 months
期刊介绍: Coastal Engineering is an international medium for coastal engineers and scientists. Combining practical applications with modern technological and scientific approaches, such as mathematical and numerical modelling, laboratory and field observations and experiments, it publishes fundamental studies as well as case studies on the following aspects of coastal, harbour and offshore engineering: waves, currents and sediment transport; coastal, estuarine and offshore morphology; technical and functional design of coastal and harbour structures; morphological and environmental impact of coastal, harbour and offshore structures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信