Wave overtopping at vertical and battered smooth impermeable structures

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2021.103889Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A simple formula set was derived to predict the mean wave overtopping rate at vertical and slightly battered, smooth, impermeable structures.

  • The formula derivation and validation were performed using small-scale, large-scale and field measurements datasets, including the EurOtop database and other most recent studies.

  • Accuracy metrics were used to show the superiority of the formula sets compared to the existing approaches.

  • The applicability of the formula set is extended for probabilistic design purposes.

Abstract

Coastal structures play a major role in protecting people and property given the increasing threat of climate-change-induced flooding. Hence, an accurate prediction of wave overtopping for each structure is required to protect both people and properties on the structure's lee side. In this study, a formula set is developed for predicting the mean wave overtopping rate for vertical and slightly battered smooth impermeable structures. The formula set is derived using available datasets of small-scale laboratory experiments and further validated using large-scale laboratory and prototype tests and field measurements. The developed formula set for vertical structures is simple, physically sound, and contains consistent functional forms for deep and shallow water conditions, making it unique among other existing formulas. More importantly, its performance based on several accuracy metrics, is superior to existing prediction methods, including over a wide range of environmental conditions and structural characteristics. Correction factors are proposed for applications to slightly battered structures, as well as obliquely attacking waves. Finally, the formula for probabilistic design is also suggested to account for safety margins in practical applications.

Introduction

Coastal defense structures have become an inevitable part of coastline design and development. Between the many different types and intended purposes, seawalls and vertical breakwaters are among the most common defense structures. Such structures are used when there is still a chance for relatively large incoming waves to generate a significant run-up across the defense structure face, reach the top and perhaps run over the crest and fall on the lee side. Accordingly, overtopping is a critical phenomenon which involves risk for authorities and the general public (Allsop et al., 1995). Of the various types of models (i.e., analytical, empirical, numerical and physical) used to predict the wave overtopping rate for particular wave sets and structural characteristics, empirical models are the most commonly used method, as they do not encompass many of the issues found in the other methods (van der Meer et al., 2009a). For instance, the numerical modeling of this phenomenon has been found quite challenging (e.g., from a computational point of view), and hence has been used in limited studies (e.g. by Xiao et al., 2009; Vanneste et al., 2014; and Suzuki et al., 2017). Hence, most studies have used laboratory measurements to develop widely applicable empirical formulas. However, choosing an appropriate modeling scale and approach has been a challenging task in preparing a suitable dataset for further analysis (De Rouck et al., 2005). Likewise, due to the natural complexity of this phenomenon, the important underlying parameters have been a debated topic for a long time. For instance, Owen (1980) measured various parameters to investigate their importance in altering the overtopping volume. Following that, Allsop et al. (2005) presented a summary of formulas and tests for vertical, battered and composite seawalls. Their proposed formulas were later considered as the basis for many other approaches (e.g. van der Meer and Bruce, 2014; EurOtop, 2018). However, depending on the (limited) dataset used, differing degrees of generalization and ranges of applicability limit the use of a particular formula (Williams et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2020). Furthermore, the performance of the empirical formulas has not been thoroughly compared with that of soft computing models such as Zanuttigh et al. (2016).

The authors, who previously studied the wave overtopping formulas (i.e., Etemad-Shahidi et al., 2016), set out to re-visit their approaches and assumptions to update their formula using a larger dataset and improved analysis methods. The authors also noted the complexity and performance of some of the existing approaches (including Etemad-Shahidi et al., 2016) and the inevitable shortcomings of soft computing tools. In this paper, the available databases of wave overtopping measurements are introduced and discussed. Then some of the most widely used wave overtopping prediction formulas and an ANN-based approach are presented and their performances are investigated. These lead to the rationale for developing a new set of formulas, using non-dimensional parameters and physical reasoning, which offers an enhancement by more precisely predicting the mean wave overtopping rate for shallow and deep-water cases in front of a vertical or slightly battered smooth impermeable structure.

Section snippets

Available databases

One of the great projects regarding wave overtopping studies was collecting of the available data to make an integrated database of wave overtopping measurements. Initially, under the CLASH project, more than 10,000 records were collected from various institutions and individuals worldwide (van der Meer et al., 2009b). Many researchers then used the CLASH database (e.g., Goda, 2009; Etemad-Shahidi and Jafari, 2014) to develop prediction formulas for various degrees of applicability and

Existing formulas and methods

In this section, the most recent or widely used mean wave overtopping prediction formulas, all developed using the CLASH (van der Meer et al., 2009b) or EurOtop (2018) databases, are introduced and their performance in predicting the selected/filtered records of vertical and slightly battered smooth impermeable structures is discussed.

Using data from the CLASH database, and noticing the issue within the CLASH formulas in shallow water foreshores with a steep slope, Goda (2009) developed the

Formula development and evaluation

In this section, the method to develop the overtopping prediction formula set is described and the performance of the newly developed formula set is evaluated quantitatively for various types of records, data and laboratory tests, using some accuracy metrics.

The formula development task involved two steps. The first step was deciding on a physically justifiable functional form to satisfy the already known aspects of overtopping. Accordingly, first the formula was developed for the deep-water

Discussion

A qualitative performance comparison/evaluation of the developed formula set (i.e., Fig. 6) and the existing methods (i.e., Fig. 5) reveals some aspects. Firstly, all the methods tend to over-predict the small values of qMeas. The same issue was also previously noted by Formentin et al. (2017) using EorOtop (2018) data. As seen in Fig. 5, for some of the methods, even for the medium range of qMeas, which encompasses most of the trustworthy laboratory tests, there is still a significant

Summary and conclusion

In this research, the EurOtop (2018) database, along with the reported data by Kisacik et al. (2019), Williams et al. (2019) and Liu et al. (2020), were used to identify the data relevant to smooth, impermeable, vertical and near vertical (i.e., slightly battered) structures. The 1430 selected records were then used to evaluate the performance of the existing predictive formulas for various groups of small- and large-scale tests. The small-scale sub-database (SS records) were sub-categorized

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Saeed Shaeri: Writing – original draft, Validation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Investigation, Resources, Data curation. Amir Etemad-Shahidi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge A/Prof. Barbara Zanuttigh, Dr. Dogan Kisacik, Dr. Hannah Williams and Dr. Ye Lie for allowing us access to their datasets. The authors also sincerely thank Mr. Mark Filmer for his assistance in proofreading and enhancing the manuscript. Furthermore, the authors acknowledge the provision of computing resources supplied by the Spatial Data Analysis Network (SPAN) at Charles Sturt University.

References (38)

  • H. Xiao et al.

    Numerical modeling of wave overtopping a levee during Hurricane Katrina

    Comput. Fluids

    (2009)
  • B. Zanuttigh et al.

    Prediction of extreme and tolerable wave overtopping discharges through an advanced neural network

    Ocean Eng.

    (2016)
  • N.W.H. Allsop et al.

    Wave overtopping at vertical and steep seawalls

    Proc. Inst. Civil Eng. Maritime Eng.

    (2005)
  • N.W.H. Allsop et al.

    Wave forces on vertical and composite breakwaters. (Technical Report SR 443)

  • L. Banyard et al.

    The Effect of Wave Angle on the Overtopping of Seawalls

    (1995)
  • P. Besley et al.

    Overtopping of vertical structures: new prediction methods to account for shallow water conditions

  • T. Bruce et al.

    Wave overtopping at vertical and steep structures

  • T. Bruce et al.

    Wave overtopping at vertical and steep structures

  • J. De Rouck et al.

    New results on scale effects for wave overtopping at coastal structures

  • Cited by (7)

    • On the mean overtopping rate of rubble mound structures

      2022, Coastal Engineering
      Citation Excerpt :

      Both panels show that the head on measurements were predicted much better than oblique wave cases. As discussed by Etemad-Shahidi and Jafari (2014), this type of discrepancy could be because the measurements (e.g. wave direction and spreading) in the field is more challenging (compared to the lab conditions) as they may even change during the observations (see also Shaeri and Etemad-Shahidi, 2021). Table 6 shows the accuracy metrics and as seen both developed formulas outperform existing ones and Eq. (14b) is the best with nearly zero bias and the lowest value for the RMSE.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text