TELEMAC-MASCARET Forum: TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS (1/1)

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #23958

bmater
OFFLINE
Junior Boarder
Posts: 49
Thank you received: 3

I've yet to use either of these modules, so forgive my ignorance in asking this question: Which would be most appropriate for modeling wind-driven wave height against a seawall on both windward and leeward sides of an island located in a harbor? I want to be able to account for wave diffraction around the island.

My preliminary understanding is that TOMAWAC solves a radiation balance equation for wave action and does not keep track of phase (or diffraction or reflection??). ARTEMIS, on the other hand, tracks phase, i.e. individual wave crests, and can handle diffraction around obstacles. Would I be better off using ARTEMIS?

Thanks,
Ben

The administrator has disabled public write access.

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #23961

cyamin
OFFLINE
openTELEMAC Guru
Posts: 997
Thank you received: 234

Hello Ben,

Indeed, ARTEMIS is what you need, since it models Diffraction and Reflection, but does not account for wave generation due to wind action. TOMAWAC on the other side does include source terms for wind generation but does not account for Reflection and the Diffraction module implemented is still experimental and tricky to use.

In ARTEMIS wave is defined at the liquid boundary and propagated inside without any wind source terms.

Regards,
Costas

The administrator has disabled public write access.

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #23963

bmater OFFLINE Junior Boarder Posts: 49 Thank you received: 3	Thanks for the clarification, Costas. Am I correct to assume that TOMAWAC results can be used as boundary conditions for a smaller nested ARTEMIS domain?
	The administrator has disabled public write access.

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #23971

cyamin OFFLINE openTELEMAC Guru Posts: 997 Thank you received: 234	Of course you can, and the functionality to facilitate it exists. You output the TOMAWAC spectrum at one point, and ARTEMIS can apply it to its liquid boundaries. See ARTEMIS example 'chwac1' for details. Regards, Costas
	The administrator has disabled public write access. The following user(s) said Thank You: bmater

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #23975

bmater OFFLINE Junior Boarder Posts: 49 Thank you received: 3	Awesome. I'll give it a shot. Thanks!
	The administrator has disabled public write access.

TOMAWAC or ARTEMIS 8 years 1 month ago #24061

bmater
OFFLINE
Junior Boarder
Posts: 49
Thank you received: 3

Costas (or others),

Do you know if ARTEMIS can capture the wave setup phenomenon in the surf zone (i.e. the seaward mean water surface slope that develops as breaking waves transfer their momentum to the surf zone)?

The theoretical note says,

The mild-slope model is a linear model...This is an important feature that evidences the limitations of that model when the bottoms have a small depth. This is because, if the bottoms come up, the shoaling process will “swell” the wave height to such an extent that it will become inconsistent with the variable water depth. In order to improve the domain validity and to broaden the range of applications of ARTEMIS, we have amended the initial mild-slope equation in order to take into account the prevailing dissipative processes in shallow water, namely bathymetric breaking and bottom friction.

So it seems that dissipation of wave energy (loss to internal energy by way of friction/turbulence) is parameterized, but I'm wondering if the onshore momentum flux is balanced. Or does ARTEMIS simply assumed a flat mean water surface?

Thanks,
Ben

The administrator has disabled public write access.