Paper detail

Statistics of weakly nonlinear waves on currents with strong vertical shear

We investigate how the presence of a vertically sheared current affects wave statistics, including the probability of rogue waves, and apply it to a real-world case using measured spectral and shear current data from the Mouth of the Columbia River. A theory for weakly nonlinear waves valid to second order in wave steepness is derived, and used to analyze statistical properties of surface waves; the theory extends the classic theory by Longuet-Higgins [J. Fluid Mech. 12, 3 (1962)] to allow for an arbitrary depth-dependent background flow, $U(z)$, with $U$ the horizontal velocity along the main direction of wave propagation and $z$ the vertical axis. Numerical statistics are collected from a large number of realisations of random, irregular sea-states following a JONSWAP spectrum, on linear and exponential model currents of varying strengths. A number of statistical quantities are presented and compared to a range of theoretical expressions from the literature; in particular the distribution of wave surface elevation, surface maxima, and crest height; the exceedance probability including the probability of rogue waves; the maximum crest height among $N_s$ waves, and the skewness of the surface elevation distribution. We find that compared to no-shear conditions, opposing vertical shear ($U&#39;(z)>0$) leads to increased wave height and increased skewness of the nonlinear-wave elevation distribution, while a following shear ($U&#39;(z)<0$) has opposite effects. With the wave spectrum and velocity profile measured in the Columbia River estuary by Zippel & Thomson [J. Geophys. Res: Oceans 122, 3311 (2017)] our second--order theory predicts that the probability of rogue waves is significantly reduced and enhanced during ebb and flood, respectively, adding support to the notion that shear currents need to be accounted for in wave modelling and prediction.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.