Tranquility

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and
Dry Dock Complex at Duqm Port
Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Ministry of Transport and Communications
PRINCIPAL :
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PORTS AND

MARITIME AFFAIRS, MINISTRY OF
TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
SULTANATE OF OMAN
ENGINEER :
DAEWOO SHIPBUILDING & MARINE

ENGINEERING
CONTRACTOR :
DAEWOOGALFAR CONSORTIUM
PROJECT NAME :
CONSTRUCTION OF SHIP REPAIR YARD AND

DRYDOCK COMPLEX AT DUQM PORT
DOCUMENT TITLE :
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENT OF HARBOUR

TRANQUILITY
Document No:
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
01
Rev.
Design Team of Daewoo E&C

Daewoo Galfar Consortium Member
04/02/09
Date
Issued for Review
J.H.Kim
K.S.Cho
H.J.Sung
Prepared
Checked
Submitte
d
Description of Revision
CONTRACTOR
Page 1 of 89
Approved
ENGINEE
R


Numerical Experiment of Harbor Tranquility

1. Summary
1.1 Object
The object of this numerical experiment is to evaluate the harbour tranquility of the
Duqm New Port in OMAN using SWAN wave model for the two different port layouts
designed with three cross-sections of the Duqm New Port.
1.2 Contents
The numerical experiments were conducted with the wave direction, N60E which is
the most effective waves causing the harbour tranquility of Duqm New Port.
Three different incident wave conditions were used for the numerical experiments
ie, the 100 years return period of the deep water wave and the design waves used as
Duqm New Port Design Criteria(Ministry of Transport and Communication in Oman,
2005. 10).
The harbour tranquility criterion was used "Target Wave Heights at Berthing
Facilities" suggested by the Duqm New Port Design Criteria. The wave height criterion
for harbor tranquility was determined as 1.0m which was required for ship repair
facility and floating docks(<Table 1.1>).
Goda's reflection rates for coastal structure were used for the numerical
experiments(<Table 1.2>).
The numerical experiments were carried out for the six different cases of port design
layouts shown in <Table 1.3> which include the two construction cases of main
breakwater and lee breakwater with three cross-secton forms by changing reflection
coefficients at Q1(Quay No. 1) section.
Page 2 of 89


Target Wave Heights
<Table 1.1>
Type of Facility
Target Wave Height (Hs m)
Ship repair, floating docks
1.00
Main commercial quays
1.00
Naval Craft
0.75
International Fishing Craft
0.75
Small Craft berths
0.50
Pontoon Locations
0.25
Goda's Reflection rates for costal structure
<Table 1.2>
Reflection
Structure form
Vertical wall
Coefficien
t
0.71.0
Reflection
Structure form
Coefficient
Deformed armour unit 0.30.5
Page 3 of 89

Vertical wall(submerged)

0.50.7
Vertical waveabsorbing structure
0.30.8
0.30.6
Coast line
0.050.2
Rubble mound
(1:23 slope)
Test plan
<Table 1.3>
CaseA-0
CaseB-0
Plan arrangement CaseA

Quay section reflection no consideration
CaseA-1
Plan arrangement CaseB

Quay section reflection no consideration
CaseA-2
Page 4 of 89
CaseA-3


Q1 : Igloo Block


Q1 : Con'c Block
CaseB-1

Q1 : Igloo Block
CaseB-2

Q1 : Con'c Block

Q1 : Igloo + Con'c Block
CaseB-3

Q1 : Igloo + Con'c Block
2. Model description (SWAN model)

2.1 Governing equation
In SWAN the waves are described with the two-dimensional wave action density
spectrum, even when nonlinear phenomena dominate(e.g., in the surf zone). The
rationale for using the spectrum in such highly nonlinear conditions is that, even in
such conditions it seems possible to predict with reasonable accuracy this spectral
distribution of the second order moment of the waves(although it may not be
sufficient to fully describe the waves statistically). The spectrum that is considered in
SWAN is the action density spectrum
rather than the energy density spectrum
since in the presence of currents, action density is conserved whereas energy
density is not(e.g., Whitham, 1974). The independent variables are the relative
frequency (as observed in a frame of reference moving with current velocity) and the
wave direction (the direction normal to the wave crest of each spectral component).
The action density is equal to the energy density divided by the relative frequency:
. In SWAN this spectrum may vary in time and space.
In SWAN the evolution of the wave spectrum is described by the spectral action
balance equation which for Cartesian coordinates is(e.g., Hasselmann et al., 1973):
The first term in the left-hand side of this equation represents the local rate of
change of action density in time, the second and third term represent propagation of
action in geographical space(with propagation velocities and in x- and y-space,
respectively). The fourth term represents shifting of the relative frequency due to
variations in depths and currents(with propagation velocity in -space). The fifth
Page 5 of 89


term represents depth-induced and current-induced refraction(with propagation

velocity in -space). The expressions for these propagation speeds are taken from
linear wave theory(e.g., Whitham, 1974; Mei, 1983; Dingemans, 1997). The term (
) at the right hand side of the action balance equation is the source term in
terms of energy density representing the effects of generation( ), dissipation( )
and nonlinear wave-wave interactions( ).
The integration in time is a simple backward finite difference, so that the

discretization of the action balance equation is(for positive propagation speeds , >
0, including the computation of the source terms but ignoring their discretization):
- Propagation term for the topography space
- Propagation term for the spectrum space
- Propagation term for the direction space
there,
2.2 Wind input

Page 6 of 89


Transfer of wind energy to the waves is described in SWAN with a resonance

mechanism(Phillips, 1957) and a feed-back mechanism(Miles, 1957). The corresponding
source term for these mechanisms is commonly described as the sum of linear and
exponential growth:
in which A describes linear growth and BE exponential growth.

For the linear growth term A, the expression due to Cavaleri and MalanotteRizzoli(1981) is used with a filter to eliminate wave growth at frequencies lower than
the Pierson-Moskowitz frequency(Tolman, 1992a):
in which is the wind direction, is the filter and

is the peak frequency of the
fully developed sea state according to Pierson and Moskowitz(1964; reformulated in
terms of friction velocity).
It should be noted that the SWAN model is driven by the wind speed at 10 m
elevation
whereas the computations use the friction velocity . For the WAM Cycle
3 formulation the transformation from
to is obtained with
in which
is the drag coefficient from Wu(1982):
For the WAM Cycle 4 formulations, the computation of

source term.
is an integral part of the
Two expressions for exponential growth by wind are optionally available in the SWAN
model. The first expression is due to Komen et al.(1984). Their expression is a function
of
Page 7 of 89


in which is the phase speed and and are the density of air and water,
respectively. This cph expression is also used in WAM Cycle 3(the WAMDI group, 1988).
The second expression is due to Janssen(1989,1991). It is based on a quasi-linear windwave theory and is given by:
where is the Miles "constant". In the theory of Janssen(1991), this Miles "constant" is
estimated from the non-dimensional critical height:
,
where is the Von Karman constant, equal to 0.41 and is the effective surface
roughness. If the non-dimensional critical height
, the Miles constant is set equal
0. Janssen(1991) assumes that the wind profile is given by:
in which
water level,
is the wind speed at height z(10m in the SWAN model) above the mean
si the roughness length. The effective roughness length
depends on
the roughness length and the sea state through the wave induced stress
total surface stress :
and the
The second of these two equations is a Charnock-like relation in which is a constant

equal to 0.01. The wave stress
vector is given by:
Page 8 of 89


The value of can be determined for a given wind speed

and a given wave
spectrum
from the above set of equations. In the SWAN model the iterative
procedure of Mastenbroek et al.(1993) is used.
2.3 Dissipation of wave energy by whitecapping

The processes of whitecapping in the SWAN model is represented by the pulse-based
model of Hasselmann(1974). Reformulated in terms of wave number(rather than
frequency) so as to be applicable in finite water depth(cf. the WAMDI group, 1988),
this expression is:
where and denote the mean frequency and the mean wave number(for expressions
see below) respectively and the coefficient depends on the overall wave steepness.
This steepness dependent coefficient, as given by the WAMDI group(1988), has been
adapted by Gnther et al.(1992) based on Janssen(1991a, see Janssen, 1991b):
This overall wave steepness is defined as:
The mean frequency , the mean wave number and the total wave energy:
defined as(cf. the WAMDI group, 1988):
2.4 Dissipation of wave energy by bottom friction
Page 9 of 89
are


The bottom friction models that have been selected for SWAN are the empirical
model of JONSWAP(Hasselmann et al., 1973), the drag law model of Collins(1972) and
the eddy-viscosity model of Madsen et al.(1988). The formulations for these bottom
friction models can all be expressed in the following form:
in which
is a bottom friction coefficient that generally depends on the bottom
orbital motion represented by
Hasselmann et al.(1973) found from the results of the JONSWAP experiment

for swell conditions. Bouws and Komen(1983) selected a
bottom friction coefficient of
for fully developed wave conditions in
shallow water. Both values are available in SWAN.
The expression of Collins(1972) is based on a conventional formulation for periodic
waves with the appropriate parameters adapted to suit a random wave field. The
dissipation rate is calculated with the conventional bottom friction formulation in
which the bottom friction coefficient is
with
(Collins, 1972).
(Note that Collins(1972) contains an error in the expression due to an erroneous
Jacobean transformation).
Madsen et al.(1988) derived a formulation similar to that of Hasselmann and
Collins(1968) but in their model the bottom friction factor is a function of the bottom
roughness height and the actual wave conditions. Their bottom friction coefficient is
given by:
in which is a non-dimensional friction factor estimated by using the formulation of

Jonsson(1966; cf. Madsen et al., 1988):
Page 10 of 89


in which
(Jonsson and Carlsen, 1976) and
excursion amplitude:
and
is a representative near-bottom
is the bottom roughness length scale. For values of
friction factor
smaller than 1.57 the
is 0.30(Jonsson, 1980).
2.5 Depth-induced wave breaking

To model the energy dissipation in random waves due to depth-induced breaking, the
bore-based model of Battjes and Janssen(1978) is used in SWAN. The mean rate of
energy dissipation per unit horizontal area due to wave breaking
in which
in SWAN,
is expressed as:
is the fraction of breaking waves determined by:
in which
is the maximum wave height that can exist at the given depth and is a
mean frequency defined as:
Extending the expression of Eldeberky and Battjes(1995) to include the spectral

directions, the dissipation for a spectral component per unit time is calculated in
SWAN with:
The maximum wave height

is determined in SWAN with
, in which is the
breaker parameter and is the total water depth(including the wave-induced set-up if
computed by SWAN). In the literature, this breaker parameter is often a constant or
Page 11 of 89


it is expressed as a function of bottom slope or incident wave steepness(see e.g.,

Galvin, 1972; Battjes and Janssen, 1978; Battjes and Stive, 1985; Arcilla and Lemos,
1990; Kaminsky and Kraus, 1993; Nelson, 1987, 1994).
In the publication of Battjes and Janssen(1978) in which the dissipation model is
described, a constant breaker parameter, based on Miche's criterion, of
was
used. Battjes and Stive(1985) re-analyzed wave data of a number of laboratory and
field experiments and found values for the breaker parameter varying between 0.6
and 0.83 for different types of bathymetry(plane, bar-trough and bar) with an average
of 0.73. From a compilation of a large number of experiments Kaminsky and
Kraus(1993) have found breaker in the range of 0.6 to 1.59 with an average of 0.79.
2.6 Quadruplet wave-wave interactions

The quadruplet wave-wave interactions are computed with the Discrete Interaction
Approximation(DIA) as proposed by Hasselmann et al.(1985). Their source code(slightly
adapted by Tolman, personal communication, 1993) has been used in the SWAN model.
In the Discrete Interaction Approximation two quadruplets of wave numbers are
considered, both with frequencies:
where is a constant coefficient set equal to 0.25. To satisfy the resonance conditions
for the first quadruplet, the wave number vectors with frequency
angle of
and
frequencies
and
and
lie at an
to the two identical wave number vectors with
. The second quadruplet is the mirror of this first quadruplet(the
wave number vectors with frequency
and
lie at mirror angles of
and
).
Within this discrete interaction approximation, the source term
where
for
refers to the first quadruplet and

are identical to those for
to the second quadruplet(he expressins
for the mirror directions) and:
Page 12 of 89
is given by:

in which

. Each of the contributions(i=1, 2, 3) is:
The constant
. Following Hasselmann and Hasselmann(1981), the
quadruplet interaction in finite water depth is taken identical to the quadruplet
transfer in deep water multiplied with a scaling factor R:
where R is given by:
in which
is the peak wave number of the JONSWAP spectrum for which the original
computations were carried out. The values of the coefficients are:

and
. In the shallow water limit, i.e.,
infinity. Therefore a lower limit of
the nonlinear transfer tends to
is applied(cf. WAM Cycle 4; Komen et al.,
1994), resulting in a maximum value of
. To increase the model robustness
in case of arbitrarily shaped spectra, the peak wave number

(cf. Komen et al., 1994).
is replaced by
2.7 Triad wave-wave interactions

The Lumped Triad Approximation(LTA) of Eldeberky(1996), which is a slightly adapted
version of the Discrete Triad Approximation of Eldeberky and Battjes(1995) is used in
SWAN in each spectral direction:
Page 13 of 89

in which
with

is a tunable proportionality coefficient. The biphase is approximated
with Ursell number
Usually, the triad wave-wave interactions are calculated only for
. But for
stability reasons, it is calculated for the whole range

. This means that both
quadruplets and triads are computed at the same time. The interaction coefficient is
taken from Madsen and Srensen(1993):
2.8 Diffraction
In a simplest case, we assume there are no nurrents. This means that
. Let
denotes the propagation velocities in geographic and spectral spaces for the situation
without diffraction as:
and
. These are given by:
where is the wave number and n is perpendicular to the wave ray. We consider the
following eikonal equation:
with denoting the diffraction parameter as given by:
Page 14 of 89


Due to diffraction, the propagation velocities are given by:
,
where
,
.
2.9 General formulation for obstacles

SWAN can estimate wave transmission through a (line-)structure such as a
breakwater(dam). Such an obstacle will affect the wave field in two ways, first it will
reduce the wave height locally all along its length, and second it will cause diffraction
around its end(s). The model is not able to account for diffraction. In irregular, shortcrested wave fields, however, it seems that the effect of diffraction is small, except in
a region less than one or two wavelengths away from the tip of the obstacle(Booij et
al., 1993). Therefore the model can reasonably account for waves around an obstacle
if the directional spectrum of incoming waves is not too narrow. Since obstacles
usually have a transversal area that is too small to be resolved by the bottom grid in
SWAN, an obstacle is modelled as a line. If the crest of the breakwater is at a level
where(at least part of the) waves can pass over, the transmission coefficient(defined
as the ratio of the(significant) wave height at the downwave side of the dam over
the(significant) wave height at the upwave side) is a function of wave height and the
difference in crest level and water level. The expression is taken from Goda et al.
(1967):
where
is the freeboard of the dam and where is the incident(significant)
wave height at the upwave side of the obstacle(dam), is the crest level of the dam
above the reference level(same as reference level of the bottom), the mean water
level relative to the reference level, and the coefficients , depend on the shape of
the dam(Seelig, 1979):
Coefficients , depend on the shape of the dam
<Table 2.1>
case
Page 15 of 89


vertical thin wall
1.8
0.1
caisson
2.2
0.4
dam with slope 1:3/2
2.6
0.15
The above expression is based on experiments in a wave flume, so strictly speaking it

is only valid for normal incidence waves. Since there are no data available on oblique
waves it is assumed that the transmission coefficient does not depend on direction.
Another phenomenon that is to be expected is a change in wave frequency since often
the process above the dam is highly nonlinear. Again there is little information
available, so in SWAN it is assumed that the frequencies remain unchanged over an
obstacle(only the energy scale of the spectrum is affected and not the spectral
shape).
3. Experimental condition
Experimental condition
<Table 3.1>
Item
Contents
Calculation for shallow water wave transformation

Harbor calm examination
World Coarse 1depth data(National Ocean and Atmo sphere
Topographic data Administration, USA)
Field observed depth data
Application model SWAN model(Used Wave Action equation)
Object
Test wave
Wave condition
Return
Period
100 year
Direction
N60E
Page 16 of 89
ii
iii

Height
Coarse

5.99m
Period
12.0s
Area
40.0km 50.0km
Grid Space 100m(Uniform)
Grid
Number
400 500(200,000)
Height
Coarse Result
Period
Grid
Infomatio
(CaseA
n
Area
)
12.0s
4.2m
12.0s
3.5m
9.4s
4.0km 5.0km
Fine
Grid
Number
400 500(200,000)
Height
Coarse Result
(CaseB Period
)
Fine
Area
12.0s
4.2m
12.0s
10.0km 12.5km
Page 17 of 89
3.5m
9.4s

Grid
Number

400 500(200,000)
CaseA-0
CaseA-i
CaseA-ii
CaseA-iii
CaseB-0
CaseB-i
CaseB-ii
CaseB-iii
Test Plan
Depth Conversion Oman Design Tide Level(+3.2m CD)
4. Experimental Result
4.1 Plan A
Range of Wave Height on Quay(CaseA)
<Table 4.1> (unit : m)
Target Area
Plan
Test Wave
CaseA-0
Q1
Q2
0.931.05
Page 18 of 89
Q3
Q4
Q5

CaseA-1
CaseA-2
CaseA-3

ii
1.031.07
iii
0.890.91
0.901.31 0.561.35 0.561.13 1.321.61 0.861.39
ii
0.901.30 0.641.61 0.641.35 1.391.71 0.951.66
iii
0.751.07 0.511.34 0.511.12 1.201.45 0.831.41
1.111.49 0.711.47 0.711.21 1.321.61 0.871.40
ii
1.101.48 0.761.70 0.761.41 1.391.71 0.961.66
iii
0.911.21 0.601.42 0.601.17 1.201.45 0.831.41
0.921.37 0.561.35 0.561.13 1.321.61 0.871.39
ii
0.901.36 0.641.61 0.631.35 1.391.71 0.961.66
iii
0.751.12 0.511.34 0.511.12 1.201.45 0.831.41
Coffer Dam Design Wave Height refer to CaseA-0 Q2 area wave heights.
4.2 Plan B
Range of Wave Height on Quay(CaseB)
<Table 4.2> (unit : m)
Page 19 of 89


Target Area
Plan
CaseB-0
CaseB-1
Test Wave
Q1
Q2
0.52
ii
0.68
iii
0.52
Q3
Q4
Q5
0.210.66 0.170.77 0.160.43 0.630.95 0.050.98
ii
0.280.85 0.231.00 0.210.57 0.831.23 0.071.26
iii
0.210.66 0.180.75 0.160.47 0.681.02 0.071.06
0.280.78 0.200.83 0.190.46 0.640.96 0.050.98
ii
0.361.02 0.271.08 0.250.61 0.841.23 0.071.26
CaseB-2
Page 20 of 89

CaseB-3

iii
0.270.78 0.210.80 0.200.49 0.681.03 0.071.06
0.220.78 0.190.83 0.190.46 0.640.95 0.050.98
ii
0.281.02 0.251.07 0.250.60 0.831.23 0.071.26
iii
0.210.78 0.200.80 0.190.49 0.681.03 0.071.06
Coffer Dam Design Wave Height refer to CaseA-0 Q2 area wave heights.
Coarse Topography(CaseA)
<Figure 4.1>
Page 21 of 89


Fine Topography(CaseA)
<Figure 4.2>
Page 22 of 89


Coarse Topography(CaseB)
<Figure 4.3>
Page 23 of 89


Fine Topography(CaseB)
<Figure 4.4>
Page 24 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Coarse, CaseA-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.5>
Page 25 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Coarse, CaseA-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.6>
Page 26 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.7>
Page 27 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.8>
Page 28 of 89


<Figure 4.9>
Page 29 of 89


<Figure 4.10>
Page 30 of 89


<Figure 4.11>
Page 31 of 89


<Figure 4.12>
Page 32 of 89


<Figure 4.13>
Page 33 of 89


<Figure 4.14>
Page 34 of 89


<Figure 4.15>
Page 35 of 89


<Figure 4.16>
Page 36 of 89


<Figure 4.17>
Page 37 of 89


<Figure 4.18>
Page 38 of 89


<Figure 4.19>
Page 39 of 89


<Figure 4.20>
Page 40 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave ii)
<Figure 4.21>
Page 41 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave ii)
<Figure 4.22>
Page 42 of 89


<Figure 4.23>
Page 43 of 89


<Figure 4.24>
Page 44 of 89


<Figure 4.25>
Page 45 of 89


<Figure 4.26>
Page 46 of 89


<Figure 4.27>
Page 47 of 89


<Figure 4.28>
Page 48 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave iii)
<Figure 4.29>
Page 49 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseA-0, Test Wave iii)
<Figure 4.30>
Page 50 of 89


<Figure 4.31>
Page 51 of 89


<Figure 4.32>
Page 52 of 89


<Figure 4.33>
Page 53 of 89


<Figure 4.34>
Page 54 of 89


<Figure 4.35>
Page 55 of 89


<Figure 4.36>
Page 56 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Coarse, CaseB-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.37>
Page 57 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Coarse, CaseB-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.38>
Page 58 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.39>
Page 59 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave i)
<Figure 4.40>
Page 60 of 89


<Figure 4.41>
Page 61 of 89


<Figure 4.42>
Page 62 of 89


<Figure 4.43>
Page 63 of 89


<Figure 4.44>
Page 64 of 89


<Figure 4.45>
Page 65 of 89


<Figure 4.46>
Page 66 of 89


<Figure 4.47>
Page 67 of 89


<Figure 4.48>
Page 68 of 89


<Figure 4.49>
Page 69 of 89


<Figure 4.50>
Page 70 of 89


<Figure 4.51>
Page 71 of 89


<Figure 4.52>
Page 72 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave ii)
<Figure 4.53>
Page 73 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave ii)
<Figure 4.54>
Page 74 of 89


<Figure 4.55>
Page 75 of 89


<Figure 4.56>
Page 76 of 89


<Figure 4.57>
Page 77 of 89


<Figure 4.58>
Page 78 of 89


<Figure 4.59>
Page 79 of 89


<Figure 4.60>
Page 80 of 89


Wave vectors and Wave Height Contour(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave iii)
<Figure 4.61>
Page 81 of 89


Wave Height Distribution(Fine, CaseB-0, Test Wave iii)
<Figure 4.62>
Page 82 of 89


<Figure 4.63>
Page 83 of 89


<Figure 4.64>
Page 84 of 89


<Figure 4.65>
Page 85 of 89


<Figure 4.66>
Page 86 of 89


<Figure 4.67>
Page 87 of 89


<Figure 4.68>
Page 88 of 89


Page 89 of 89

Tranquility

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tranquility

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Dry Dock Complex at Duqm Port

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PORTS AND

DAEWOO SHIPBUILDING & MARINE

CONSTRUCTION OF SHIP REPAIR YARD AND

NUMERICAL EXPERIMENT OF HARBOUR

Design Team of Daewoo E&C

Issued for Review

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Numerical Experiment of Harbor Tranquility

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Target Wave Heights

Target Wave Height (Hs m)

Ship repair, floating docks

Main commercial quays

International Fishing Craft

Small Craft berths

Goda's Reflection rates for costal structure

Deformed armour unit 0.30.5

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Vertical waveabsorbing structure

Plan arrangement CaseA

Plan arrangement CaseB

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Plan arrangement CaseA

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Plan arrangement CaseA

Plan arrangement CaseB

Plan arrangement CaseB

Plan arrangement CaseA

Plan arrangement CaseB

2. Model description (SWAN model)

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

term represents depth-induced and current-induced refraction(with propagation

The integration in time is a simple backward finite difference, so that the

- Propagation term for the spectrum space

- Propagation term for the direction space

2.2 Wind input

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

Transfer of wind energy to the waves is described in SWAN with a resonance

in which A describes linear growth and BE exponential growth.

in which is the wind direction, is the filter and

is the drag coefficient from Wu(1982):

For the WAM Cycle 4 formulations, the computation of

is an integral part of the

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

The second of these two equations is a Charnock-like relation in which is a constant

vector is given by:

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

The value of can be determined for a given wind speed

2.3 Dissipation of wave energy by whitecapping

2.4 Dissipation of wave energy by bottom friction

Construction of Ship Repair Yard and

Directorate General of Ports and Maritime Affairs,

is a bottom friction coefficient that generally depends on the bottom