Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 1/14

International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ international-journal-of-naval-architecture-and-ocean-engineering/

Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater Q4,1

Jiawen Sun a, b, Zhe Ma a, Dongxu Wang c, Sheng Dong c, *, Ting Zhou a a

State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China National Marine Environment Monitoring Center, Dalian 116023, China c College of Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China b

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 6 June 2019 Received in revised form 25 October 2019 Accepted 18 November 2019 Available online xxx

A numerical model is established to investigate the run-up of a solitary wave after propagating over a triangular saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater. A rectangular-shaped submerged breakwater is simulated for comparison. Several factors, including the submerged depth, the lagoon length and the beach slope, are selected as independent variables. The free surface motions and velocity fields of the solitary wave interacting with the submerged breakwater are discussed. The results show that the submerged depth and lagoon length play significant roles in reducing the run-up. The influence of the beach slope is not significant. At the same submerged depth, the triangular saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater has only a slightly better effect than the rectangular-shaped submerged breakwater on the run-up reduction. However, a calmer reflected wave profile could be obtained with the rougher surface of the saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater. The study conclusions are expected to be useful for the conceptual design of saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwaters. © 2019 Society of Naval Architects of Korea. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Solitary wave Submerged breakwater Triangular saw-tooth Run-up Conceptual design

1. Introduction Among the most devastating coastal disasters are tsunamis induced by mass water movements resulting from ground motions triggered by earthquakes, submarine landslides and collapses; tsunamis can cause high economic losses and numerous casualties in coastal areas (Feng et al., 2017). In the field of coastal engineering, two common means are employed to approximate tsunamis on temporal and spatial scales. The traditional yet effective method uses the solitary wave as an approximation and has obtained many good results over the last twenty years (Silva et al., 2000; Yao et al., 2018). However, with the deep ongoing discussion in tsunami research, many scholars have found that the main component of a tsunami wave may act at different temporal and spatial scales compared to than solitary waves (Chan and Liu, 2012; Madsen et al., 2008). Therefore, the N-wave method has been developed and utilized to approximate tsunamis in many papers (Qu et al., 2017; Williams and Fuhrman, 2016). Schimmels et al. (2016) elaborate on the requirements and limitations of simulating a real tsunami in the

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Dong). Peer review under responsibility of Society of Naval Architects of Korea.

laboratory, which means that the feasibility of generating a tsunami by a piston-type wave maker has been authenticated. However, because of the rather long wave lengths of real tsunamis, the length of the wave flume or computational domain may be impractically long. In the past several decades, studies on tsunamis have been commonly completed by large-scale experimental facilities (Goseberg et al., 2013) and fully nonlinear potential theory (Sriram et al., 2016). With the development and application of computers, there has been an interesting interest in numerical simulations based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods to solve numerous tsunami problems, though they are costly. In the present study, the moving wall method is adopted for the generation of waves, indicating that the positions of the grid points should be updated in each time step, which requires considerable computing resources. Therefore, the N-wave method, in which the computational domain is quite long, will not be adopted for the sake of reducing the computational cost. Finally, a solitary wave is used as the input condition throughout this study to maintain a balance between economic and feasibility considerations. In contrast to regular or irregular waves in the deep water region, almost all of the energy of a solitary wave is above the free surface, and the wave length of a solitary wave is very long. Obviously, the impact and run-up of a solitary wave are expected to be

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002 2092-6782/© 2019 Society of Naval Architects of Korea. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Q2 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 2/14

2

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

harmful to structures (Qu et al., 2018). To solve this problem, breakwaters, among the most common structures in coastal engineering, have been extensively used. The choice of a breakwater depends mostly on the wave conditions and the morphology of the coastal region. Emerged breakwaters provide excellent shelter for the leeside, but the cost to construct this type of breakwater is very high, and significant reflected waves may create problems on the seabed in front of the breakwater (Rambabu and Mani, 2005). A submerged breakwater (hereafter SB) is another type of low-crest breakwater that can conserve engineering resources and mitigate coastal erosion. Moreover, SBs retain a clear view of the sea and maintain a leeside with a high water quality; these represent the key features of this breakwater type (Christou et al., 2008). As a result of these advantages, SBs are preferred in coastal engineering design. Correspondingly, SBs have been a popular research topic in recent years, and many important studies have been published by researchers who analyzed SBs both experimentally (Jiang et al., 2017; Carevic et al., 2013; Hsiao and Lin, 2010) and numerically (Wu et al., 2012; Zhang et al., 2016; Kasem and Sasaki, 2010). In these studies, one of the main points that most researchers have considered is the geometry of the SB. The two most common types of SBs are the rectangular type (Chen et al., 2017) and the semicircular type (Young and Testik, 2011). Instead of adopting one of these two traditional shapes, Shing (2014) adopted a triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB in his experiment to obtain a rougher surface that may dissipate more wave energy than a smoother surface; this SB provided a greater reduction in the solitary wave run-up than both the rectangular SB and the semicircular SB. However, the model height of the triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB in the experiment conducted by Shing (2014) is higher than that of other SBs, which means that the added run-up reduction could be partially due to the geometry and partially due to the increase in the model height. As a result, further research is needed to determine the effect of the geometry on the wave run-up reduction while maintaining the same model height. Therefore, in this study, a numerical model is established and utilized to investigate the effect of the saw-tooth-shaped SB on the reduction in the solitary wave run-up. A sketch of this problem can be found in Fig. 1, where d is the initial water depth, D is the submerged depth, W is the width of the SB, L is the length of the lagoon, a is the beach slope, and R is the run-up. For numerical simulations, the variable L0 indicates the distance between the SB and the wave generation boundary. It is worth noting that W may have little influence on the propagation characteristics of solitary waves passing over a submerged structure (Wang et al., 2018a,b; Irtem et al., 2011). Therefore, W is constant in the present paper, and the submerged depth D, lagoon length L and beach slope a are selected as independent variables. The maximum run-up of a solitary wave on an impermeable slope is calculated, and the optimal setup of the sawshaped SB is the expected result. The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 1 presents the

introduction, which contains some basic information about the topic at hand. Section 2 provides a detailed description of the numerical model, including the governing equations and boundary conditions. Section 3 describes the validation of the present model and the setup of the subsequent simulation. Section 4 provides the results and discussion of the simulation. Section 5 gives some conclusions according to the results of the article. 2. Numerical model 2.1. Governing equations A numerical program (Wang et al., 2019a, b) developed by one of the authors is utilized to investigate the interaction between a solitary wave and the SB. This numerical model is developed from the open-source CFD code OpenFOAM. The governing equations of the wave field are a combination of the continuity equation, Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations (RANS) and the volume of fluid (VOF) equation (Hirt and Nichols, 1981):

V,u ¼ 0

(1)

vru þ VðruuÞ  V,ðmVuÞ ¼ C kVa  gXVr  VPrgh vt

(2)


 
va þ V , auÞ þ V , a 1  a Ur  ¼ 0 vt

(3)

where u is the velocity vector; a stands for the volumetric ratio of fluid in every cell, i.e., 0 for air and 1 for water, with values between 0 and 1 indicating cells containing a mixture of the two fluids; t is the specific Reynolds stress tensor; and r and m are the weighted density and dynamic viscosity, respectively, of the two phases calculated as followed:

r ¼ ar1 þ ð1  aÞr2

(4)

m ¼ am1 þ ð1  aÞm2

(5)

where the subscripts 1 and 2 are for fluid and air, respectively. In Eq. (2), CkVa is the surface tension term, in which C is the surface tension coefficient and k is the curvature of the interface, g is the gravitational acceleration, X is the position vector, and Prgh is the pseudodynamic pressure:

Prgh ¼ P  rgX

(6)

which has no physical meaning but is used in the application of a convenient numerical technique. Eq. (6) represents the dynamic pressure only if the free surface is located at Z ¼ 0. The velocity and pressure are solved by the PIMPLE algorithm. The third term on the left-hand side of Eq. (3) is the artificial compression term, which is effective only at the free surface, and Ur is the artificial compressive velocity:

Ur ¼ ca jUj

(7)

where ca is a factor with a value of 1 by default that can be specified by users to enhance or eliminate (ca ¼ 0) the compression of the interface; in this paper, ca equals 1. 2.2. Boundary conditions Fig. 1. Sketch of a solitary wave propagating over an SB and the wave run-up on a beach.

There are two kinds of boundaries employed in the model. The first one is the no-slip boundary:

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 3/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
4d3 H 3:80 þ d 3H

3

Ujwall ¼ 0

(8)

2 T¼ C

vp j ¼ 0 vn wall

(9)

Until now, the displacement of the paddle has been clear, but in the present model, a minor adjustment has been made. The initial position of the paddle is set to (-T/2, -S/2), which means that the wave paddle will perform a unidirectional motion within the motion time T to generate a solitary wave and stop if the simulation time is larger than T. The final function is

where U is the velocity and p is the pressure. The surface of the SB and the slope and bottom of the model in the following simulations are no-slip boundaries. The second kind of boundary is the wave generation boundary with the moving wall method. In other words, this boundary moves similar to a piston-type wave maker, thus generating the target wave. In wave theory, a solitary wave is the unidirectional permanent wave solution of the KdV equation. The period of this wave is considered infinite. All of the free surface of the solitary wave is above the still water surface and can be expressed as:

hðx; tÞ ¼ Hsech2

# "rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 3H ðx  ctÞ 4d3

3.1. Validation of the model

" qffiffiffiffiffiffi

3H ðX 4d3

cHsech

2

d þ Hsech

" qffiffiffiffiffiffi

#  ctÞ

3H ðX 4d3

#

(11)

 ctÞ

The integral of Eq. (11) is the displacement function of the wave paddle:

"rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi # rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 4H 3H d tanh XðtÞ ¼ ðct  XÞ 3d 4d3

(12)

Because of the infinite period, the stroke of the wave paddle could be expressed as:

S ¼ Xð þ ∞Þ  Xð  ∞Þ ¼

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 16Hd 3

(13)

However, the motion time for the paddle cannot actually be infinite; thus, a time truncation is applied:

"rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
# 3H T S ¼ 0:999 tanh c  4d3 2 2

(16)

3. Validation and simulation

2

dXðtÞ chðx; tÞ ¼ ¼ dt d þ hðx; tÞ

"rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ( 
#) 4H 3H T S d 1 þ tanh  X XðtÞ ¼ c t 3d 2 2 4d3

(10)

where H is the wave height, g is the gravitational acceleration and pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi c ¼ gðH þ dÞ is the wave speed, while the other variables remain the same as previously described. First, the velocity of the wave paddle is:

UðtÞ ¼

(15)

(14)

Via the implementation of Eq. (14), the motion time of the wave paddle for the generation of a solitary wave is:

In this subsection, the present numerical model will be validated by an existing case. Ji et al. (2017) presents a numerical model created with the constrained interpolation profile (CIP) method (Li et al., 2018) and uses the model to simulate a solitary wave propagating over a submerged rectangular obstacle (Fig. 2). This case is so classic that it has been studied by many other researchers both numerically (Chang et al., 2001) and experimentally (Zhuang and Lee, 1996). When a solitary wave propagates over a submerged breakwater, the flow fields around the weather side and leeside of the structure are unsteady owing to flow separation and vortex generation. Therefore, this problem is useful for validating the present numerical model to calculate the velocity field of a solitary wave propagating over a submerged breakwater. To simulate this case, a two-dimensional numerical wave flume is established. The length and height of this flume are 12.0 m and 0.5 m, respectively. The submerged obstacle, whose setup is the same as the obstacle shown in Fig. 2, is located at x ¼ 4.0 m. The dimensions of the background cells are 0.008 m in the x-axis direction and 0.004 m in the z-axis direction, which means the ratio of the length to the height is 2:1. To obtain a better result, the mesh in the vicinity of both the free surface and the submerged obstacle is refined. Finally, the minimum refined grid dimensions are 0.004 m in the x-axis direction and 0.002 m in the z-axis direction, and the number of grids is 313,335. The initial time step is 0.001 s, and the total time of the simulation is 6.5 s. The SST k-U turbulence model (Menter, 1994) is used during the simulation. The validations of the sensitivity of the mesh and the stability of the solitary wave at a constant water depth are referred to the author's other paper (Wang et al., 2018a,b). Comparisons among the results of the present model and those of other models are shown in Fig. 3. The x-axis and y-axis represent the dimensionless time t * (g/d)0.5 and velocity components u * (gd)0.5 or

Fig. 2. Sketch of a solitary wave passing over a submerged obstacle (Ji et al., 2017).

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 4/14

4

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. Comparison among the results of the present model and those of the other models at two points.

w * (gd)0.5, respectively. The solid lines represent the present numerical results, while the red dashed lines and blue dashed-dotted lines represent the results of Ji et al. (2017) and Chang et al. (2001), respectively. The experimental results are captured by , symbols. Although these three simulations are all based on the viscous numerical model, one of the main differences among the simulations is the selection of the turbulence model. Ji et al. (2017) believe that the breaking scale is relatively small, so the turbulence model is not employed in their simulation, whereas the k-ε model is adopted in the model of Chang et al. (2001), and the SST k-U model is used in the present model. For 0 < t * (g/d)0.5 < 15, all models show good coincidence with the experimental results. When t * (g/ d)0.5 > 15, some deviation occurs. For example, the results of model by Ji et al. (2017) for w at point 2 are smaller than the experimental data when t * (g/d)0.5 equals 17.0, where the difference between the present model and the experimental data is much smaller. In addition, when t * (g/d)0.5 > 20, the present model shows the best coincidence with the experimental data among all the models. Overall, good agreement between the numerical results and experimental data is shown in Fig. 3, which means that the present model is effective at capturing the velocity fields. Fig. 4 shows snapshots of the free surface motions and the velocity fields at four different moments. t0 is the dimensionless time, which is the same as that shown in Fig. 3. As the solitary wave approaches the obstacle, flow separation and vortex generation occur on the weather side of the obstacle. The first vortex is generated to the top left of the obstacle and then stretched downstream. As the wave passes, another vortex is formed in the vicinity of the leeside of the obstacle. This vortex continues to develop and exists for a long time. All the characteristics of the flow field are consistent with the existing results, which means that the present model can be used to simulate the interactions between a solitary wave and the submerged structure.

wave flume in Fig. 1 with a length of 15.0 m and height of 1.2 m is established for all the following simulations. The distance between the SB and wave generation boundary L0 is equal to 6.0 m, and the water depth d is 0.4 m. The wave height of the solitary wave is 0.12 m, which indicates strong nonlinearity, i.e., ε ¼ H/d ¼ 0.3. As mentioned above, the width of the SB is constant and equals 1.0 m in the present paper. Two kinds of SBs with triangular saw-tooth and rectangular shapes are considered in the present study. The details of the geometries of these SBs are listed in Fig. 5. Regarding the independent variables, there are four values for the submerged depth D, which means that the dimensionless submerged depth D* ¼ D/d varies from 0.6 to 0.9. In addition, there are three values of the lagoon length L, which means that the dimensionless lagoon length L* ¼ L/W varies from 1.0 to 2.0. Finally, two different beaches with slopes of 10 and 20 are considered in the simulation. The dimensions of the background cells are 0.012 m in the x-axis direction and 0.008 m in the z-axis direction, which means that the ratio of the length to the height is 1.5. To obtain better results, the mesh is refined one more time in the vicinities of both the free surface and the SB. After this refinement, the minimum dimensions of the grids are 0.006 m in the x-axis direction and 0.004 m in the z-axis direction, and the final numbers of grids are 280,638 for the cases with a 10-degree slope and 242,472 for the cases with a 20degree slope. For rectangle shaped SB, the mesh is relative regular as for simple structure. As for triangle saw-tooth shaped SB, the grids near upper side should gain more attention, and the mesh sketch can be shown in Fig. 6. The mesh configuration has been done referred to the author's other paper (Wang et al., 2019a, b). The initial time step is 0.001 s, and the total simulation time is 9.0 s. All the cases and variables can be found in Table 1. In addition, the SST k-U turbulence model is utilized throughout this study. 4. Results and discussion

3.2. Setup of the simulations 4.1. Maximum run-up analysis Since the numerical model has been validated, the setup of the simulations will be elaborated in this subsection. The numerical

One of the earliest important investigations on the run-up of

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 5/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

5

Fig. 6. Mesh sketch of the geometry of the triangle saw-tooth shaped SB.

Table 1 All the cases and variables. Case number

Geometry of the SB

#1 #2 #3-#26 #27-#50

E E R T

D* ¼ D/d

0.6/0.7/0.8/0.9 0.6/0.7/0.8/0.9

L* ¼ L/W

a (degrees)

1.0/1.5/2.0 1.0/1.5/2.0

10 20 10/20 10/20

E e empty, R e rectangle, T e triangular saw-tooth.

waves on slopes was completed by Synolakis (1987), who derived the following formula to predict the maximum run-up of a solitary wave on a smooth slope:

. pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi R d ¼ 2:831 cot aðH=dÞ5=4

Fig. 4. Snapshots of the free surface motions and the velocity fields at four different moments.

(17)

where R denotes the maximum run-up and H is the wave height of the solitary wave. The other variables are the same as those previously described. The analytical solution of Eq. (17) is based on the nonlinear and nondispersive shallow water equations. The following equations were cited in Synolakis's paper for the nonbreaking condition:

. pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi H d  0:8183 cot aðH=dÞ10=9

(18)

Fig. 5. Details of the geometries for both kinds of SBs.

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 6/14

6

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

. pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi H d  0:479 cot aðH=dÞ10=9

(19)

Synolakis (1987) indicates that Eq. (18) represents the case when the wave first breaks during run-up, while Eq. (19) represents the case when the wave breaks during washback. In the present paper, the nonlinearity of the solitary wave is equal to 0.3, which is larger than the results of Eq. (18) and Eq. (19). In other words, for a solitary wave with strong nonlinearity (ε > 0.3), wave breaking is very likely to occur during run-up regardless of whether there is an SB. However, the maximum run-up calculated by Eq. (17) could also be treated as a reference since the run-up of a broken wave is not easy to predict. The maximum run-ups of all the cases, as well as the theoretical values calculated by Eq. (17), are listed in Fig. 7. The vertical and horizontal axes represent the dimensionless maximum run-up (divided by the water depth d) and the dimensionless submerged depth, respectively. Several interesting conclusions can be drawn from Fig. 7. First, for a solitary wave with strong nonlinearity, the geometry of the SB with the same submerged depth seems to have no influence on the run-up reduction. In contrast, in some cases, such as the case where L* ¼ 1.0 and a ¼ 10 , when the submerged depth D* ¼ 0.9, the run-up for the saw-tooth-shaped SB (R ¼ 0.93) is larger than that for the rectangular SB (R ¼ 0.89). However, in most cases, these two SBs have almost identical impacts on the reduction in run-up. Second, researchers commonly consider the submerged depth D* to play a crucial role in reducing the run-up. From the left part of Fig. 7, it can be concluded that, for a solitary wave with strong nonlinearity, the run-ups obtained by cases with and without an SB demonstrate no significant difference if D* is less than 0.7. Third, the lagoon length L* is another important factor in the run-up reduction. The run-ups measured in the cases with L* ¼ 2.0 are obviously smaller than those measured in the cases with L* ¼ 1.0. Moreover, most run-ups for the 20-degree slope are larger than those for the 10-degree slope. Overall, the maximum run-up of a solitary wave over an SB is influenced by multiple parameters, except for the geometry of the SB. In other words, in terms of the run-up reduction, larger values of D* and L* and smaller values of a are preferred. The saw-tooth-shaped SB seems unnecessary under the same D* conditions. Another interesting finding is that, in contrast to the cases of a regular wave or an irregular wave, an SB may increase the solitary wave run-up. For example, when D* ¼ 0.8, L* ¼ 1.0, and a ¼ 20 , unconventional

Fig. 7. Maximum run-ups of all the cases and the corresponding theoretical values.

maximum run-ups are observed regardless of whether the SB is triangular (saw-tooth-shaped) or rectangular. This phenomenon, which may be due to wave breaking, will be discussed in the following subsections. 4.2. General process analysis The process of a solitary wave propagating over an SB and running up on a slope is presented in this section. As mentioned before, the cases where D* ¼ 0.8 and L* ¼ 1.0 are selected because of their unconventional maximum run-ups. Fig. 8 shows the wave profiles at different moments for the cases with a ¼ 10 . The x-axis and y-axis represent the position and dimensionless wave profiles, respectively. The dimensionless time t’ ¼ t * (g/d) 0.5 is the same as that in Fig. 3. Fig. 8 shows that the wave profiles for both types of SBs are similar, and the entire process can be divided into three stages: propagation (black solid lines), interaction (blue solid lines) and run-up (green solid lines). In the propagation stage, the solitary wave propagates at a constant water depth, and the wave profiles are almost stable, with h/d ¼ 0.3. This also validates the effectiveness of the present model. At t’ ¼ 19.81, the interaction between the solitary wave and the SB starts. At t’ ¼ 19.81, an increase in the wave height can be found because of the SB. The wave crest leans forward due to the decrease in water depth. At t’ ¼ 22.29, the solitary wave is directly above the SB. Flow separation occurs, and the solitary wave is separated into two parts: the reflected wave moves backwards, and the transmitted wave goes forward, which can be seen at t’ ¼ 25.26. Generally, in the interaction stage, the solitary wave height increases first and then decreases and then increases again. With time, the wave propagates beyond the SB and towards the slope, and the run-up stage occurs. Finally, the wave profile on the slope can be found at t’ ¼ 38.63 (red solid lines); at this point, there are no clear distinctions between the results of the two SBs. It is worth indicating that, although wave breaking can be found in Fig. 8, the wave height at the moment of t’ ¼ 25.26 is larger than that at t’ ¼ 12.38, which may be the reason why the unconventional run-up occurs. The whole processes of the 20-degree cases show a very similar tendency, as illustrated in Fig. 9. 4.3. Submerged depth analysis It has been widely accepted that the submerged depth D* plays a crucial role in reducing the run-up. Fig. 10 shows the wave profiles during the interaction stage for the rectangular-shaped SB with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 and several different values of D*. From the top to the bottom of Fig. 10, in the interaction stage, the solitary wave height first increases when propagating near the left surface of the SB; then, wave separation occurs, accompanied by a decreased wave height, after which the wave height reaches peak value. At t’ ¼ 19.81, the solitary wave begins to interact with the SB, and the wave crest is uplifted. Generally, a greater submerged depth D* correlates with a higher uplift. When D* ¼ 0.6, the wave profile during the interaction stage is similar to that during the propagation stage. However, when D* ¼ 0.9, the wave height becomes much higher in the interaction stage, and the wave crest obviously leans forward. At the moment of t’ ¼ 22.29, the solitary wave separates into two parts: reflected and transmitted waves. The greater the value of D* is, the greater the reflected wave will be and the smaller the transmitted wave will be. At t’ ¼ 25.26, the transmitted wave falls into the lagoon and will start to run up. Interestingly, in the present study, D* ¼ 0.8 is the threshold value at which the solitary wave breaks. When D* is less than 0.8, the wave profile is more stable, and the wave crest becomes greater if D* increases. When D* is equal to or larger than 0.8, the wave surface becomes disordered as wave breaking occurs, and droplet detachment and gas

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 7/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 8. Wave profiles at different moments with D* ¼ 0.8, L* ¼ 1.0 and a ¼ 10 .

Fig. 9. Wave profiles at different moments with D* ¼ 0.8, L* ¼ 1.0 and a ¼ 20 .

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

7

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 8/14

8

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 10. Wave profiles during the interaction stage for a rectangular-shaped SB with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 and several different values of D*.

entrapment are observed as well. Moreover, in a comparison between the cases with D* ¼ 0.7 and 0.8, the wave heights of the two cases are similar, although wave breaking occurs when D* ¼ 0.8. This may be the reason why there are unconventional maximum run-ups in Fig. 7. The wave profile obtained by the case in which D* ¼ 0.9 is so disordered that even some bubbles could be observed; in other words, most of the wave energy is dissipated by the SB, so the final run-up with D* ¼ 0.9 is much smaller than those with lower D* values. The wave profiles during the interaction stage for the triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 and several different D* values are presented in Fig. 11. The wave profiles in Figs. 10 and 11 are very similar to each other. However, there is a slight difference in the vicinity of x ¼ 6.0 m at t’ ¼ 25.26. The wave profiles of the rectangular SB show a wave trough at that position, but this phenomenon is eliminated when the triangular saw-toothshaped SB is used. The phenomenon mentioned above is very likely due to the existence of the saw-tooth-shaped SB because this structure is the only difference between the two scenarios. To capture a clear view of the function of the saw-tooth-shaped SB, the velocity vectors and pressure fields for the cases with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 , D* ¼ 0.8 are shown in Fig. 12. For the rectangular SB, two vortexes are formed

after the propagation of the solitary wave. The first vortex is generated to the top left of the SB, and the other is formed in the vicinity of the leeside of the SB, which is similar to the phenomenon shown in Fig. 4. Correspondingly, the pressure near the vortex is smaller than that elsewhere. Fig. 12 indicates that the geometry of the SB has little influence on the vortex in the vicinity of the leeside of the SB. However, the vortex to the top left of the SB is seriously affected by the geometry of the SB surface. For the triangular sawtooth-shaped SB, the flow enters the gaps between the saw-toothshaped triangles and forms small vortexes. The vortex in the second gap at the top left of the SB, which is also the place where the first vortex forms for the rectangular SB, is larger than those in the other gaps. As a result, the free surface of the reflected wave for the triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB is calmer than that for the rectangular SB. The results of additional cases show analogous trends and will not be repeated here. 4.4. Lagoon length and slope analysis The lagoon length and the beach slope are two other factors that affect the maximum run-up of solitary waves. The influences of these two factors will be described in this subsection. Cases with

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 9/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 11. Wave profiles during the interaction stage for a triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 and several different values of D*.

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

9

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 10/14

10

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 12. Velocity vectors and pressure fields for the cases with L* ¼ 1.0, a ¼ 10 , and D* ¼ 0.8.

D* ¼ 0.7 are selected here to prevent wave breaking from occurring, thus enabling clear wave profiles to be observed. Moreover, only the results simulated by the triangular saw-tooth-shaped SB are listed in this subsection because the wave profiles obtained by the two types of SBs are very similar to each other. The wave profiles for different lagoon lengths L* and beach slopes a are visualized in Fig. 13 and Fig. 14. As indicated previously, in the interaction stage, the evolution of wave height variation is similar to that summarized in Section 4.3 with an initial peak, followed by a valley and second peak. Upon leaving the interaction stage, the wave profile is likely to become unstable because of wave breaking and a change in the water depth. As shown in Figs. 13 and 14, a larger value of L* provides a better opportunity for the dissipation of the transmitted wave. In other words, the transmitted wave will start to run up as soon as it passes the SB if L* is equal to or less than 1.0, which is not beneficial for reducing the run-up. To validate this result, the fields of the x-axis velocity component Ux at the moment when the wave crest arrives at the slope are illustrated in Fig. 15. It is obvious that the value of Ux pertaining to the wave crest decreases with increasing lagoon length. Comparing Figs. 13 and 14, we find that for a solitary wave at a given moment, a steeper beach slope results in a larger run-up. For example, when t’ ¼ 34.67, the run-ups on a 20-degree slope are much larger than those on a 10-degree slope. Physically, this is not difficult to understand because a larger slope means a larger displacement in the z-axis direction when the x-axis direction displacement is identical. As a result, the maximum run-up time of a 20-degree slope is smaller than that of a 10-degree slope, which means less time for the wave energy to dissipate. Notably, the effect of the beach slope in the present study is not very significant.

5. Conclusions In the present study, a numerical model is established and used to simulate the run-up of a solitary wave after propagating over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater. The submerged depth, lagoon length and beach slope are selected as the independent variables, and the maximum run-up of a solitary wave on an impermeable slope is measured. The free surface motions and velocity fields of the solitary wave interacting with the submerged breakwater are presented and discussed. The conclusions are listed as follows: 1. The whole process of the solitary wave interacting with the SB is presented and divided into three stages: propagation, interaction and run-up. The interaction stage has a vital influence on the run-up reduction. Under the same conditions, an SB with a rougher upper surface (i.e., the triangular saw-tooth-shaped surface) seems to hardly have a better influence on the run-up reduction than an SB with a smoother upper surface. However, the rougher upper surface results in a calmer reflected wave profile, which may be favorable for the anchoring stability of ships in the nearshore region. 2. The dimensionless submerged depth D* plays a significant role in reducing the run-up. In the present study, for a solitary wave with strong nonlinearity, when D* is equal to or larger than 0.8, wave breaking occurs, and the run-up decreases considerably. The dimensionless lagoon length L* is another important factor that affects the maximum run-up because the x-axis velocity component decreases rapidly in the lagoon. Conversely, a shorter lagoon length may increase the run-up. The beach slope

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 11/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

11

Fig. 13. Wave profiles for different lagoon lengths L* (a ¼ 10 ).

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 12/14

12

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 14. Wave profiles for different lagoon lengths L* (a ¼ 20 ).

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 13/14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

13

Fig. 15. Fields of the x-axis velocity component at the moment when the wave crest arrives at the slope.

somewhat affects the maximum run-up. In the present paper, run-ups simulated on a 20-degree slope are larger than those simulated on a 10-degree slope. However, the difference is not significant. 3. The results of this study are expected to be useful for coastal engineers in preliminary feasibility studies and for the conceptual design of triangular saw-tooth-shaped SBs. Regarding SB

design, to obtain a smaller run-up, a greater submerged depth D* (greater than 0.8 if possible), a longer lagoon length L* (greater than 2.0) and a smaller beach slope a (10e20 ) are recommended. Moreover, it is obvious that there must be an optimum solution for the relationship between the submerged depth and the lagoon length because a longer lagoon always leads to deeper water conditions and, consequently, higher SB

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

IJNAOE290_proof ■ 27 November 2019 ■ 14/14

14

J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering xxx (xxxx) xxx

costs. Further research is needed to find this optimum solution according to the realistic conditions of different coastal regions. Declaration of competing interest We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connection with the work submitted. Acknowledgements The study was supported by the NSFC-Shandong Joint Fund Project (U1706226) and the Natural Science Foundation of China (51779236, 51809053, 51709140). References Carevic, D., Loncar, G., Prsic, M., 2013. Wave parameters after smooth submerged breakwater. Coast. Eng. 79, 32e41. Chan, I., Liu, P.L.F., 2012. On the runup of long waves on a plane beach. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans 117 (C8). Chang, K., Hsu, T., Liu, P.L.F., 2001. Vortex generation and evolution in water waves propagating over a submerged rectangular obstacle: Part I. solitary waves. Coast. Eng. 44 (1), 13e36. Chen, L., Ning, D., Teng, B., Zhao, M., 2017. Numerical and experimental investigation of nonlinear wave-current propagation over a submerged breakwater. J. Eng. Mech. 143 (9), 04017061. Christou, M., Swan, C., Gudmestad, O.T., 2008. The interaction of surface water waves with submerged breakwaters. Coast. Eng. 55 (12), 945e958. Feng, X., Yin, B., Gao, S., Wang, P., Bai, T., Yang, D., 2017. Assessment of tsunami hazard for coastal areas of Shandong Province, China. Appl. Ocean Res. 62, 37e48. Goseberg, N., Wurpts, A., Schlurmann, T., 2013. Laboratory-scale generation of tsunami and long waves. Coast. Eng. 79, 57e74. Hirt, C.W., Nichols, B.D., 1981. Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J. Comput. Phys. 39 (1), 201e225. Hsiao, S., Lin, T., 2010. Tsunami-like solitary waves impinging and overtopping an impermeable seawall: experiment and RANS modeling. Coast. Eng. 57 (1), 1e18. Irtem, E., Seyfioglu, E., Kabdasli, S., 2011. Experimental investigation on the effects of submerged breakwaters on tsunami run-up height. J. Coast. Res. 64 (s), 516e520. Ji, Q., Dong, S., Luo, X., Guedes Soares, C., 2017. Wave transformation over submerged breakwaters by the constrained interpolation profile method. Ocean Eng. 136, 294e303. Jiang, X., Zou, Q., Zhang, N., 2017. Wave load on submerged quarter-circular and semicircular breakwaters under irregular waves. Coast. Eng. 121, 265e277. Kasem, T.H.M.A., Sasaki, J., 2010. Multiphase modeling of wave propagation over

submerged obstacles using Weno and level set methods. Coast Eng. J. 52 (3), 235e259. Li, M., Zhao, X., Ye, Z., Lin, W., Chen, Y., 2018. Generation of regular and focused waves by using an internal wave maker in a CIP-based model. Ocean Eng. 167, 334e347. €ffer, H.A., 2008. On the solitary wave paradigm for Madsen, P.A., Fuhrman, D.R., Scha tsunamis. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans 113 (C12). Menter, F.R., 1994. Two-equation Eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J. 32 (8), 1598e1605. Qu, K., Ren, X.Y., Kraatz, S., 2017. Numerical investigation of tsunami-like wave hydrodynamic characteristics and its comparison with solitary wave. Appl. Ocean Res. 63, 36e48. Qu, K., Tang, H.S., Agrawal, A., Cai, Y., Jiang, C.B., 2018. Numerical investigation of hydrodynamic load on bridge deck under joint action of solitary wave and current. Appl. Ocean Res. 75, 100e116. Rambabu, A.C., Mani, J.S., 2005. Numerical prediction of performance of submerged breakwaters. Ocean Eng. 32 (10), 1235e1246. Schimmels, S., Sriram, V., Didenkulova, I., 2016. Tsunami generation in a large scale experimental facility. Coast. Eng. 110, 32e41. Shing, T.K.C., 2014. Experimental Study on the Effect of Submerged Breakwater Configuration on Long Wave Run-Up Reduction. The University of Hawaii, Hawaii. Silva, R., Losada, I.J., Losada, M.A., 2000. Reflection and transmission of tsunami waves by coastal structures. Appl. Ocean Res. 22, 215e223. Sriram, V., Didenkulova, I., Sergeeva, A., Schimmels, S., 2016. Tsunami evolution and run-up in a large scale experimental facility. Coast. Eng. 111, 1e12. Synolakis, C.E., 1987. The runup of solitary waves. J. Fluid Mech. 185, 523e545. Wang, D., Sun, J., Gui, J., Ma, Z., Fang, K., 2018a. Numerical simulation of solitary wave transformation over reef profile based on InterDyMFoam. Ocean Eng. 36 (2), 47e55. Wang, D., Dong, S., Sun, J., 2019a. Numerical modeling of the interactions between waves and a Jarlan-type caisson breakwater using OpenFOAM. Ocean Eng. 188, 106230. Wang, D., Sun, J., Gui, J., et al., 2019b. A numerical piston-type wave-maker toolbox for the open-source library OpenFOAM. J. Hydrodyn. 31, 800. Wang, J., He, G., You, R., Liu, P., 2018b. Numerical study on interaction of a solitary wave with the submerged obstacle. Ocean Eng. 158, 1e14. Williams, I.A., Fuhrman, D.R., 2016. Numerical simulation of tsunami-scale wave boundary layers. Coast. Eng. 110, 17e31. Wu, Y.T., Hsiao, S.C., Huang, Z.C., Hwang, K.S., 2012. Propagation of solitary waves over a bottom-mounted barrier. Coast. Eng. 62, 31e47. Yao, Y., Tang, Z., Jiang, C., He, W., Liu, Z., 2018. Boussinesq modeling of solitary wave run-up reduction by emergent vegetation on a sloping beach. J. Hydro-Environ. Res. 19, 78e87. Young, D.M., Testik, F.Y., 2011. Wave reflection by submerged vertical and semicircular breakwaters. Ocean Eng. 38 (10), 1269e1276. Zhang, N., Zhang, Q., Zou, G., Jiang, X., 2016. Estimation of the transmission coefficients of wave height and period after smooth submerged breakwater using a non-hydrostatic wave model. Ocean Eng. 122, 202e214. Zhuang, F., Lee, J., 1996. A viscous rotational model for wave overtopping over marine structure. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Coastal Engineering. ASCE, Orlando, Florida.

Please cite this article as: Sun, J et al., Numerical study of the run-up of a solitary wave after propagation over a saw-tooth-shaped submerged breakwater, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2019.11.002

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86