A fully non-linear numerical wave tank (NWT), based on Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), provides a useful tool for the analysis of coastal and offshore engineering problems. To generate and absorb free surface waves within a NWT, a variety of numerical wave maker (NWM) methodologies have been suggested in the literature. Therefore, when setting up a CFD-based NWT, the user is faced with the task of selecting the most appropriate NWM, which should be driven by a rigorous assessment of the available methods. To provide a consistent framework for the quantitative assessment of different NWMs, this paper presents a suite of metrics and methodologies, considering three key performance parameters: accuracy, computational requirements and available features. An illustrative example is presented to exemplify the proposed evaluation metrics, applied to the main NWMs available for the open source CFD software, OpenFOAM. The considered NWMs are found to reproduce waves with an accuracy comparable to real wave makers in physical wave tank experiments. However, the paper shows that significant differences are found between the various NWMs, and no single method performed best in all aspects of the assessment across the different test cases.

The computational fluid dynamic (CFD) toolbox OpenFOAM is used to assess the applicability of Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) solvers to the simulation of oscillating wave surge converters (OWSC) in significant waves. Simulation of these flap type devices requires the solution of the equations of motion and the representation of the OWSC׳s motion in a moving mesh. A new way to simulate the sea floor inside a section of the moving mesh with a moving dissipation zone is presented. To assess the accuracy of the new solver, experiments are conducted in regular and irregular wave traces for a full three dimensional model. Results for acceleration and flow features are presented for numerical and experimental data. It is found that the new numerical model reproduces experimental results within the bounds of experimental accuracy

Coastal boulder deposits (CBD), transported by waves at elevations above sea level and substantial distances inland, are markers for marine incursions. Whether they are tsunami or storm deposits can be difficult to determine, but this is of critical importance because of the role that CBD play in coastal hazard analysis. Equations from seminal work by Nott (1997), here referred to as the Nott Approach, are commonly employed to calculate nominal wave heights from boulder masses as a means to discriminate between emplacement mechanisms. Systematic review shows that this approach is based on assumptions that are not securely founded and that direct relationships cannot be established between boulder measurements and wave heights. A test using an unprecedented dataset of boulders moved by storm waves (with associated sea-state data) shows a lack of agreement between calculations and actual wave heights. The equations return unrealistically large heights, many of which greatly exceed sea states occurring during the boulder-moving storms. This underscores the finding that Nott-Approach wave-height calculations are unreliable. The result is general, because although the field data come from one region (the Aran Islands, Ireland), they represent a wide range of boulder masses and topographic settings and present a valid test of hydrodynamic equations. This analysis demonstrates that Nott Approach equations are incapable of distinguishing storm waves from tsunami transport and that wave heights hindcast from boulder masses are not meaningful. Current hydrodynamic understanding does not permit reliable computation of wave height from boulder measurements. A combination of field, numerical, and experimental approaches is required to quantify relationships between wave power and mass transport onshore. Many CBD interpreted as tsunami deposits based on Nott-Approach analysis may in fact have been emplaced during storms and should therefore be re-evaluated. This is especially important for CBD that have been incorporated into long-term coastal risk assessments, which are compromised if the CBD are misinterpreted. CBD dynamics can be better determined from a combination of detailed field measurements, modeling, and experiments. A clearer understanding of emplacement mechanisms will result in more reliable hazard analysis.