Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 8 of 8 items for :
- Author or Editor: R. T. Guza x
- Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology x
- Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Abstract
Surveys of the subaerial beach (e.g., landward of approximately the MSL depth contour) are widely used to evaluate temporal changes in sand levels over large alongshore reaches. Here, seasonal beach face volume changes based on full bathymetry beach profiles (to ~8 m in depth) are compared with estimates based on the subaerial section of the profile. The profiles span 15 years and 75 km of Southern California shoreline, where seasonal vertical fluctuations in near-shore sand levels of a few meters are common. In years with relatively low winter wave energy, most erosion occurs above the MSL contour, and subaerial surveys capture as much as 0.8 of the total (relatively small) seasonal beach face volume change. In response to more energetic winter waves, beach face erosion increases and occurs as deep as 3 m below MSL, and subaerial surveys capture as little as 0.2 of the total beach face volume change. Patchy, erosion-resistant rock and cobble layers contribute to alongshore variation of the subaerial fraction of beach face volume change.
Abstract
Surveys of the subaerial beach (e.g., landward of approximately the MSL depth contour) are widely used to evaluate temporal changes in sand levels over large alongshore reaches. Here, seasonal beach face volume changes based on full bathymetry beach profiles (to ~8 m in depth) are compared with estimates based on the subaerial section of the profile. The profiles span 15 years and 75 km of Southern California shoreline, where seasonal vertical fluctuations in near-shore sand levels of a few meters are common. In years with relatively low winter wave energy, most erosion occurs above the MSL contour, and subaerial surveys capture as much as 0.8 of the total (relatively small) seasonal beach face volume change. In response to more energetic winter waves, beach face erosion increases and occurs as deep as 3 m below MSL, and subaerial surveys capture as little as 0.2 of the total beach face volume change. Patchy, erosion-resistant rock and cobble layers contribute to alongshore variation of the subaerial fraction of beach face volume change.
Abstract
Statistics of the nearshore velocity field in the wind–wave frequency band estimated from acoustic Doppler, acoustic travel time, and electromagnetic current meters are similar. Specifically, current meters deployed 25–100 cm above the seafloor in 75–275-cm water depth in conditions that ranged from small-amplitude unbroken waves to bores in the inner surf zone produced similar estimates of cross-shore velocity spectra, total horizontal and vertical velocity variance, mean currents, mean wave direction, directional spread, and cross-shore velocity skewness and asymmetry. Estimates of seafloor location made with the acoustic Doppler sensors and collocated sonar altimeters differed by less than 5 cm. Deviations from linear theory in the observed relationship between pressure and velocity fluctuations increased with increasing ratio of wave height to water depth. The observed covariance between horizontal and vertical orbital velocities also increased with increasing height to depth ratio, consistent with a vertical flux of cross-shore momentum associated with wave dissipation in the surf zone.
Abstract
Statistics of the nearshore velocity field in the wind–wave frequency band estimated from acoustic Doppler, acoustic travel time, and electromagnetic current meters are similar. Specifically, current meters deployed 25–100 cm above the seafloor in 75–275-cm water depth in conditions that ranged from small-amplitude unbroken waves to bores in the inner surf zone produced similar estimates of cross-shore velocity spectra, total horizontal and vertical velocity variance, mean currents, mean wave direction, directional spread, and cross-shore velocity skewness and asymmetry. Estimates of seafloor location made with the acoustic Doppler sensors and collocated sonar altimeters differed by less than 5 cm. Deviations from linear theory in the observed relationship between pressure and velocity fluctuations increased with increasing ratio of wave height to water depth. The observed covariance between horizontal and vertical orbital velocities also increased with increasing height to depth ratio, consistent with a vertical flux of cross-shore momentum associated with wave dissipation in the surf zone.
Abstract
Airborne light detecting and ranging (lidar) systems can survey hundreds of kilometers of shoreline with high spatial resolution (several elevation estimates per square meter). Sequential surveys yield spatial change maps of beach and dune sand levels. However, lidar data include elevations of the exposed, subaerial beach and, seaward of the waterline, the ocean surface. Here, a simple method is developed to find the waterline and eliminate returns from the ocean surface. A vertical elevation cutoff is used, with the waterline elevation (W) above the known tide level because of the superelevation from wave setup and runup. During each lidar pass, the elevation cutoff (W) is assumed proportional (C) to the offshore significant wave height Hs. Comparison of in situ and lidar surveys on a moderately sloped, dissipative California beach yields C ≈ 0.4, which is qualitatively consistent with existing observations of runup and setup. The calibrated method rejects ocean surface data, while retaining subaerial beach points more than 70 m seaward of the mean high waterline, which is often used as a conservative default waterline.
Abstract
Airborne light detecting and ranging (lidar) systems can survey hundreds of kilometers of shoreline with high spatial resolution (several elevation estimates per square meter). Sequential surveys yield spatial change maps of beach and dune sand levels. However, lidar data include elevations of the exposed, subaerial beach and, seaward of the waterline, the ocean surface. Here, a simple method is developed to find the waterline and eliminate returns from the ocean surface. A vertical elevation cutoff is used, with the waterline elevation (W) above the known tide level because of the superelevation from wave setup and runup. During each lidar pass, the elevation cutoff (W) is assumed proportional (C) to the offshore significant wave height Hs. Comparison of in situ and lidar surveys on a moderately sloped, dissipative California beach yields C ≈ 0.4, which is qualitatively consistent with existing observations of runup and setup. The calibrated method rejects ocean surface data, while retaining subaerial beach points more than 70 m seaward of the mean high waterline, which is often used as a conservative default waterline.
Abstract
The performance of the Datawell Directional Waverider and the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) 3-m discus buoy, widely used to measure the directional properties of surface gravity waves, are evaluated through comparisons to an array of six pressure transducers mounted 14 m below the sea surface on a platform in 200-m depth. Each buoy was deployed for several months within a few kilometers of the platform. The accuracy of the platform ground-truth array was verified by close agreement of wavenumber estimates with the theoretical linear dispersion relation for surface gravity waves. Buoy and array estimates of wave energy and directional parameters, based on integration of the directional moments across the frequency band of energetic swell (0.06–0.14 Hz), are compared for a wide range of wave conditions. Wave energy and mean propagation direction estimates from both buoys agree well with the platform results. However, the Datawell buoy provides significantly better estimates of directional spread and skewness than the NDBC buoy.
Abstract
The performance of the Datawell Directional Waverider and the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) 3-m discus buoy, widely used to measure the directional properties of surface gravity waves, are evaluated through comparisons to an array of six pressure transducers mounted 14 m below the sea surface on a platform in 200-m depth. Each buoy was deployed for several months within a few kilometers of the platform. The accuracy of the platform ground-truth array was verified by close agreement of wavenumber estimates with the theoretical linear dispersion relation for surface gravity waves. Buoy and array estimates of wave energy and directional parameters, based on integration of the directional moments across the frequency band of energetic swell (0.06–0.14 Hz), are compared for a wide range of wave conditions. Wave energy and mean propagation direction estimates from both buoys agree well with the platform results. However, the Datawell buoy provides significantly better estimates of directional spread and skewness than the NDBC buoy.
Abstract
Shear waves (instabilities of the breaking wave–driven mean alongshore current) and gravity waves both contribute substantial velocity fluctuations to nearshore infragravity motions (periods of a few minutes). Three existing methods of estimating the shear wave contribution to the infragravity velocity variance are compared using extensive field observations. The iterative maximum likelihood estimator (IMLE) and the direct estimator (DE) methods use an alongshore array of current meters, and ascribe all the velocity variance at non–gravity wavenumbers to shear waves. The ratio (R) method uses a collocated pressure gauge and current meter, and assumes that shear wave pressure fluctuations are small, and that the kinetic and potential energies of gravity waves are equal. The shear wave velocity variance 〈
Abstract
Shear waves (instabilities of the breaking wave–driven mean alongshore current) and gravity waves both contribute substantial velocity fluctuations to nearshore infragravity motions (periods of a few minutes). Three existing methods of estimating the shear wave contribution to the infragravity velocity variance are compared using extensive field observations. The iterative maximum likelihood estimator (IMLE) and the direct estimator (DE) methods use an alongshore array of current meters, and ascribe all the velocity variance at non–gravity wavenumbers to shear waves. The ratio (R) method uses a collocated pressure gauge and current meter, and assumes that shear wave pressure fluctuations are small, and that the kinetic and potential energies of gravity waves are equal. The shear wave velocity variance 〈
Regional Swell Transformation by Backward Ray Tracing and SWANAbstract
Beach erosion and wave-induced flooding models are often initialized in O(10)-m depth, seaward of the surfzone, with wave conditions estimated from regional nonlinear spectral wave models [e.g., Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN)]. These models are computationally expensive for high-resolution, long-term regional O(100)-km hindcasts, and they limit examination of the effect of different climate scenarios on nearshore processes. Alternatively, computationally fast models with reduced linear wave physics enable long-term hindcasts at high spatial (<100 m) resolution. Linear models, that efficiently transform complete spectral details from deep water through complex offshore bathymetry, are appropriate for low-frequency swell wave energy propagation. Here, two numerically different linear methods are compared: backward ray-tracing and stationary linear SWAN simulations. The methods yield similar transformations from deep water (seaward of offshore islands in Southern California) to the nearshore, O(10)-m depth. However, SWAN is sensitive to model spatial resolution, especially in highly sheltered regions, where with typical (1–2 km) resolution SWAN estimates of nearshore energy vary by over a factor of 2 relative to ray tracing. Alongshore radiation stress estimates from SWAN and ray tracing also differ, and in some cases the climatological means have opposite signs. Increasing the SWAN resolution to 90 m, higher than usually applied to regional models, yields the nearshore transforms most similar to ray tracing. Both accurate rays and high-resolution SWAN require significant computation time; however, ray tracing is more efficient if transforms are needed at relatively few locations (compared with every grid point), or if computer memory is limited. Though presently less user friendly than SWAN, ray tracing is not affected by numerical diffusion or limited by model domain size or spatial resolution.
Abstract
Beach erosion and wave-induced flooding models are often initialized in O(10)-m depth, seaward of the surfzone, with wave conditions estimated from regional nonlinear spectral wave models [e.g., Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN)]. These models are computationally expensive for high-resolution, long-term regional O(100)-km hindcasts, and they limit examination of the effect of different climate scenarios on nearshore processes. Alternatively, computationally fast models with reduced linear wave physics enable long-term hindcasts at high spatial (<100 m) resolution. Linear models, that efficiently transform complete spectral details from deep water through complex offshore bathymetry, are appropriate for low-frequency swell wave energy propagation. Here, two numerically different linear methods are compared: backward ray-tracing and stationary linear SWAN simulations. The methods yield similar transformations from deep water (seaward of offshore islands in Southern California) to the nearshore, O(10)-m depth. However, SWAN is sensitive to model spatial resolution, especially in highly sheltered regions, where with typical (1–2 km) resolution SWAN estimates of nearshore energy vary by over a factor of 2 relative to ray tracing. Alongshore radiation stress estimates from SWAN and ray tracing also differ, and in some cases the climatological means have opposite signs. Increasing the SWAN resolution to 90 m, higher than usually applied to regional models, yields the nearshore transforms most similar to ray tracing. Both accurate rays and high-resolution SWAN require significant computation time; however, ray tracing is more efficient if transforms are needed at relatively few locations (compared with every grid point), or if computer memory is limited. Though presently less user friendly than SWAN, ray tracing is not affected by numerical diffusion or limited by model domain size or spatial resolution.
Abstract
Aerial images are used to quantify the concentration of fluorescent Rhodamine water tracing (WT) dye in turbid and optically deep water. Tracer releases near the shoreline of an ocean beach and near a tidal inlet were observed with a two-band multispectral camera and a pushbroom hyperspectral imager, respectively. The aerial observations are compared with near-surface in situ measurements. The ratio of upwelling radiance near the Rhodamine WT excitation and emission peaks varies linearly with the in situ dye concentrations for concentrations <20 ppb (r 2 = 0.70 and r 2 = 0.85–0.88 at the beach and inlet, respectively). The linear relationship allows for relative tracer concentration estimates without in situ calibration. The O(1 m) image pixels resolve complex flow structures on the inner shelf that transport and mix tracer.
Abstract
Aerial images are used to quantify the concentration of fluorescent Rhodamine water tracing (WT) dye in turbid and optically deep water. Tracer releases near the shoreline of an ocean beach and near a tidal inlet were observed with a two-band multispectral camera and a pushbroom hyperspectral imager, respectively. The aerial observations are compared with near-surface in situ measurements. The ratio of upwelling radiance near the Rhodamine WT excitation and emission peaks varies linearly with the in situ dye concentrations for concentrations <20 ppb (r 2 = 0.70 and r 2 = 0.85–0.88 at the beach and inlet, respectively). The linear relationship allows for relative tracer concentration estimates without in situ calibration. The O(1 m) image pixels resolve complex flow structures on the inner shelf that transport and mix tracer.
Abstract
A drifter designed to measure surf zone circulation has been developed and field tested. Drifter positions accurate to within a few meters are estimated in real time at 0.1 Hz using the global positioning system (GPS) and a shore-to-drifter radio link. More accurate positions are estimated at 1 Hz from postprocessed, internally logged data. Mean alongshore currents estimated from trajectories of the 0.5-m-draft drifters in 1–2-m water depth agree well with measurements obtained with nearby, bottom-mounted, acoustic current meters. Drifters deployed near the base of a well-developed rip current often followed eddylike paths within the surf zone before being transported seaward.
Abstract
A drifter designed to measure surf zone circulation has been developed and field tested. Drifter positions accurate to within a few meters are estimated in real time at 0.1 Hz using the global positioning system (GPS) and a shore-to-drifter radio link. More accurate positions are estimated at 1 Hz from postprocessed, internally logged data. Mean alongshore currents estimated from trajectories of the 0.5-m-draft drifters in 1–2-m water depth agree well with measurements obtained with nearby, bottom-mounted, acoustic current meters. Drifters deployed near the base of a well-developed rip current often followed eddylike paths within the surf zone before being transported seaward.
