2014
DOI: 10.2112/si70-049.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applicability of video-derived bathymetry estimates to nearshore current model predictions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Video-based cBathy bathymetry estimates have been compared with vessel-based bathymetry surveys for a range of beaches (Table 1), but rarely with waves bigger than 1.7 m, and never for waves bigger than 2.0 m because of the difficulty of performing in-situ surveys in the presence of large waves. Root mean square differences between cBathy-estimated and surveyed seafloor elevations in previous studies range between 0.51 and 2.05 m (Table 1, Rutten et al, 2017;Radermacher et al, 2014;Holman and Stanley, 2013;Wengrove and Henriquez, 2013;Bergsma et al, 2016)). Errors frequently are largest in shallow water near the shoreline, where (1) linear theory may not be valid; (2) the rapid cross-shore depth changes (over a cBathy sample domain or smoothing distance) cannot be resolved; and (3) wave speed estimates can be distorted by wave runup.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Video-based cBathy bathymetry estimates have been compared with vessel-based bathymetry surveys for a range of beaches (Table 1), but rarely with waves bigger than 1.7 m, and never for waves bigger than 2.0 m because of the difficulty of performing in-situ surveys in the presence of large waves. Root mean square differences between cBathy-estimated and surveyed seafloor elevations in previous studies range between 0.51 and 2.05 m (Table 1, Rutten et al, 2017;Radermacher et al, 2014;Holman and Stanley, 2013;Wengrove and Henriquez, 2013;Bergsma et al, 2016)). Errors frequently are largest in shallow water near the shoreline, where (1) linear theory may not be valid; (2) the rapid cross-shore depth changes (over a cBathy sample domain or smoothing distance) cannot be resolved; and (3) wave speed estimates can be distorted by wave runup.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Although in development for more than 20 years, remote sensing methods rarely have been used in applied coastal engineering projects to quantify surfzone bathymetry, and initial tests to calculate surfzone sediment volumes have poor skill (Rutten et al, 2017). A potential application is to use the data as boundary conditions for numerical models of surfzone processes (Radermacher et al, 2014;Díaz M endez et al, 2015;Smith et al, 2017). For example, using remotely sensed data to estimate the position of the sandbar in a surfzone bathymetric grid significantly increases the fidelity of numerical simulations of surfzone circulation (Holman et al, 2014;Wilson et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Timeseries of water depth estimates on a 20 Â 10 m analysis grid (alongshore x cross-shore spacing) are then fed into a Kalman filter (Kalman, 1960) in order to reduce noise and make the depth estimates more robust. Applications of the cBathy algorithm to Argus imagery at various field sites and under a range of environmental conditions have demonstrated its capability to resolve nearshore bathymetry with a bulk root-mean-squared error of approximately 50 cm Wengrove et al, 2013;Radermacher et al, 2014;Sembiring et al, 2015;Bergsma et al, 2016;Rutten et al, 2017). Depth estimates were obtained every four hours during daytime since installation of the camera tower in 2013, with the exception of several periods of down-time ( Fig.…”
Section: Remotely-sensed Bathymetrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively, nearshore bathymetry can be estimated operationally using remote sensing techniques. The technical feasibility of coupling remotely-sensed bathymetry to nearshore hydrodynamic predictions was presented by Radermacher et al (2014) and Sembiring et al (2015), successfully demonstrating the potential of this combination. While they report the accuracy of the resulting simulated flow fields at their respective field sites, they do not address the coupling between errors in the remotely-sensed bathymetry and the simulated flow fields.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation