Breaking Wave Kinematics and Resulting Slamming Pressures on a Vertical Column

Stansberg, Carl Trygve; Berget, Kjetil; Graczyk, Mateusz; Muthanna, Chittiappa; Pákozdi, Csaba

doi:10.1115/omae2012-83929

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The high spatial variability of impact induced pressures is by now well recognised, see for example Hofland et al (2010) and Stansberg et al (2012), but the mechanisms of the wave impact on a structure remain largely unknown and thus the distribution of impact pressures unpredictable. Accordingly the capability of the pressure mapping system to provide high resolution maps of the impact induced pressure distribution becomes appealing.…”

Section: Pressure Distribution Mapmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring wave impact induced pressures with a pressure mapping system

Stagonas

Marzeddu

Gironella

et al. 2016

Coastal Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of a pressuremapping system formeasuring wave impact induced pressures is evaluated in this paper. A set-up and a calibrationmethodology are suggested and employed for thiswork. The system is validated against pressure transducer and load cell measurements and for a range of waves breaking on a vertical seawall. For a large number (120 measurements for each case considered) of breaking and broken waves interacting with the wall, the peak pressure (Ppeak) profiles and the pressure distribution maps reported by the system agree wellwith results acquired using pressure transducers. Although the pressuremapping system tends to underestimate Ppeak, differences on themean of the 3, 5 and 10 highest Ppeak rangewithin±10%, while for themajority of the measurements the error on the integral of the acting pressures (the acting force compared with the force measured by the load cell) ranges within ±20%. It is concluded, that through careful calibration and set-up the pressure mapping system has the capacity to provide pressure distribution maps with a good accuracy. It is not, however, considered to constitute the absolute alternative to pressure transducers and thus a combined use is suggested for applications where a very high level of accuracy is required.Postprint (author's final draft

show abstract

Section: Pressure Distribution Mapmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring wave impact induced pressures with a pressure mapping system

Stagonas

Marzeddu

Gironella

et al. 2016

Coastal Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bullock et al, (2007). More recently, Stansberg et al (2012) used a square matrix of control points, featuring 49 sensors (7 x 7) over an area of 119cm 2 and from here showed the strong, vertical and horizontal, variations in the pressure fields induced by waves breaking on a vertical column.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…This approach provided pressure measurements with an unprecedented spatial resolution. Compared with Stansberg et al (2012) the observational mesh increased from 49 measurements over 119cm 2 to 196 measurements over 50.5cm 2 . The PMS has been validated against pressure transducers and load cell data and for a range of waves breaking on a vertical seawall, Stagonas et al (2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Experimental set-up and calibration errors for mapping wave-breaking pressures on marine structures

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Capturing the detailed spatial variation of pressures induced by breaking waves on physical model structures has become possible using a high resolution mapping system. It can provide data with 4 measuring points/cm 2 , whereas the denser pressure measurements reported so far, for wave-structure interaction experiments, were limited to 0.4 pressure transducers/cm 2. The paper explores the main parameters affecting the accuracy and errors of pressure data induced by laboratory setup and system calibration. The quality of pressure maps deteriorates due to cushioning effects associated to air trapped in the sensor during manufacturing. The sensor's response is also shown to depend on the loading conditions. Non-calibrated outputs returned for impact pressures induced by impinging water-jets are more than three times smaller than the outputs recorded for static pressures, and/or for pressures developed when a material less compliant than water comes forcibly in contact with the sensor. Therefore, the calibration settings must be similar to the conditions anticipated in the experiments. To this end, a setup and calibration methodology, designed specifically for hydraulic model tests with waves breaking on structures, are proposed and discussed in the paper.

show abstract

“…In MARINTEK combination in a consistent manner of CFD and model tests has intensively been studied in the last years, e.g. Pakozgi et al 2012, Stansberg et al (2012). Commonly, extreme random wave events identified from numerical simulations or model tests are isolated and modelled by CFD, Stansberg et al (2012), Henning et al (2015.…”

Section: Shipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sea state conditions for marine structures' analysis and model tests

Bitner‐Gregersen

Dong

et al. 2016

Ocean Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study reviews, based on the state-of-the-art findings, some uncertainties associated with wave data and models currently used in design and operation procedures of ship and offshore structures. Although the same basic principles prevail for hydrodynamic loads on ships and offshore structures, actual problems and methods for assessing these loads in the design and operation stage are not the same. Different wave data and models are used for specifying design and operational criteria for these two types of platforms and different uncertainties are related to them. Wave data and models used to define sea state characteristics are discussed and particular attention is given to the associated sources of uncertainties. Some weaknesses of wave input used in design and operational procedures for marine structures are pointed out. Focus is also given on uncertainties related to model tests as tank testing is an important supporting tool for design and operation. Impact of some selected uncertainties on wave description and wave loads is demonstrated by examples. Highlights ► Definitions of uncertainties. ► Establishment of sea state characteristics for marine structures' analysis and model tests. ► Uncertainties associated with sea state characteristics. ► Impact of uncertainties of sea state characteristics on model tests and design and operations of marine structures.

show abstract

Breaking Wave Kinematics and Resulting Slamming Pressures on a Vertical Column

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Measuring wave impact induced pressures with a pressure mapping system

Measuring wave impact induced pressures with a pressure mapping system

Experimental set-up and calibration errors for mapping wave-breaking pressures on marine structures

Sea state conditions for marine structures' analysis and model tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About