Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 3;2:9. doi: 10.1038/s44172-023-00058-3

Table 2.

Results from the flume tests used to compare overtopping discharge rate as measured by WireWall and predicted by Bayonet GPE.

Tanks T WireWall W Bayonet GPE
Test WL m ODN Hm0,t m Tp,t s q, l s−1 m−1 no. q, l s−1 m−1 no. q l s−1 m−1 −1 s.d. +1 s.d.
WC01** 5.87 0.87 6.27 14.2 ± 2.1 5 14.0 ± 1.4 2 13.4 4.0 148
WC06 6.17 0.91 5.72 27.2 ± 2.3 2 - 71.8 14.4 1794
WC07 6.17 0.94 6.6 34.1 ± 4.5 4 28.3 ± 3.8 2 96.1 16.2 3382
WC12 4.98 0.87 6.27 0.4 1 - 0.3 0.1 6
WC13 5.33 0.87 6.27 1.5 1 - 0.5 0.1 10
WC14 5.80 0.83 6.42 9.1 ± 0.3 2 - 7.6 2.1 101
WC15** 5.62 0.8 7.65 8.4 ± 0.8 6 9.1 ± 1.6 4 3.1 0.6 89

The water levels (WL), significant wave heights (Hm0,t), wave peak periods (Tp,t) and discharge rates (q) are real-world values, i.e. scaled up from the flume values. Wave heights and periods are those at the toe of the structure, as indicated by “t” in the parameter names. The number of repeat runs for which tank (T no.) and/or WireWall (W no.) data were collected are provided. Tank data are the mean of all data available (from the HRW partitioned tank and/or one or more of the three large NOC tanks). WireWall values are averages from both units. Mean and + /− s.d. are given for discharge rates.

** indicates conditions that were also simulated when doing many short (~10 min) incomplete runs to avoid the use of pumps.