The wave motion over a submerged larlan-type breakwater consisting of a perforated front wall and a solid rear wall was investigated analytically and experimentally. An analytical solution was developed using matched ...The wave motion over a submerged larlan-type breakwater consisting of a perforated front wall and a solid rear wall was investigated analytically and experimentally. An analytical solution was developed using matched eigenfunction expansions. The analytical solution was confirmed by previously known solutions for single and double submerged solid vertical plates, a multidomain boundary element method solution, and experimental data. The calculated results by the analytical solution showed that compared with double submerged vertical plates, the submerged Jarlan-type perforated breakwater had better wave-absorbing performance and lower wave forces. For engineering designs, the optimum values of the front wall porosity, relative submerged depth of the breakwater, and relative chamber width between front and rear walls were 0.1-0.2, 0.1-0.2, and 0.3-0.4, respectively. Interchanging the perforated front wall and solid rear wail may have no effect on the transmission coefficient. However, the present breakwater with a seaside perforated wall had a lower reflection coefficient.展开更多
基金The National Natural Science Foundation of China under contract Nos 51322903,51279224 and 51010009
文摘The wave motion over a submerged larlan-type breakwater consisting of a perforated front wall and a solid rear wall was investigated analytically and experimentally. An analytical solution was developed using matched eigenfunction expansions. The analytical solution was confirmed by previously known solutions for single and double submerged solid vertical plates, a multidomain boundary element method solution, and experimental data. The calculated results by the analytical solution showed that compared with double submerged vertical plates, the submerged Jarlan-type perforated breakwater had better wave-absorbing performance and lower wave forces. For engineering designs, the optimum values of the front wall porosity, relative submerged depth of the breakwater, and relative chamber width between front and rear walls were 0.1-0.2, 0.1-0.2, and 0.3-0.4, respectively. Interchanging the perforated front wall and solid rear wail may have no effect on the transmission coefficient. However, the present breakwater with a seaside perforated wall had a lower reflection coefficient.
