Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Excess energy approach for wave energy dissipation at

submerged structures
Umut Trker
Eastern Mediterranean University, Civil Engineering Department, Gazimagusa, 99450, North Cyprus, Turkey

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 3 February 2013
Accepted 22 June 2014

Using the excess energy approach, it is found that the net energy dissipation rate on submerged
structures can be dened in terms of submerged depth, transmission coefcient and transmitted wave
height. In order to generate a denition for the net energy dissipation on submerged structures, the
difference between the wave energy dissipation rates per unit volume at break and the wave energy
dissipation rate during the wave transformation is incorporated. The analytical solution is tested by
laboratory study and the computed solutions are validated with the results of previously published
studies. Based on laboratory results an empirical relationship representing the wave transmission
coefcient is also proposed based on spilling and plunging type of breaks. Both the relations were linear
and were dened in terms of relative submergence parameter and wave steepness parameter. The
dominant effect of plunging type of breaks on wave energy dissipation rates is validated for submerged
structures while smaller effect of spilling type of break is approved. It is shown that the proposed
denition for energy dissipation is robust and accurate, and can easily demonstrate the net energy
dissipation rates at submerged structures.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Energy dissipation
Plunging break
Spilling break
Submerged structure
Transmission coefcient

1. Introduction
Natural or articial submerged structures are generally dened
as a shore detached structures parallel to the shoreline. They are
generally reducing the energy of propagating waves by a compulsorily breaking process. Articial submerged structures are widely
used to develop man-made beach proles by generating sheltered
areas while protecting erosion of coastal areas. Lately, they are also
used to enhance aquatic habitats by causing more stable areas
within the dynamic, unstable coastal environments such as ball
reefs (Armono, 2003).
Knowledge of wave energy dissipation over a submerged
structure, and wave transmission represents a major substantial
practical concern for short and long term changes in coastal
hydrodynamics. Wave energy reduction as the wave passes over
the submerged structure is caused by inducing wave breaking. The
wave height at the offshore side of the structure decreases slightly
due to the energy dissipation and reaches a minimum value at the
near shore edge. A performance characteristic of energy dissipation on submerged structures is previously studied in laboratory
model tests by Ahrens and Fulford (1988) and Kabdal and Trker
(2002). Their tests showed that due to submerged structures 17
50% of the wave energy is dissipating. Gu and Wang (1992)
developed a boundary equation model to simulate the wave
energy dissipation within submerged breakwaters. Ting et al.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.06.030
0029-8018/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

(2004) studied the effects of porosity of submerged structures

on wave energy losses during wave attenuation over the structures. Mendez et al. (2001) formulated the energy dissipation by
breaking on submerged structures in which mass ux, energy ux,
radiation stress and mean water level were analyzed for this
purpose. Tsai et al. (2006) on the other hand worked out a
numerical model based on time dependent mild slope equation
to investigate the wave transformation over the submerged
structures.
There are many studies analyzing wave decay after the wave
breaking phenomena. Usually, these studies are based on two
different approaches. These approaches are mainly differing from
each other by means of their formulization. One of these
approaches is derived for random waves and energy dissipation
relationship is developed based on a turbulent bore which yields
wave heights and set up through the surf zone as in Battjes and
Janssen (1978) and Battjes (1986). The second approach is modeled by Dally et al. (1984), which is originally developed for
monochromatic waves. The model is called excess-energy (EE)
approach. This approach is then modied to simulate transformation of random waves (Kamphuis, 1991) by using a wave-by-wave
approach (Dally, 1992). The model proposed by Dally et al. (1984)
has been veried extensively for a variety of wave conditions,
including laboratory and eld conditions and monochromatic and
random waves.

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

As a result of wave decay on submerged structures, a ratio

between the wave height before and after the wave break can be
dened in terms of the transmissivity property of submerged
structure. The transmissivity is therefore can be dened as a
function of structure's geometric characteristics and wave parameters. The structure transmissivity is generally represented by
the transmission coefcient and hence, this coefcient is a
dimensionless ratio between the wave heights at offshore and
onshore sides of submerged structure.
It is clear from the examination of the literature that among the
geometric characteristics and wave parameters, empirical denition of transmission coefcient is highly dependent upon the
submerged depth and incoming wave height (D'Angremond
et al., 1996; Buccino and Calabrese, 2007). The other signicant
variables in the empirical equations employed to dene transmission coefcient are the crest width, mean armor diameter of the
submerged structure and wave length and period. These variables
are successfully used to investigate the physical effects of submerged structures on coastal dynamics. Ting et al. (2004) considered the role of structure porosity and depicted that the
porosity of the permeable structure reduces the effect of the
transmission coefcient. Rao et al. (2009) conducted physical
model studies in a monochromatic wave ume to evaluate the
wave transmission characteristics of a submerged plate breakwater consisting of a xed plate. Later, the transmission coefcient
on submerged poro-elastic structures were theoretically analyzed
by Lan and Lee (2010), based on linear wave theory.
In this paper, an attempt is made to develop a simple expression to predict the net energy loss at articial submerged structures based on excess energy approach. The modication of the
wave energy ux at the offshore side of the submerged structures
is used in corporation with the energy ux at the nearshore region.
Thus, the net energy dissipation while the wave passes over the
submerged structure is evaluated. The analysis is focused on the
relative importance of wave dissipation and wave transmission at
the structure. The study also includes the analysis of changes in
transmission coefcient in terms of spilling and plunging type of
wave breaks over the submerged structures.

alongshore simplies the Eq. (1) into:

D

K
P cos d P  P s
x
h

The construction purpose of submerged breakwater is to

dissipate the energy of waves by a compulsory break and requires
a detailed experimental and analytical investigation. The general
aim herein, is to adapt an existing wave breaking model to
adequately simulate wave energy dissipation rate on submerged
structures. The approach is based on Dally et al. (1984) model
which is well known as Excess Energy (EE) model. The energy
balance equation for waves advancing directly toward shore is
based on the steady state equation.

P cos P sin Dx; y

x
y

where Dx; y is the energy dissipation rate per unit surface area
due to wave breaking, turbulence, etc., x and y are cross-shore and
longshore coordinates respectively, P is the wave energy ux and
is the angle between the wave orthogonal and bottom contours.
The model assumes that the wave propagates at a gentle slope
such that the breaking starts at the point where the bottom
becomes horizontal. Wave breaking does not stop instantaneously
over the horizontal surface and continue until stable wave height
is attained. Therefore, the rate of wave energy dissipation per unit
of horizontal area D(x,y), used in Eq. (1) is given to be proportional
to the difference between the local wave ux and the stable wave
ux. The assumption that the wave conditions are uniform

Kd is empirical wave decay coefcient and h is mean water depth.

The wave decay coefcient controls the rate of energy dissipation,
whereas the stable energy ux determines the amount of energy
dissipation necessary for stable conditions to occur once breaking
is initiated. Thus stable wave conditions refer to a state in which
the effect of energy dissipation during breaking ceases, allowing
waves to reform. Stable wave height is a function of water depth.
H st h

where H st is the stable wave height and is the stable wave height
coefcient. Dally et al. (1984) recommended K d 0:15 and
0:40. The wave energy ux per unit length of wave crest or,
equivalently, the rate at which wave energy is transmitted across a
plane of unit width perpendicular to the direction of wave
advance, is the product of the wave energy, and the wave group
speed.
P EC g

where E is the wave energy density and Cg is wave group speed.

The wave energy density, which consists of two parts, potential
and kinetic, is given as;
1
E gH 2
8

where is the density of water and H is the wave height. Further,

by using the shallow water wave group speed denition and
rewriting Eq. (4) in terms of wave energy and wave group speed,
the energy ux attained as the wave breaks can be expressed as
follows
1
P wave EC g gH 2i ghb 1=2
8

which is the product of wave energy density and group velocity at

break. The broken waves, after some time recovers itself back to a
stable stage. At this time the net energy ux of the wave is
1
P stable Es C g g h2 gh1=2
8

2. Wave energy dissipation model

195

The difference between the stable wave energy ux and the

energy ux attained as the wave breaks (Pwave Pstable) yields the
net energy ux dissipated on the submerged structure. Considering that the wave breaking phenomenon took place at the same
depth where the wave recovers itself (Dally et al., 1984), the net
energy ux dissipated is the difference between the stable wave
energy ux and energy ux attained as the wave breaks. The net
energy ux can be dened as
1
1=2
2 5=2
P net g 3=2 H 2i h  h 
8

Then, the wave energy dissipation per unit of volume can be

obtained by substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (2) with the assumption
that bottom contours in front of the submerged structure are
parallel and are perpendicular to the structure;
Dnet

1 P
K
1=2
2 5=2
d g 3=2 H 2i h  h 
h x 8h2

where x is the onshore-offshore direction. Wave energy dissipation models have been already used in the literature for sediment
transport analyzes and beach prole predictions (Kriebel et al.,
1991; Hanson, 1992; Larson and Kraus, 1989; Larson et al., 1990). In
most of these studies and in many others (Kriebel and Dean, 1985;
Trker and Kabdasli, 2004; Cho and Kim, 2008) Dnet is dened as
wave energy dissipation per unit volume. However, the unit of the
Eq. (9) is showing that Dnet is actually reecting the wave power

196

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

dissipated per unit volume, which was also dened by Battjes and
Janssen (1978).
The wave decay on submerges structures can be related to the
ratio between the incoming wave height and the transmitted wave
height. After the break occurs the wave decays on the submerged
structure and nally attains its new wave height, Ht. This wave
attenuation can be briey dened by the help of wave transmission coefcient, Kt, where,
Ht
Kt
Hi

10

Finally, the net energy dissipation can be obtained by substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (9) leading to
"
#
p
K
H2
2
Dnet d g 3=2 2 t3=2 
ds
11
8
K d
t

in which ds is the depth of water above the submerged structure

which is relevant to the water depth, h where the wave break and
the wave decay phenomena occurs.

between 6 and 11 cm. Two locations were selected for the wave
gages in order to record wave properties before and after the
submerged structure. Signicant wave heights were determined at
each gage position using zero-up-crossing analysis. The submerged structure was placed at the middle of the ume and was
monitored during the experiments to detect if it deforms under
the effect of wave attacks. Before starting to each experiment, the
location of the structure was checked to ensure similar conditions
for all the experiments. The wave gages were xed in their
assigned positions before the wave maker is turned on to generate
the waves.
The expected breaking of waves over the submerged structure
was observed where the waves were deforming and energy was
dissipating. An equation representing the power dissipated per
unit volume was given in previous chapter in Eq. (11). The results
of the experimental analysis and Eq. (11) can be cooperated in
order to validate the applicability of excess energy approach on
submerged structures.

4. Results and discussion

3. Laboratory experiments
4.1. Dimensional analysis and decision
3.1. Experimental installation
Since the necessary data for a eld-scale submerged structures and
wave interaction was unavailable, the performance of the study was
evaluated by physical testing at laboratory environments. A model was
therefore, constructed by placing armor units into a glass walled
ume, and piling them in the shape of a trapezoid. The ume was
24 m long, 1 m wide and 1 m deep. The up and downstream faces of
submerged structure were constraint by gages in order to record the
wave heights around and over the submerged structure (Fig. 1). The
paddle at one end of the ume, driven by a prescribed constant speed
motor, generated periodic progressive surface waves. The leeward
bottom corner of the submerged structure was 12 m away from the
wave paddle. At the other end of the ume a pile of brick wall was
constructed in order to minimize the interaction of reected waves
during the experiments.
3.2. Experimental conditions and procedures
During the experiments, progressive waves approaching to the
wave breaking zone induce periodic motion. The signicant wave
height of these waves was ranging from 2 cm to 11 cm and the
corresponding wave periods were ranging between 0.6 and 1.1 s.
The results of 20 experiments are given in Table 1. The still water
depth in the ume was 33 cm above the bottom of the ume.
During the experiments, depending on the incident wave heights,
the waves were observed to break in either spilling or plunging
type at the submerged structure. Usually, the waves varying at
27 cm were experiencing spilling type of break whereas plunging
wave break conditions were dominant at wave heights varying in

The ratio of the wave height before the submerged structure to

the wave height after the submerged structure is dened as a
transmission coefcient, Kt. The range of transmission coefcient
is between zero and one, where zero implies no transmission and
one implies complete transmission; no energy loss. The
Table 1
Experimental wave series.
Incoming
wave height
Hi, [cm]

Wave
period,
T [s]

Wave
steepness
[Ho/Lo]

Passing wave Transmission Breaking

height, Ht
coefcient [Ht/ type
Hi]
[cm]

2.07
3.77
6.41
5.74
7.19
7.33
7.88
5.66
5.74
10.3
6.76
7.88
10.77
8.69
6.41
11.2
9.35
12.96
9.01
8.84

1.1
1.1
1.1
0.96
0.96
0.85
0.96
1.1
0.96
1.1
0.85
0.85
0.96
1.1
0.68
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.68
0.68

0.011
0.020
0.034
0.040
0.050
0.065
0.070
0.078
0.040
0.055
0.060
0.070
0.075
0.079
0.089
0.100
0.110
0.115
0.125
0.130

1.76
3.26
5.51
4.68
5.93
5.93
6.11
4.58
3.01
5.39
3.75
3.94
5.92
4.62
3.21
5.6
4.2
6.48
3.51
4.11

0.850
0.865
0.860
0.815
0.825
0.810
0.775
0.810
0.525
0.523
0.555
0.500
0.550
0.532
0.500
0.500
0.450
0.500
0.390
0.465

Fig. 1. The regular wave ume and the experimental installation of equipment. The ume dimensions are 22.5  1  0.5 m.

Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Spilling
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging
Plunging

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

dimensionless transmission coefcient, the ratio of transmitted

wave height Ht [L] to the incident wave height Hi [L], can be
dened as a function of ow properties, uid properties and the
structure properties. The ow properties are still water depth, h[L],
the water depth over the submerged structure known as submerged depth, ds [L], and incident wave period, T [T]. The uid
properties are uid density w [ML  3], gravitational acceleration g
[LT  2], and the dynamic viscosity, [ML  1 T  1], whereas, the
structure properties are the slope of submerged structure, [1],
the porosity of rocks, ns [1], and the crest width of the submerged
structure, B [L]. A functional expression for physical variables can
be summarized as follows;
0
1
B
C
K t f 1 @H i ; H t ; T; ds ; h ; w ; g; ; B; ; ns A
|{z} |{z} |{z}
f low prop:

12

f luid prop: structure prop:

The purpose is to investigate the net energy dissipation rates

while the waves are overtopping the submerged structure. Therefore, the applicability of macro scale simplied model is more
convenient rather than a complex problem while dening the
characteristics of transmission coefcient. The solution of Eq. (12)
is therefore can be achieved by the help of dimensional analysis,
and expressed in Eq. (13)
!
H t ds h B
H
2
Kt f
; ; ; ; ; n; i2 ; 3
13
Hi Hi Hi Hi
gT H i g 2
Several formulas are available to evaluate the transmission
coefcient in terms of the above dimensionless terms. A simple
prediction formula is formerly derived by Van der Meer (1990),
representing the transmission coefcient in terms of relative
submerged parameter.
 
ds
K t 0:46  0:3
14
Hi
Further analysis is performed by D'Angremond et al. (1996) for
exposed and submerged structures and the nal denition is
represented as;
 
   0:31
ds
B
1  exp  0:5C
15
0:3
K t  0:4
Hi
Hi
in which is dimensionless Iribarren number and C is a coefcient
equal to 0.8 for impermeable and 0.64 for permeable structures.
As it is detailed in the experimental conditions and procedures
section, experiments were carried out under constant geometrical
cross-section. Hence the effects of porosity and the slope of
submerged structure are eliminated from the analysis. The rst
four terms in Eq. (13) denes the ratio of incoming wave height to

197

the transmitted wave height, crest freeboard, still water depth and
width of the submerged structure.
The third term, (h/Hi) is the depth parameter that can be also
accepted relatively constant. The still water level was always same
during the experimental studies and its ratio to the incoming wave
height was not physically affecting the wave break and transmission on the submerged structures. The fourth term is dened as
relative crest width, and it is related with the distance over which
wave decay occurs after wave breaking. This term is already
considered in the derivation of wave energy dissipation relation
and its effect can be neglected in order to prevent the duplication
of its effects. During the experiments the width of submerged
structure was also constant. Hence, the contribution of crest width
parameter can be ignored. The last term of Eq. (13) describes the
ratio of the gravitational forces to the viscous forces and is called
the Jeffrey's Number (Jeffreys, 1959). The importance of Jeffrey
Number is dominant in astrogeological problems (O'Keefe and
Adams, 1965) which is not important in submerged structure
analysis. Therefore, the effect of last term in Eq. (13) is also
ignored. On the basis of the above criteria, the following functional
dimensionless parameters can be introduced for the denition of
transmission coefcient Kt,
!
H t H i ds
; 2;
Kt f
16
H i gT H i
Upon analyzing the effect of relative submergence parameter
(ds/Hi) and wave steepness parameter (Hi/gT2) from the experimental observations, their inuence on the wave transmission
coefcient can be provided.
4.2. The effect of relative submergence parameter
The effect of relative submergence parameter on the wave
transmission coefcient is analyzed for submerged structures with
submerged depths of, ds 3 cm and ds 5 cm. With this choice of
ds, the depth parameter varied between 0.35 and 0.6 for plunging
type of breaks and between 0.75 and 0.9 for spilling type of wave
breaks. Fig. 2 shows the variation of relative submergence parameter with transmission coefcient in non-dimensional form. The
analysis is restricted to the regular wave heights ranging between
2 cm and 13 cm. As the relative submergence parameter increases,
the relationship seeks to route a mild linear increment on the
magnitude of transmission coefcient. The coefcient uctuates
around 0.5 for plunging break and uctuates around 0.8 for
spilling breaker environment. Fig. 2 shows that for the plunging
and the spilling breaking wave analysis, the relationship is linear
possessing a moderate trend for coefcient of determination

Fig. 2. The change in wave transmission coefcient with respect to relative submergence parameter for spilling and plunging type of wave breaks.

198

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

attaining 46% for spilling and 50% for plunging wave break
analysis.
4.3. The effect of wave steepness parameter
Corollary to the relative submergence parameter, the wave
steepness parameter route a mild linear decrease on the magnitude of transmission coefcient (Fig. 3). This suggests that any
increment on incoming wave height could perhaps attenuate
strong wave breaks, increasing the rate of wave energy dissipation
over the submerged structure. In contrasts, the results show that a
quadruple increase of wave steepness parameter does not result
considerable change on transmission coefcient.
4.4. Evaluation of empirical relationship
Most of the previously derived empirical transmission coefcient relationships were successfully predicting the values of the
transmission coefcient for different structure and ow properties.
However, nearly all of them ignore the important effect of
transmission coefcient on the magnitude of wave energy dissipation rates. As it is derived in Section 2, the wave energy
dissipation is a function of transmission coefcient that is directly
related with the type of break occurring in front of the structure
(Eq. (11)).
In order to seek the effects of the previously detailed dimensionless parameters on wave transmission coefcient, the parameters

harmonized and an empirical equation is predicted for the magnitude of transmission coefcient based on spilling and plunging type
of breaking, in Eqs. (17) and (18), respectively.
!
Ht
Hi
eds =Hi 0:9
K t  7:5
17
Hi
gT 2
!
Ht
Hi
K t  5:95
eds =Hi 0:6
Hi
gT 2

18

The linear relationship between the dimensionless transmission coefcient and combined effects of wave steepness parameter
and relative submerged parameter for spilling and plunging wave
breaks are represented graphically on Fig. 4. The coefcient of
determination for plunging and spilling breaks was 0.53 and 0.41
respectively. The results show that as the dimensionless
H i =gT 2 eds =Hi increases K t decreases both in spilling and plunging
type of breaker conditions.
The quality of t analysis is applied to the predicted equations
(Eqs. (17) and (18)) and the experimental (measured) wave
transmission coefcient data. It is seen that the resultant empirical
equations are tting the data quite well. The goodness of t
between the measured and predicted results are indicated by
the following equation.

K t measured K t predicted 2
K t measured 2

19

Fig. 3. The change in wave transmission coefcient with respect to wave steepness parameter for spilling and plunging type of wave breaks.

Fig. 4. The trend of change of transmission coefcient with respect to combined effects of wave steepness parameter and relative submerged parameter for spilling and
plunging type of wave breaks.

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

Fig. 5. Measured versus predicted wave transmission coefcient values.

where K t measured and K t predicted are the measured and predicted

wave transmission coefcient values, respectively. The value 0
corresponds to a perfect t between the two data, and increasing
value of refers to poorer t. The results of Eq. (19) shows that
there is a good relationship for both spilling and plunging wave
break conditions between the predicted and measured data;
spilling 0:00112 and plunging 0:00558. Fig. 5 plots the predicted
and measured wave transmission coefcient results for both
spilling and plunging wave break conditions at submerged structures. The gure also supports the results of Eq. (19). The
presented method has root mean square error less than 4% where
the root mean square error, erms is dened as
"
#1=2
K t measured  K t predicted 2
20
erms
J
where J is the number of observations carried out during the
experimental work. In effect, the root mean square error describes
the probability of a predicted magnitude variation from the
observed results. Therefore, an estimation of the wave transmission coefcient for submerged structures yields 2.7% and 3.74%
error for spilling and plunging breaks, respectively.
4.5. Energy dissipation at the submerged structure
The wave energy dissipation at submerged structures is mainly
caused by either wave breaking or ow percolation. The concept of
energy dissipation related with the ow percolation occurs
because of decay of incoming waves while percolating through
the porous structure. If the spilling type of wave breaking undergoes on submerged structures, then most of the wave energy will
be dissipated without considerable amount of wave attenuation
due to type of breaking. Therefore, if the incoming wave height
undergoes plunging type of break at the structure, it would not be
possible to distinguish the reason of energy dissipation on the
basis of ow percolation and spilling type of break. Fig. 6 demonstrates the steep increase of wave energy dissipation with respect
to changes in wave height observed at laboratory experiments. The
requirements for greater wave height for plunging type of breaks
implies that there must be a lower limit for the incoming wave
height to observe wave energy dissipation due to wave break.
Otherwise, if the wave height is less than lower limit the dissipation will not occur due to ow percolation or non-breaking wave
conditions. The limitation for the magnitude of the wave height
can be derived from Eq. (11). The energy dissipation at the

199

submerged structures per unit volume of water column will occur

3=2
2 1=2
whenever H 2t =K 2t ds
is greater than ds . Further analysis
between the two parameters results in the famous wave breaking
relationship proposed by the Dally et al. (1984), H i Z ds .
Consequently, the evaluation of the energy dissipation at the
submerged structures show variations but suggest important
effects of plunging type of wave breaks. Whether the spilling or
plunging wave break occurs the considerable energy dissipation is
recorded when the plunging wave break is dominant. Therefore,
the experimental observations that only satisfy the criteria of
plunging breaks from previous laboratory studies by Calabrese
et al. (2007), Calabrese et al. (2002), Fowler et al. (2002), Pilarczyk
(2003) and Cox and Tajziehchi (2005) are used to validate the
accuracy of Eqs. (11) and (18). The experimental conditions for
these studies are given in Table 2 as they differ from those of the
present laboratory study. These previous studies had different
experimental conditions and were conducted to model submerged
structures for different environmental conditions and criteria.
Hence, the magnitude of wave transmission coefcient for these
studies is calculated separately, by using Eqs. (14), (15) and (18).
The results are given in Figs. 7 and 8. The net energy dissipation
equation derived in this study is performing similarities with the
Eq. (15) but completely independent results were achieved when
compared with Eq. (14).
Fig. 7 represents the net energy dissipation rates computed by
Eq. (11) in which abscissa represents the energy dissipation values
based on transmission coefcient values from Eq. (14) (Labeled
D14) and ordinate represents the energy dissipation values derived
with Eq. (18) (Labeled D18). Fig. 8, on the other hand, compares the
energy dissipation rates derived by Eq. (15) (Labeled D15) at the
abscissa and by Eq. (18) at the ordinate. Apart from the observations of R3, given in Fig. 7, the extracted data from other studies
agree fairly well with the results of the data of the present study
and ts into the derived wave energy dissipation equation for
submerged structures. It should be noted that R1 and R4 developed their studies on a large scale articial channel and on natural
environment, respectively, whereas; R2 and R3 obtained their data
through small scale experimental measurements. On the other
hand, apart from the observations of R1 given in Fig. 8, the
extracted data did not show any trend with Eq. (18).
On the basis of Figs. 7 and 8, it can be concluded that the wave
transmission coefcient relationship given in this study is closely
matching with the equation dened in Eq. (14) but not matching
with Eq. (15). Under these circumstances the relationship between
the incoming wave height and rate of energy dissipation on
submerged structures are further analyzed with the data extracted
from R1, R2, R3 and R4. The change in net energy dissipation with
respect to incoming wave height are computed as given in
Figs. 9 and 10. The observations of R1 (ds 0.2 m and ds 0.4 m)
and R4 (ds 1.6, 0.9 and 2.0 m), are given together in Fig. 9 since
the results of these experiments are based on eld and large tank
experiments. Left abscissa in Fig. 9 is demonstrating the net
energy dissipation values of experimental results of R1 and right
abscissa is representing experimental results of R4. The observations of R2 and R3 are given in Fig. 10. The net energy dissipation
for the experimental results of R1 and R4 has shown that the
minimum energy dissipation occurs when ds 0.4 m and ds 2 m,
respectively. As the incoming wave height increases, the energy
dissipation increases since the difference between H i and ds
enlarges. Implementation of experimental data taken from R2 has
given the chance to observe the effect of wave period on the
magnitudes of wave energy dissipation. The submerged depth
kept constant while the wave period increased from 1 s to 1.5 s.
The wave period was observed to be inversely proportional with
the energy dissipation since dissipation was slightly decreasing
(2025%) on the structure. On the other hand, the results of R3

200

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

Fig. 6. The change in wave energy dissipation values for spilling and plunging waves with respect to changes in deep water wave heights.

Table 2
Test conditions for previous experimental investigations on submerged structures, used in this study.
Code

Reference

Experimental conditions

R1

Calabrese et al., 2002

Flume dimensions (m): 7  5  300

Water depth (m): 1.51.7
Incoming wave height (m): 0.61.1
Submerged depth (m): 0.2, 0.4
Wave period (s): 3.5, 4.5, 6.5
Structure type: submerged breakwater

R2

Calabrese et al., 2007

Flume dimensions (m): 0.75  0.5  23.5

Water depth (cm): 31.5
Incoming wave height (cm): 211
Submerged depth (cm): 6.5
Wave period (s): 1.0, 1.5, 2,.0
Structure type: submerged breakwater

R3

Cox and Tajziehchi, 2005

Flume dimensions (m): 1.5  3  30

Water depth (cm): 35.0, 40.0, 45.0
Incoming wave height (cm): 5.015.5
Submerged depth (cm): 5.0, 10.0, 15.0
Wave period (s): 0.752.0
Structure type: submerged breakwater

R4

Fowler et al., 2002 and Pilarczyk, 2003

Flume dimensions (m): no ume

Water depth (m): 4.7, 5.8
Incoming wave height (m): 2.32.7
Submerged depth (m): 0.92.7
Wave period (s): 7.09.0
Structure type: submerged geotube breakwater

have shown that when the wave height is constant wave energy
dissipation is increasing as the submerged depth is decreasing. The
power relationship between the wave height and energy dissipation is valid for all the experimental cases.
The relation between the net wave energy dissipation and
incoming wave height with respect to different submergence
depths is emphasized in Fig. 11. The net energy dissipation for
each of the four different submerged depths is plotted separately
according to the Eq. (11). Note that the incoming wave period and
slope of the submerged structure is kept constant with T 2 s. It is
clear that, in all cases, the difference between the net energy
dissipation of two consequent representative wave heights is
ascending as the wave height increases. A slight increase in the
rate of energy dissipation at constant wave height is also observed
in Fig. 11. The trend of rate of change is consistent throughout the
different submerged depths.
In summary, the available data from present study and other
observations show that Eq. (11) gives reasonable predictions for
energy dissipation. Hence, the wave energy dissipation equation of

the present study is recommended for wave energy dissipation

analysis on submerged structures.

5. Conclusion
It is shown that Excess Energy Equation can be developed to
predict the wave energy dissipation rates over submerged structures. The analysis and the cross-comparison of experimental data,
collected from different scaled and characterized studies performed a relationship for predicting the wave energy dissipation
on submerged structures (Eq. (11)). The wave height attenuation
on the structure is derived based on the theory given by Dally et al.
(1984) which assumes that the wave breaking phenomena totally
took place at the same depth that the wave recovers itself.
A simple relationship representing the wave transmission coefcient is proposed which takes into consideration the type of break
just above the structure; spilling and plunging. The robustness of the
proposed transmission equations was tested using an independent

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

201

Fig. 7. Net energy dissipation rates computed with Eq. (11), comparing Eqs. (14) and (18).

Fig. 8. Net energy dissipation rates computed with Eq. (11), comparing Eqs. (15) and (18).

Fig. 9. The rate of net energy dissipation with respect to changes in incoming wave height for reference experiments R1 and R4.

data set including large scale and small scale laboratory tests. The
comparison between measured and calculated transmission coefcient equations yield 2.7% and 3.74% error for spilling and plunging

breaks, respectively. Of particular signicance are the ndings of

breaking properties of the waves and their relationship with rate of
energy dissipation. Especially noticeable are the ndings at H i Z ds

202

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

Fig. 10. Rate of energy dissipation with respect to changes in incoming wave height for reference experiments R2 and R3.

Fig. 11. Rate of energy dissipation with respect to changes in incoming wave height at different submergence depths according to the Eq. (11).

where the incoming waves are triggered to break and initiate the
wave energy dissipation processes. Consequently, at higher incoming
wave heights plunging wave breaks and considerable wave energy
dissipation rates are plotted. The analytical solution of wave energy
dissipation followed a power relation with incident wave height.
Finally, it should be noted that, even though the approach
presented thus far provides a natural interpretation of the wave
energy dissipation at submerged structures, it is still required to be
developed since it does not distinguish the exact classication of
wave energy dissipation for plunging and spilling type of breaks.
On the other hand, derived energy dissipation relationship can be
used as the initial step to formulate the clean energy potential at
the leeward of submerged structures.
Acknowledgment
Experiments in stanbul Technical University hydraulic laboratory were conducted by the help of Prof. Dr. Sedat Kabdasli. The
author would like to thank to him and stanbul Technical University for their tremendous help.
References
Ahrens, J.P., Fulford, E.T., 1988. Wave energy dissipation by reef breakwaters.
Marine Technology Society, Washington, D.C., pp. 12441249 (Oceans '88).
Armono, H.D., 2003. Hemispherical Shape Articial Reefs (Ph.D. dissertation).
Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

Battjes, J.A., 1986. Energy dissipation in breaking solitary and periodic waves, Delft
University of Technology Report. Communications on Hydraulic and Geotechnical Engineering, Delft University, Netherlands (865).
Battjes, J.A., Janssen, J.P.F.M., 1978. Energy loss and set-up due to breaking of
random waves. In: Proceedings of 16th International Conference on Coastal
Engineering, ASCE, Hamburg, pp. 569587.
Buccino, M., Calabrese, M., 2007. Conceptual approach for the prediction of wave
transmission at low crested breakwaters. J. Waterw. Port, Coast. Ocean Eng. 133
(3), 213224.
Calabrese, M., Buccino, M., Pasanisi, F., 2007. Qualitative and quantitative features of
wave breaking over a submerged breakwater, and effects on nonlinear wave
structure interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on
Marine Research and Transportation, 2830 June, Naples, Italy, pp. 2532.
Calabrese, M., Vicinanza, D., Buccino, M., 2002. Large-scale experiments on the
behaviour of low crested and submerged breakwaters in presence of broken
waves, In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Coastal
Engineering, ASCE, pp. 19001912.
Cho, W.C., Kim, H.I., 2008. Cross shore change of beach prole in two shapes of
beach slope breakdown. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Offshore and
Polar Engineering Conference, ISOPE, pp. 735739.
Cox, R.J., Tajziehchi, M., 2005. 2D experimental modeling of hydrodynamic effects
of submerged breakwaters. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference
on Coastal Dynamics, 48 April, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 112.
Dally, W.R., 1992. Random breaking waves: eld verication of a wave by wave
algorithm for engineering application. Coast. Eng. 16, 369397.
Dally, W.R., Dean, R.G., Dalrymple, R.A., 1984. A model for breaker decay on beaches.
In: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Coastal Engineering,
Houston, TX, ASCE, New York, pp. 8298.
D'Angremond, K., Van der Meer, J.W., De Jong, R.J., 1996. Wave transmission at lowcrested structures. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on
Coastal Engineering, ASCE, New York, pp. 24182427.
Fowler, J., Stephens, T., Santiago, M., De Bruin, P., 2002. Amwaj Islands constructed
with geotubes, Bahrein, CEDA Conference, Denver, USA, pp 114.
Gu, G.Z., Wang, H., 1992. Numerical modeling for wave energy dissipation
within porous submerged breakwaters of irregular cross-section. In: Proceedings

U. Trker / Ocean Engineering 88 (2014) 194203

of the 23rd International Conference on Coastal Engineering, ASCE, pp.

11891202.
Hanson, H.,1992. Cross shore sediment transport for engineering applications. In:
Proceedings of the Short Course on Design and Reliability of Coastal Structures:
Preprints: Venice, Scuola di S. Giovanni Evangelista, 13 October 1992. Attached
to the 23rd International Conference on Coastal Engineering.
Jeffreys, S.H., 1959. The Earth, 4th edition Cambridge University Press, pp. 14.
Kabdal, M.S., Trker, U., 2002. The wave breaking phenomena as a tool for
environmental friendly shore protection. Water Sci. Technol. 46 (8), 153160.
Kamphuis, J.W., 1991. Wave transformation. Coast. Eng. 15, 173184.
Kriebel, D.L., Dean, R.G., 1985. Numerical simulation of time dependent beach and
dune erosion. Coast. Eng. 9, 221245.
Kriebel, D.L., Kraus, N.C., Larson, M., 1991. Engineering methods for predicting beach
prole response. In: Proceedings of Coastal Sediments '91, ASCE, pp. 557571.
Lan, Y.J., Lee, J.F., 2010. On waves propagating over a submerged poro-elastic
structure. J. Ocean Eng. 37 (89), 705717.
Larson, M., Kraus, N.C., 1989. SBEACH: Numerical model for simulating storminduced beach change, Report 1, Empirical Foundation and Model Development, U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station Technical Report,
CERC-89-9. Coastal Engineering Research Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Larson, M., Kraus, N.C., Byrnes, M.R., 1990. SBEACH: Numerical model for simulating
storm-induced beach change, Report 2, Numerical Formulation and Model

203

Tests Technical Report CERC-89-9. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment

Station, Coastal Engineering Research Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Mendez, F.J., Losada, I.J., Losada, M.A., 2001. Wave-induced mean magnitudes in
permeable submerged breakwaters. J. Waterw. Port, Coast. Ocean Eng. 127 (1),
715.
O'Keefe, J.A., Adams, E.W., 1965. Tektite structure and lunar ash ows. J. Geophys.
Res. 70 (16), 38193829.
Pilarczyk, K.W., 2003. Design of low-crested (submerged) structuresan overview.
In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Coastal and Port
Engineering in Developing Countries, Colombo, Sri Lanka, pp. 118.
Rao, S., Shirlal, K.G., Varghese, R.V., Govindaraja, K.R., 2009. Physical model studies
on wave transmission of a submerged inclined plate breakwater. J. Ocean Eng.
36 (1516), 11991207.
Ting, C.L., Lin, M.C., Cheng, C.Y., 2004. Porosity effects on non-breaking surface
waves over permeable submerged breakwaters. Coast. Eng. 50 (4), 213224.
Tsai, C.P., Chen, H.B., Lee, F.C., 2006. Wave transformation over submerged permeable breakwater on porous bottom. J. Ocean Eng. 33 (1112), 16231643.
Trker, U., Kabdasli, M.S., 2004. Average sediment dislocation analysis for barred
proles. J. Ocean Eng. 31, 17411756.
Van der Meer, J.W., 1990. Data on Wave Transmission Due to Overtopping,
Technical Report. Delft Hydraulic (Report n.H986).