Changeset 5319

Timestamp:

May 14, 2008, 11:41:16 AM (16 years ago)

Author:

duncan

Message:

latex doc bug fix

File:

• anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex (modified) (1 diff)

anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex

@@ -638 +638 @@
 \subsection{Runup of solitary wave on circular island wavetank validation}
 
-This section will describe the ANUGA results for the experiments conducted
-by Briggs et al (1995). Here, a 30x25m basin with a conical island is situated near
-the centre and a directional wavemaker is used to produce planar solitary waves of
-specified crest lenghts and heights. A series of gauges were distributed within the
-experimental setup. As described by Hubbard and Dodd \cite{Hubbard02}, a number of researchers
-have used this benchmark problem to test their numerical models. {\bf Jane: check
-whether these results are now avilable as they were not in 2002}. Hubbard and Dodd 
-\cite{Hubbard02} note that 
-a particular 3D model appears to obtain slightly better results than the 2D ones reported 
-but that 3D models are unlikely to be competitive in terms of computing power for
-applications in coastal engineering at least. Choi et al \cite{Choi07) use a 3D RANS model
-(based on the Navier-Stokes equations)
-for the same problem and find a very good comparison with laboratory and 2D numerical 
-results. An obvious advantage of the 3D model is its ability to investigate the
-velocity field and Choi et al also report on the limitation of depth-averaged
+This section will describe the ANUGA results for the experiments
+conducted by Briggs et al (1995). Here, a 30x25m basin with a conical
+island is situated near the centre and a directional wavemaker is used
+to produce planar solitary waves of specified crest lenghts and
+heights. A series of gauges were distributed within the experimental
+setup. As described by Hubbard and Dodd \cite{Hubbard02}, a number of
+researchers have used this benchmark problem to test their numerical
+models. {\bf Jane: check whether these results are now avilable as
+they were not in 2002}. Hubbard and Dodd \cite{Hubbard02} note that a
+particular 3D model appears to obtain slightly better results than the
+2D ones reported but that 3D models are unlikely to be competitive in
+terms of computing power for applications in coastal engineering at
+least. Choi et al \cite{Choi07} use a 3D RANS model (based on the
+Navier-Stokes equations) for the same problem and find a very good
+comparison with laboratory and 2D numerical results. An obvious
+advantage of the 3D model is its ability to investigate the velocity
+field and Choi et al also report on the limitation of depth-averaged
 2D models for run-up simulations of this type.