Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T21:43:58.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the separation of air flow over water waves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2006

M. L. Banner  and
W. K. Melville
M. L. Banner
Affiliation:
Department of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, School of Mathematics, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia 2033
W. K. Melville
Affiliation:
Department of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, School of Mathematics, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia 2033
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Conditions leading to the onset of air-flow separation over a mobile air-water interface are discussed. It is argued that, in a frame of reference in which the interfacial boundary assumes a steady shape, the occurrence of separation requires a stagnation point on the interface. In the case of air blowing over water waves, this corresponds to the onset of wave breaking. These arguments are strongly supported by flow visualization and pressure measurements carried out in a laboratory wind-wave flume. Furthermore, the pressure measurements show a greatly enhanced interfacial shear stress for a breaking wave compared with that over an unbroken wave of the same wavelength. The implications of these findings for wind-wave generation are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 77 , Issue 4 , 22 October 1976 , pp. 825 - 842
Copyright
© 1976 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banner, M. L. & Peillips, O. M. 1974 J. Fluid Mech. 65, 647.Google Scholar
Barger, W. R., Garrett, W. D., Mollo-Ceristensen, E. L. & Ruggles, K. W. 1970 J. App1. Met. 9, 396.Google Scholar
Barnett, T. P. & Kenyon, K. E. 1975 Rep. Prog. Phys. 38, 667.Google Scholar
Batceelor, G. K. 1967 An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ceang, P. C., Plate, E. J. & Hidy, G. M. 1971 J. FZuid Mech. 47, 183.Google Scholar
Hasselmann, K. 1971 J. Fluid Mech. 50, 189.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, H. 1924 Proc. Roy. Soc. A 107, 189.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, H. 1925 Proc. Roy. Soc. A 110, 341.Google Scholar
Kendall, J. M. 1970 J. Fluid Mech. 41, 259.Google Scholar
Longuet-Higgins, M. S. 1960 J. Fluid Mech. 8, 293.Google Scholar
Longuet-Higgins, M. S. 1969a Phys. Fluids, 12, 737.Google Scholar
Longuet-Hiogins, M. S. 1969b Proc. Roy. Soc. A 311, 371.Google Scholar
Motzfeld, H. 1937 2. angew. Math. Mech. 17, 193.Google Scholar
Phillips, O. M. 1966 The Dynamics of the Upper Ocean. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Phllips, O. M. & Banner, M. L. 1974 J. Fluid Mech. 66, 625.Google Scholar
Stanton, T. E., Marshall, D. & Hougelton, R. 1932 Proc. Roy. Soc. A 137, 282.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. W. 1974 Boundary-Layer Met. 6, 151.Google Scholar
Ursell, F. 1956 In Surveys in Mechanics (ed. G. K. Batchelor), p. 216. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wu, J. 1969 Tellus, 21, 707.Google Scholar