Search

The causes of surf zone morphologic changes observed along a sandy beach onshore of a submarine canyon were investigated using field observations and a numerical model (Delft3D/SWAN). Numerically simulated morphologic changes using four different sediment transport formulae reproduce the temporal and spatial patterns of net cross‐shore integrated (between 0 and 6.5 m water depths) accretion and erosion observed in a ∼300 m alongshore region, a few hundred meters from the canyon head. The observations and simulations indicate that the accretion or erosion results from converging or diverging alongshore currents driven primarily by breaking waves and alongshore pressure gradients. The location of convergence or divergence depends on the direction of the offshore waves that refract over the canyon, suggesting that bathymetric features on the inner shelf can have first‐order effects on short‐term nearshore morphologic change. Converging (diverging) alongshore currents resulting from wave refraction over an offshore canyon cause accretion (erosion) at an onshore beachThe incidence angle of offshore waves determines the locations of converging and diverging currentsBathymetric features on the inner shelf can have first‐order effects on surf zone morphologic change

Nearshore rocky reefs with scales of order 10–100 m are common along the world's coastline and often shape wave‐driven hydrodynamics and shoreline morphology in their lee. The interaction of waves with these reefs generally results in either two or four‐cell mean circulation systems (2CC and 4CC, respectively), with diverging flows behind the reefs and at the shoreline in the 2CC case and flows that diverge in the lee and converge at the shoreline in the 4CC case. By applying a phase‐resolving wave‐flow model to conduct a detailed analysis of mean momentum balances for waves interacting with nearshore reefs, we develop an understanding of the drivers of 2CC and 4CC flow dynamics and how they vary for different reef geometries and wave and water level conditions. The 2CC or 4CC patterns were primarily driven by alongshore pressure gradients toward the exposed (nonreef fronted) or reef‐fronted beach. These alongshore pressure gradients were dependent on the cross‐shore setup dynamics governed by the balance between pressure (i.e., related to the setup) and radiation stress gradients, and mean bottom stresses exerted on the water column. If shoreline wave setup in the lee of the reef was less than the exposed beach, a 4CC pattern developed with convergent flow at the shoreline in the lee of the reef; otherwise, a 2CC emerged with divergent flow at the shoreline. Across the parameter space investigated, reef roughness, distance to the shoreline, and beach slope were the three parameters most likely to change the flow patterns between 2CC and 4CC. Small‐scale nearshore rocky reefs are found worldwide along a variety of sandy and rocky coastlines. Wave breaking over small reefs drives mean alongshore circulation patterns in their lee that may cause shoreline accretion or erosion. In this study, we apply a wave‐flow model to investigate the physical drivers of the mean currents in the lee of small reefs. The alongshore circulation was primarily driven by the differences of the mean water levels between the lee and the adjacent nonreef fronted beaches. Mean water levels increased by wave breaking; however, the onshore‐directed mean flows over the reef created offshore‐directed bottom stresses that reduced the mean water levels in the reef lee. If the shoreline mean water levels in the lee were less than the adjacent beach, alongshore currents that converged from the adjacent beaches toward the reefs were developed. If the shoreline mean water levels in the lee of the reef exceeded the adjacent beach, alongshore currents that diverged from the reef toward the adjacent beach occurred. The improved understanding of the circulation drivers developed in this study enhances our ability to characterize and predict wave‐driven flows in small‐scale nearshore reef systems. Phase‐resolved model simulations were used to understand circulation patterns that occur in the lee of small‐scale reefsTwo‐cell and four‐cell circulation patterns were primarily driven by alongshore pressure gradients, which depend on the setup dynamicsA four‐cell pattern generally developed if the shoreline wave setup in the lee of the reef was less than the adjacent nonreef fronted beach Phase‐resolved model simulations were used to understand circulation patterns that occur in the lee of small‐scale reefs Two‐cell and four‐cell circulation patterns were primarily driven by alongshore pressure gradients, which depend on the setup dynamics A four‐cell pattern generally developed if the shoreline wave setup in the lee of the reef was less than the adjacent nonreef fronted beach

Wave breaking on the steep fore‐reef slopes of shallow fringing reefs can be effective at dissipating incident sea‐swell waves prior to reaching reef shorelines. However, wave setup and free infragravity waves generated during the sea‐swell breaking process are often the largest contributors to wave‐driven water levels (wave runup) at the shoreline. Laboratory flume experiments and a two‐dimensional vertical phase‐resolving nonhydrostatic wave‐flow model, which includes a canopy model to predict drag forces generated by roughness elements, were used to investigate wave‐driven water levels for along‐shore uniform fringing reefs. In contrast to many previous studies, both the laboratory experiment and the numerical model account for the effects of large bottom roughness. The numerical model reproduced the observations of the wave transformation and runup over both smooth and rough reef profiles. The numerical model was then extended to quantify the influence of reef geometry and compared to simulations of plane beaches lacking a reef. For a fixed offshore forcing condition, the fore‐reef slope controlled wave runup on reef‐fronted beaches, whereas the beach slope controlled wave runup on plane beaches. As a result, the coastal protection utility of reefs is dependent on these slopes. For our examples, with a fore‐reef slope of 1/5 and a 500 m prototype reef flat length, a beach slope of ∼1/30 marked the transition between the reef providing runup reduction for steeper beach slopes and enhancing wave runup for milder slopes. Roughness coverage, spacing, dimensions, and drag coefficient were investigated, with results indicating the greatest runup reductions were due to tall roughness elements on the reef flat. Wave breaking and bottom friction are effective at reducing incident sea‐swell waves before they can reach the shoreline of reef‐fronted coastlines. However, globally, mass mortality of coral reef‐building organisms is causing coral reefs to become structurally flatter, a process that may lower wave dissipation. Laboratory flume experiments and a multilayer phase‐resolving wave‐flow model that includes drag forces generated by roughness elements (representing coral reef forms) were used to investigate wave‐driven water levels in the lee of fringing reefs and assess the influence of reef geometry and roughness characteristics. The numerical model was able to reproduce laboratory observations of waves and water levels over both smooth and rough reef profiles. Wave runup, the vertical extent of wave uprush on a beach, was sensitive to the presence and characteristics of roughness. Roughness coverage, spacing, and dimensions were investigated with results indicating the greatest runup reductions were due to tall roughness elements on the reef flat. SWASH reproduced laboratory observations of waves and runup over both smooth and rough fringing reefsFore‐reef slope controls wave runup on reef‐fringed coasts as opposed to beach slope on plane open coast beachesWave runup was sensitive to bottom roughness with tall roughness elements on the reef flat generating the greatest runup reduction SWASH reproduced laboratory observations of waves and runup over both smooth and rough fringing reefs Fore‐reef slope controls wave runup on reef‐fringed coasts as opposed to beach slope on plane open coast beaches Wave runup was sensitive to bottom roughness with tall roughness elements on the reef flat generating the greatest runup reduction

Alongshore force balances, including the role of nonlinear advection, in the shoaling and surf zones onshore of a submarine canyon are investigated using a numerical modeling system (Delft3D/SWAN). The model is calibrated with waves and alongshore flows recorded over a period of 1.5 months at 26 sites along the 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 m depth contours spanning about 2 km of coast. Field observation‐based estimates of the alongshore pressure and radiation‐stress gradients are reproduced well by the model. Model simulations suggest that the alongshore momentum balance is between the sum of the pressure and radiation‐stress gradients and the sum of the nonlinear advective terms and bottom stress, with the remaining terms (e.g., wind stress and turbulent mixing) being negligible. The simulations also indicate that unexplained residuals in previous field‐based estimates of the momentum balance may be owing to the neglect of the nonlinear advective terms, which are similar in magnitude to the sum of the forcing (pressure and radiations stress gradients) and to the bottom stress. A depth‐averaged numerical model reproduced observed surfzone alongshore forcingThe model indicates nonlinear advection plays an important role in the dynamicsResiduals in field‐based force balances may result from neglecting advection

Two‐dimensional mean wave‐driven flow and setup dynamics were investigated at a reef‐lagoon system at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia, using the numerical wave‐flow model, SWASH. Phase‐resolved numerical simulations of the wave and flow fields, validated with highly detailed field observations (including >10 sensors through the energetic surf zone), were used to quantify the main mechanisms that govern the mean momentum balances and resulting mean current and setup patterns, with particular attention to the role of nonlinear wave shapes. Momentum balances from the phase‐resolved model indicated that onshore flows near the reef crest were primarily driven by the wave force (dominated by radiation stress gradients) due to intense breaking, whereas the flow over the reef flat and inside the lagoon and channels was primarily driven by a pressure gradient. Wave setup inside the lagoon was primarily controlled by the wave force and bottom stress. The bottom stress reduced the setup on the reef flat and inside the lagoon. Excluding the bottom stress contribution in the setup balance resulted in an over prediction of the wave‐setup inside the lagoon by up to 200–370%. The bottom stress was found to be caused by the combined presence of onshore directed wave‐driven currents and (nonlinear) waves. Exclusion of the bottom stress contribution from nonlinear wave shapes led to an over prediction of the setup inside the lagoon by approximately 20–40%. The inclusion of the nonlinear wave shape contribution to the bottom stress term was found to be particularly relevant in reef regions that experience a net onshore mass flux over the reef crest. Coral reefs that are located in close proximity to a coastline are typically characterized by a steep slope and reef crest that is connected to the coast or front a shallow lagoon. At the reef crest, waves break and drive onshore‐directed currents and elevate the mean (time‐averaged) water level in the lagoon. In this study, we combined measurements of waves, currents and water levels with simulations from an advanced computer model to understand the physical mechanisms that determine the current patterns and water level variations at a coral reef‐lagoon system in Western Australia. Friction generated by the water moving over the rough reef structures was found to reduce the mean water levels inside the lagoon. This friction was explained by the combined presence of both waves and mean currents. Furthermore, near the reef crest, the waves peak and pitch forward before they break, and this nonlinear wave shape was found to enhance the friction from the bottom. This contribution from nonlinear wave shapes however, is generally not accurately described in larger‐scale computer models and should be included in such computer models to provide more reliable simulations of the water motion in coral reefs. The numerical wave‐flow model, SWASH, reproduced highly detailed field measurements of waves and currents through the surf zone of a reef‐lagoon system (Ningaloo Reef, AU)Wave setup inside the lagoon was reduced by bottom stresses generated by the combined action of waves and currentsExclusion of the bottom stress contribution from nonlinear wave shapes resulted in a 20%–40% over prediction of the setup inside the lagoon The numerical wave‐flow model, SWASH, reproduced highly detailed field measurements of waves and currents through the surf zone of a reef‐lagoon system (Ningaloo Reef, AU) Wave setup inside the lagoon was reduced by bottom stresses generated by the combined action of waves and currents Exclusion of the bottom stress contribution from nonlinear wave shapes resulted in a 20%–40% over prediction of the setup inside the lagoon

Coral reefs generate substantial volumes of carbonate sediment, which is redistributed throughout the reef‐lagoon system. However, there is little understanding of the specific processes that transport this sediment produced on the outer portions of coral reefs throughout a reef‐lagoon system. Furthermore, the separate contributions of currents, sea‐swell waves, and infragravity waves to transport, which are all strongly influenced by the presence of a reef, is not fully understood. Here, we show that in reef‐lagoon systems most suspended sediment is transported close to the seabed and can, at times, be suspended higher in the water column during oscillatory flow transitions (i.e., near slack flow) at sea‐swell wave frequencies, and during the peak onshore oscillatory velocity phase at infragravity wave frequencies. While these wave frequencies contribute to the transport of suspended sediment offshore and onshore, respectively, the net flux is small. Mean currents are the primary transport mechanism and responsible for almost 2 orders of magnitude more suspended‐sediment flux than sea‐swell and infragravity waves. Whilst waves may not be the primary mechanism for the transport of sediment, our results suggest they are an important driver of sediment suspension from the seabed, as well as contributing to the partitioning of sediment grain sizes from the reef to the shoreline. As the ocean wave climate changes, sea level rises, and the composition of reef benthic communities change, the relative importance of mean currents, sea‐swell waves, and infragravity waves is likely to change, and this will affect how sediment is redistributed throughout reef‐lagoon systems. Most of the sandy sediment found on coral reef coastlines is produced by organisms living within the reef. This sediment is then transported by waves and currents across the reef and distributed throughout the lagoon. Little is known about these transport processes, including the relative importance of how currents or different types of waves drive transport. This study shows that most of the sediment in the water column (suspended sediment) is transported close to the seabed by mean currents. At times, this sediment can be suspended higher in the water column by short waves (5–25 s) when the flow transitions from being onshore directed to offshore directed, or when the velocities of longer period waves (25–250 s), called infragravity waves, are directed onshore. The timing of the suspension by these waves helps to sort the sediment into different sizes across the system, but the quantity of sediment transported is small. As the ocean wave climate changes, sea level rises, and reefs change, the relative importance of mean currents, sea‐swell waves, and infragravity waves is also likely to change, and this will affect how sediment is redistributed throughout reef‐lagoon systems. This study provides insight into what changes may be expected. Sediment transported in suspension is 3–4 times lower than sediment transported as bedloadSediment transported in suspension by mean currents is 2 orders of magnitude greater than sediment transported by wavesSea‐swell waves typically transport sediment offshore and infragravity waves and mean currents typically transport sediment onshore Sediment transported in suspension is 3–4 times lower than sediment transported as bedload Sediment transported in suspension by mean currents is 2 orders of magnitude greater than sediment transported by waves Sea‐swell waves typically transport sediment offshore and infragravity waves and mean currents typically transport sediment onshore