Sei sulla pagina 1di 6

ADAPTATIVE MODELING OF THE NEAR SHORE WAVE BEHAVIOR OF THE BAJA CALIFORNIA SUR REGION

Javier Alberto Carmona Troyo 1 , Marco Antonio Castro Liera 1 y Sergio Troyo Dieguez 1

1 Departmento de Sistemas y Computación Instituto Tecnológico de La Paz Boulevard Forjadores de Sudcalifornia #4720 La Paz, B.C.S., C.P. 23080 jcarmona@itlp.edu.mx mcastro@itlp.edu.mx

Abstract: Wave behavior modeling is a highly important matter concerning the planning, design and construction of near- shore commercial, protection or living-space edifications. A good prediction of future wave conditions is essential to avoid human and material losses. Currently there has been an increasing interest on the application of cooperative use of intelligent strategies such as Neural Networks, Fuzzy Systems, Genetic Algorithms and Rough Sets, commonly referred as soft-computing to solve complex systems modeling and control. This paper proposes the use of an Adaptative Neural Fuzzy Inference System on the modeling of shore wave behavior on the south region of Baja California Sur, México. Current status of the field, the modeling strategy along with present results and its analysis are presented.

1. INTRODUCTION

Numeric modeling of physical processes on the ocean was greatly developed during the early 70’s of the XIX century; investigations were directed by the need of solving hydrodynamic problems (Rodenhuis, 1994). The first models treated water movement on a big scale basis; such as tidal movements on near-shore zones and currents on the superficial layer of the ocean. With the early success of this line of work it began the search for models that could account for more complex scenarios such as sedimentation and pollution shifts on rivers and on specific points of the shore lines. One of the processes that has gathered interest of the experts on the field is ocean surge from its origin on deep water and its propagation on to the shore line where it releases its energy affecting the coast and near shore edifications. Wave behavior models can be classified on three categories: discrete spectral models, hybrid parametric models and discrete coupled models. Discrete models began its use around half of the last century on Europe those first models had three key terms on their mathematical structure, an advection term, a wave generator term, and an energy dissipation term. The models were adjusted empirically to reproduce wave conditions that depended on the duration of the winds and the amount of fetch. The inputs for those models where the wind intensity and direction, to obtain punctual results that where used to build wave propagation diagrams that can be used to calculate spectral energy exchange rates. The growth of the spectrum was simultaneous and it was assumed that all the wave components grew independently to their equilibrium value given by the Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum. Several modifications to the above mentioned model where introduced focusing on the energy dissipation and transfer aspects, that went through hybrid parametric models and discrete coupled models, in which the swell and the local winds are taken into account. One of the pioneering models of this precision and detail level when it comes to the flux structure is MIKE 21 NSW developed in Europe. The model is based on the Holthuijsen equations (Holthuijsen, et al 2000). Johnson used MIKE 21 NSW to study the growth of the wind waves on shallow waters with limited fetch; the simulation can account for the wave behavior taking into account the wind influence, the bottom friction, the spectral form and the break. Results show that 3 to 4 meters deep water bodies with fetch no greater than 20 km, the significant heights of local waves are independent of the bottom friction and the break induced by the depth variation. When calculating waves on shallow waters, the best results are obtained with the JONSWAP spectrum as input as opposed as using the direct calculation of the spectrum equation (Carter, 1982). Carter suggests the following criteria for the use of the model. Waves should be generated by local wind; the energy contribution of external area waves is not taken into account. (Swell is not considered).

Wind velocity and direction must remain constant in a period of 3 to 4 hours. The MIKE 21 NSW model gave origin to the WAMDI investigators group of the European Scientific Community; later this group created the WAM model (which stands for WAve Modeling) used to simulate shallow near shore zones wave behavior, this is how more precise models arise, such as wind in presence of swell (bimodal spectrum); some of the more important works on this field are (Mason 1993) (Bowen, Huntley, 1984) (Madsen et al 1988), which analyze the non lineal coupling phenomena caused by the interaction of resonant waves on a bimodal spectrum on shallow waters. These models use a time scale for swell decay coupled with the typical spectrum of the local wind. The coupling produces a growth on the swell, induced by the energy of the local waves, on the range of the peak frequency of those waves. Since the beginning of the eighties Hasselmann and his workgroup have studied the non-lineal interaction between wave groups, using a mathematical formulation of the waves energy balance (Hasselman, 1992). The above mentioned studies have been used to create SWAN (Simulating Waves Near shore), this model was developed by the civil engineering department of the Technological University of Delft in Holland (Holthuijsen et al,

2000).

The SWAN model analyzes the wave prediction on near shore regions problem using two approximation strategies:

The study area comprehends shallow waters from the beginning of the analysis. Initially deep water waves are generated which then propagates to the shallow waters. The first mode is important on semi-closed basins or shallow bays, while the second one is important for near-show regions where there’s a great propagation of storm waves from the deep waters to the coast. (Komen et al 1994) broadly discuss the problem of numeric ocean waves modeling.

1.2 ANFIS

Currently neural networks have been successfully used to model near shore wave behavior (Makarynskyy et al 2005), (Makarynskyy et. al. 2001). ANFIS stands for Adaptative Neural Fuzzy Inference Systems and it’s a way to create collaborative systems which takes advantage both of the power of fuzzy logic to deal with imprecision and the power of neural networks as function approximators. There are three main components on a fuzzy inference system: input-output variables, fuzzy rules set, and the fuzzy inference method which is interprets IF-THEN rules to produce the output values using the current linguistic values of the input-output variables. An ANFIS neuro-fuzzy system can be interpreted as a fuzzy system with Takagi-Sugeno-Kang rules (Sugeno, Kang 1998) a sample structure with two input variables will is shown:

a sample structure with two input variables will is shown: x y x y A 1

x

y

x y A 1 π N A 2 Σ x y B 1 π N
x
y
A 1
π
N
A 2
Σ
x
y
B
1
π
N
B
2

z

Figure 1. ANFIS architecture

With the following rules set:

IF x is A 1 AND y is B 11 THEN z = p 1 x + q 1 y + r 1 IF x is A 1 AND y is B 22 THEN z = p 2 x + q 2 y + r 2 IF x is A 2 AND y is B 11 THEN z = p 3 x + q 3 y + r 3 IF x is A 2 AND y is B 22 THEN z = p 3 x + q 3 y + r 3

(1)

Where Ai and Bj are fuzzy sets that characterize the x and y input variables respectively. The inference process is a

and

A

1

(

x

),

A

2

(

x

),

B

1

(

y

)

four stages process which begins with the calculation of the membership functions

( y )  B 2 using the generalized bell function (2) 1  u
(
y )
 B 2
using the generalized bell function (2)
1
 u
(
;

,
,
)
2 
u 
1 

(2)

Afterwards the output of the model is calculated using a pondered average of the degree in which each condition on the fuzzy rules set is fulfilled using:

z

m

i 1

h z

i

i

m

i 1

h

i

(3)

Where hi is the degree in which the antecedent part of the i-th rule is fullfiled and is calculated using the expression:

h

i

T(

Ai

(x),

Bi

(y))

(4)

Where, in our case, T (the conjunction operator) is the algebraic product. Given this structure, the models ability to capture the dynamics of the process is given by the chosen values for the parameters on each consequent function, the amount of rules and the fuzzy sets for each input variable. ANFIS uses a combination of steepest descent and back-propagation with gradient vector to optimize the parameters of the model using a training data set

2

METHODOLOGY

In this section we describe briefly the procedure used to create the computational model for near-shore wave behavior using ANFIS over MATLAB framework.

2.1 Test data-set preparation

The data used for the training and validation of the model where obtained from surge registries taken by a wave monitor on the near shore zone of Baja California Sur. The data was sampled every second over periods of an hour with 6 hours separations through several days. The device measures the pressure on the bottom of the sea which is composed by the atmospheric pressure plus the water column pressure (5)

P abs = P atm +P man

(5)

Where Pabs represents the absolute pressure, Patm is the atmospheric pressure and Pman the manometric (water column) pressure.

We first obtain the manometric pressure from (5) to obtain the water column pressure on the instant of the signal registry. On the specific point of measurement, the atmospheric pressure is 1013.2, thus we obtain the expression.

η= (P abs -1013.2)/100

(6)

Where, η is the wave signal on the measurement instant, and we divide by 100 to convert from centimeters to meters.

With this calculation applied to each measurement, we obtain the mean wave height W for every measured hour by subtracting the tendency from η.

W = η-tendency

(7)

To model the wave signal WS we calculated a lineal regression of the signal using a data ser for every registered period and substracted it from W.

W S = W-Regression

(8)

Table 1 presents a sample data-set of the above mentioned transformations.

Table 1. Sample data-set processing

P

abs

Η

W

Regression

W

S

2635.0417

16.218417

-0.11096544

-0.08195

-0.02901544

2631.2107

16.180107

-0.14927544

-0.08190

-0.06737544

2628.9358

16.157358

-0.17202444

-0.08185

-0.09017444

2636.2954

16.230954

-0.09842844

-0.08180

-0.01662844

2652.7065

16.395065

0.06568256

-0.08175

0.14743256

2668.4646

16.552646

0.22326356

-0.08170

0.30496356

3,600 measurements where considered for each hour and a 3rd order model was created to capture the systems dynamics. Where WS on t+1 is calculated using: t, t-1 and t-2 measurements. This is depicted on table 2.

Table 2. Wave signal data for model training at 4:00 hrs.

S (t-2)

W

S (t-1)

W

S (t)

W

S (t)

W

-0.09017444

-0.01662844

0.14743256

0.30496356

-0.01662844

0.14743256

0.30496356

0.34820656

0.14743256

0.30496356

0.34820656

0.26765156

0.30496356

0.34820656

0.26765156

0.12616156

0.34820656

0.26765156

0.12616156

0.02766856

0.26765156

0.12616156

0.02766856

-0.00884344

0.12616156

0.02766856

-0.00884344

-0.03736044

0.02766856

-0.00884344

-0.03736044

-0.08746644

-0.00884344

-0.03736044

-0.08746644

-0.15802944

-0.03736044

-0.08746644

-0.15802944

-0.17471944

Figure 2. Error behavior For each one of the three inputs, three fuzzy sets where

Figure 2. Error behavior

For each one of the three inputs, three fuzzy sets where defined to calculate the single output, 1,000 training epochs were sufficient to obtain a correlation index of 98% which is shown on figure 2. The error shown is calculated as the difference between the measured and calculated wave signals. The output´s correlation is 98.32% for the trained dataset. Using a different dataset and the same model, we were able to obtain a 99.36% correlation index, which reflects the ability of generalization that the model possesses. Figure 3 shows error and output comparison graphics for the non-trained dataset.

and output comparison graphics for the non-trained dataset. Figure 3. Error and output comparison, non trained

Figure 3. Error and output comparison, non trained data-set

The error level shown on this figure has a mean of -0.0039 and the correlation index is 99.36% between the measured and calculated data.

3 CONCLUSIONS

From the obtained results we can conclude that the use of ANFIS was very effective on capturing the highly non-linear dynamic data of wave behavior on short time intervals, we are currently working on creating a model with a longer prediction period. Te main advantage of using this kind of model over other soft-computing approaches is that since it possesses a fuzzy rules set, it can both acquire knowledge from the field experts in the form of partitions on the input variables, and the amount of rules, and when the model is generated purely by the available data, experts can gain new perspectives from the models structure that enables them to have a better perspective of the systems behavior. For instance, it was possible to determine three kinds of behavior for the system depending on the wave intensity, where most of the models only consider two partitions, low and high wave intensity.

4 REFERENCES

1. Bowen, A. J. y D.A. Huntley, (1984) Waves, Longwaves and Nearshore Morphology. Marine Geology., 60: 1 - 13.

2. Carter, D.J.T., (1982). Prediction of Wave Height and Period for a Constant Wind Velocity using the Jonswap results. Ocean Engineering, 9(1):17 - 33.

3. Hasselman, K., 1992. On the Spectral Energy Balance and Numerical Prediction of Ocean Waves. On: Turbulent Fluxes Through the Sea Surface, Wave Dynamics and Prediction. K. Hasselman (editor), Plenum Press: 531-546.

4. Holthuijsen, L., N. Booj, I. Haagsma and A. Kieftenburg, (2000). SWAN Implementation Manual, Version 40.01 and updates (electronic form). Delft University of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering http://swan.ct nl/tudelft

5. Komen, G.J., Cavaleri J., M.Donelan, K. Hasselman, S.Hasselman, and P.A.E.M. Jansen, (1994) Dynamics and Modelling of Ocean Waves, Final Report of the WAM group/SCOR, Cambridge University Press, 532 p.

6. Madsen, O.S., Y.-K. Poon and H. Graber, (1988) Spectral Wave Attenuation by Bottom Friction: Experiments. Chapter

34. Coastal Engineering, Volum 2, B. L. Edge (editor), ASCE: 849-857.

7. Makarynskyy et. al. (2005), Artificial neural networks un wave predictions at the west coast of Portugal, Computers &

Geo-sciences, Vol. 31, no 4 pp. 415-424

8. Makarynskyy et. al. (2001) Modeling pollutant diffusion with a statistical characterization of wind conditions. Assestment and Management of Enviromental Risks, I.Linkov and J.M.Palma-Olivera (eds.)

9. Mason, D., (1993) On the Nonlinear Coupling between Swell and Wind Waves. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 23:

1249 - 1258.

10. Rodenhuis, G. S., 1994. Two-dimensional Nearly-horizontal Flow Models. Coastal, Estuarial and Harbour Engineers' Reference Book, M. Abbot and W. Price (editores), editorial E. & FN SPON: pp 129-144.

11. Sugeno, M, Kang T. (1988), Structure identification on fuzzy Model. Fuzzy sets and systems, Vol. 28, pp 15-33.