World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×
Spring Sale: Get 35% off with a min. purchase of 2 titles. Use code SPRING35. Valid till 31st Mar 2025.

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

EMPIRICAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN INLET CROSS-SECTION AND TIDAL PRISM: A REVIEW

    https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814282475_0098Cited by:8 (Source: Crossref)
    Abstract:

    The well-known empirical relationship between the equilibrium cross-sectional area of tidal inlet entrances (A) and the tidal prism (P), first developed by O'Brien (1931), has been extensively reviewed. A theoretical investigation indicates that a unique A-P relationship should only be expected for clusters of inlets that are phenomenologically similar (i.e. fairly similar hydrodynamic and morphological conditions), and that the exponent q in the A-P relation should be larger than 1. However, the relevant published data available to date do not clearly support this theoretical finding. A re-analysis of the available data sets indicates that they may not be sufficiently reliable to verify our theoretical finding with regard to q>1 due to the violation of the condition of phenomenological similarity, and possibly also due to violating the initial definitions given by O'Brien (1931) in estimating the tidal prism. The resolution of this issue is important because slightly different values of q result in significantly variable values for the equilibrium cross-sectional area of the tidal entrance. This may have significant implications in determining the true stable equilibrium entrance cross-sectional area. We advocate a careful re-scrutiny of the datasets available as a necessary first step in evaluating the robustness of the theoretical considerations presented herein.