Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Energy properties of regular water waves over horizontal bottom with

increasing nonlinearity
Guohai Dong, Xiang Gao, Xiaozhou Ma *, Yuxiang Ma
The State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The energy of surface water waves is a very important concept. The most common method for calculating the
Energy density wave energy is based on the linear or first-order Stokes wave theory. This study investigated the energy density
Nonlinear wave (i.e., the potential, kinetic, and total energy) of very nonlinear waves for a finite water depth and deep water over
Analytical solution
horizontal bottoms. Analytical expressions for the wave energy density were derived based on the nonlinear
Homotopy analysis method (HAM)
Stokes wave theories using the perturbation expansion method and Taylor expansion. The energy density was
accurate to the fourth order and sixth order for the second- and third-order Stokes wave theories, respectively. As
for the fifth-order Stokes wave theory, higher-order energy density expressions were proposed, which were
accurate to the tenth order. Compared with previous findings, the present fifth-order Stokes wave energy density
was more consistent with the numerical integration result. Then, the homotopy analysis method (HAM) was
applied to obtain the energy density. According to the expressions for the nonlinear wave energy density, the
energy density was no longer a single-variable function of wave height and varied with wave parameters such as
the wave height and wave number. In addition, the kinetic energy and potential energy were not equal, and the
former was larger than the latter.

1. Introduction
The energy of surface water waves is a very important concept
because the waves basically propagate a certain amount of mechanical
energy by transferring between kinetic and potential energy. The wave
energy is extensively used to index the strength of waves, calculate the
radiation stress, and evaluate the wave field to exploit wave power
(Dean and Dalrymple, 1991; Jacobsen, 2016; Stokes, 1847). The most
common method for calculating the wave energy density is based on the
linear or first-order Stokes wave theory. Dean and Dalrymple (1991) and
Sorensen (2006) calculated the average potential energy and kinetic
energy per unit of water by integrating over a wavelength range. Mei
et al. (2005) and Zou (2005) calculated the energy by integrating over a
wave period. The result was a univariate function of the wave height,
which was proportional to the square of the wave height, and the kinetic
energy was equal to the potential energy. Because of its simplicity, this
method is also used for nonlinear waves. The nonlinear wave theories
have been well developed and many researchers have proposed ex­
pressions of higher-order wave theories (Fenton, 1985; Pihl et al., 2001;
Skjelbreia, 1959; Song et al., 2012). The influence of nonlinear waves on
harbors and near-shore buildings was receiving more attention (Gao
et al., 2016, 2017, 2020a, 2020b). However, there have been few studies
on the properties of nonlinear wave energy. Longuet-Higgins (1975) and
Klopman (1990) derived the exact relations between the integral prop­
erties of irrotational periodic gravity surface waves of finite amplitude.
Some of these relationships are limited to the special case of a reference
frame moving with a horizontal velocity, which makes the mean
Eulerian velocity vanish at each point below the level of the wave
troughs. This corresponds to Stokes’s first definition of wave celerity.
Jonsson and Arneborg (1995) derived the energy properties of
fifth-order Stokes waves based on the work of Fenton (1985) for a finite
water depth, and the energy density was accurate to the fourth-order.
Jonsson and Steenberg (1999) calculated the potential and kinetic en­
ergy in deep water, which led to an energy density that was correct to
the sixth order.
With the development and enrichment of mathematical methods,
more and more new computational methods and techniques were used
to solve nonlinear water wave problems. Dehghan and Shakeri (2008)
used the homotopy perturbation method to solve a Boussinesq-type
partial differential equation in modeling of flow in porous media. The

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: maxzh@dlut.edu.cn (X. Ma).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108159
Received 24 March 2020; Received in revised form 10 August 2020; Accepted 20 September 2020
Available online 2 October 2020
0029-8018/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

variational iteration method was applied to solve the Kawahara equa­ 2. Energy density of nonlinear Stokes waves
tion arising in modelling of the water waves (Saadatmandi and Deh­
ghan, 2009). Dehghan et al. (2010) solved the nonlinear fractional 2.1. Second-order Stokes wave energy density
partial differential equations by the homotopy analysis method. Based
on that, a scheme was developed to obtain the approximate solution of The wave-induced potential energy per unit of horizontal area under
the fractional KdV, K(2, 2), Burgers, BBM-Burgers, cubic Boussinesq, the free surface is considered, as shown in Fig. 1. The potential energy
coupled KdV, and Boussinesq-like B(m, n) equations with initial condi­ must be measured relative to a horizontal level. The mean water level
tions. Dehghan and Abbaszadeh (2017) developed a fast and efficient (MWL) is naturally chosen as z = 0, and x is the coordinate in the wave
proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) meshless Radial basis propagation direction.
functions-finite difference (RBF-FD) technique, which was applied to The phase-averaged potential energy Ep and kinetic energy Ek over a
solve the shallow water equations in one- and two-dimensional cases. wavelength are given as follows:
Then, Abbaszadeh and Dehghan (2020) combined the upwind local ∫ ∫
1 x+L η
radial basis function-differential quadrature (LRBF-DQ) method with Ep = ρgz ​ dzdx, (1)
the space-splitting idea and proposed a numerical procedure based on L x 0

the meshless method for solving some models arising in water sciences. ∫ x+L ∫ η
1 1 ( 2 )
The homotopy analysis method (HAM) was a rapid development ana­ Ek = ρ u + w2 dzdx, (2)
L 2
lytic approximation method used to solve significantly nonlinear prob­ x − d

lems (Liao, 2003; Lin, 2016; Lin et al., 2014). In contrast to the
where L is the wave length; ρ is the water density; g is the gravitational
traditional perturbation method, the HAM did not depend on a small
acceleration; η is the wave profile; d is the mean water depth; and u and
parameter. Moreover, it was more flexible in relation to the selection of
w represent the horizontal and vertical velocities, respectively.
an appropriate set of base functions for the solution and a simple way to
Substituting the free surface boundary conditions and the bottom
control the convergence rate and region of the solution series. The HAM
boundary conditions into the water wave governing equation. The
had been successfully applied to many nonlinear ordinary and partial
perturbation expansion method is used to solve the equation and the
differential equations, including some water wave problems (Liao, 2012;
result is accurate to second order. Then the analytical expressions of
Liu et al., 2016, 2019).
second-order Stokes are obtained. The expressions for the wave profile
This study derives analytical expressions of the nonlinear wave en­
and velocity potential of a second-order Stokes wave are given as fol­
ergy density for a finite water depth and deep water, including second-,
lows. Note that there is no constant term in the wave profile expression.
third-, and fifth-order Stokes wave theories, and the results are accurate
The mean water level is at the origin of the coordinates, and the mean of
to the fourth order, sixth order, and tenth order, respectively. Then, the
η is zero. According to Dean and Dalrymple (1991), the constant term is
homotopy analysis method (HAM) is applied to solve the fully nonlinear
related to the Bernoulli constant. Thus, the constant term vanishes.
partial differential equation for a steady propagating periodic gravity
[ ]
wave and obtain the energy density. A comparison of the energy density Ak cosh kd⋅(cosh 2kd + 2)
η = A cos θ + cos 2θ , (3)
with that obtained by the Stokes wave showed that it was close to that of 4 sinh3 kd
a fifth-order Stokes wave, and there is a slight difference between the [ ]
two methods near the wave of maximum steepness. The results show Aω cosh k(z + d) 3 cosh 2k(z + d)
φ= sin θ + Ak sin 2θ , (4)
that for a nonlinear wave, the kinetic energy and potential energy of the k sinh kd 8 4
sinh kd
wave are no longer equal, and the total energy is no longer a univariate
function of the wave height, but varies with wave parameters such as the where A is the amplitude of the wave, k is the wave number, ω is the
wave height and wave number. In addition, with an increase in wave angular frequency, and θ represents the wave phase, with θ = kx −
nonlinearity, the interaction between the various components of the ωt. The second-order Stokes wave horizontal (u) and vertical (w) ve­
wave would have a significant impact on the wave energy. The energy locities can be obtained using the spatial derivative of velocity potential
distribution inside the wave would also become more uneven. This may φ:
provide a way to explain the breaking of waves from an energy ∂φ ∂φ
perspective. Therefore, for a wave with nonlinearity, using wave energy u= , w= , (5)
∂x ∂z
formulas based on the linear wave theory will cause some errors. The
results of this study have research significance for the calculation of Considering the second-order Stokes wave profile, substituting Eq.
nonlinear wave energy. (3) into Eq. (1) makes it possible to obtain the potential energy of the
second-order Stokes wave for a finite water depth as follows:

Fig. 1. Sketch for determination of potential energy.

2
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

{ ( )}
1 g 1 16S4 + 21S2 + 9 ( )
Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 + , (6) 1 g 1
4 k 4 16S 6 Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 , (17)
4 k 4
Where S = sinh kd, and ε = Ak.
1 g ( )
Considering the second-order Stokes wave velocity and wave profile, Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 , (18)
4 k
Eqs. (3) and (4) can be substituted into Eq. (2). The integration process is
( )
divided into two parts: the bottom to the mean water level, and the mean 1 g 5
water level to the wave surface. The second-order Stokes wave kinetic E = Ep + Ek = ρ 2 ε 2 1 + ε 2 . (19)
2 k 8
energy can be obtained as follows:
The potential and kinetic energy expressions (Eq. (6), Eq. (15)) for a
∫ ∫ ∫ ∫
ρ 0
ρ η
ρ 0
ρ η
finite water depth are the same as those of Zou (2005), but are expressed
Ek = u2 dz + u2 dz + w2 dz + w2 dz, (7)
2 − d 2 0 2 − d 2 0 in different forms. Given wave period T = 4 s, the water depth d = 10 m
and d = 20 m, which represent the application range for the finite and
where the bar represents the mean value over a wavelength. deep water depth, respectively. The energy of the first-order Stokes
For the first term, wave is used to obtain the dimensionless energy (see Eq. (20)).
Comparing the analytical solutions with the numerical integration re­
u2 = (u(1) + u(2) )2 = u2(1) + 2u(1) u(2) + u2(2) , (8)
sults in the application range (Méhauté, 1976) for the second-order
Stokes wave, as shown in Fig. 2.
where u(1) and u(2) represent the first- and second-order terms of the
/( ) /( ) /( )
horizontal velocity, respectively. Substituting the second-order Stokes
Ep ’ = Ep 1
ρ gA2
, E ’
= E 1
ρ gA2
, E ’
= E 1
ρgA 2
wave dispersion relations yields the following: (20)
4 k k 4 2

ω2 = gk⋅tanh kd, (9) The analytical solutions were found to be in good agreement with the
numerical integration results, and with an increase in the wave steep­
and the result of the first term of Eq. (7) is as follows: ness, the kinetic energy was larger than the potential energy. This trend
1 g
{ (
kd⋅N 1 9ε2 kd⋅N 2C2 − 1
)} will further strengthen with an increase in the nonlinearity.
Ek1 = ρ 2 ε2 + + + , (10)
4 k 2S2 2 16 2S8 2S6
2.2. Third-order Stokes wave energy density
where C = cosh kd, and N = tanh kd.
As for the second term of Eq. (7), the upper limit of the integral is As for the third-order Stokes wave theory, different and often
variable. The Taylor expansion is used to expand the velocity at the inconsistent Stokes solutions are proposed in the available literature.
mean water level (z = 0). For the second-order Stokes wave, expanding Generally, the existing third-order Stokes solutions can be classified into
the velocity to the first derivative term can meet the accuracy re­ three kinds. The first kind has a constant term in the expression of wave
quirements. The expression is as follows: profile, such as that given by De (1955) and Laitone (1962). The second
∫η ∫η kind, such as that due to Whitham (1974) and Tsuchiya and Yasuda
1
ρ u2 dz = 12 ρ 0 [u2 (0) + (u2 (0) )’ ⋅z ] dz,
2 0
(11) (1981), has a non-periodic term in the expression of velocity potential.
In the third kind, there is no constant term in the free surface expression
Substituting the expressions of second-order Stokes wave profile η or non-periodic term in the velocity potential expression, such as
and wave velocity u(0) into Eq. (11). A result that is accurate to ε4 is Skjelbreia (1959) and Wiegel (1992). The essence for the existing
given as follows: various third-order Stokes wave solution lies in the different definitions
{ ( )} for the perturbation parameter or the water levels as datum. Here, the
1 g 17C2 − 8
Ek2 = ρ 2 ε2 ε2 1 + . (12) mean water level (MWL) is chosen as datum and wave steepness ε as
4 k 8S4
perturbation parameter, which is consistent as Skjelbreia (1959). Thus,
In the same way, the third and fourth terms of Eq. (7) can be obtained Skjelbreia’s (1959) results are considered. The wave profile and velocity
as follows: potential expressions for a third-order Stokes wave are given as follows:
{ ( )} η = E1 cos θ + E2 cos 2 θ + E3 cos 3 θ, (21)
1 g kd⋅N 1 9ε2 kd⋅N 2C2 − 1
Ek3 = ρ 2 ε2 − + + − + , (13)
4 k 2S2 2 16 2S8 2S6
Aω
( ) φ= (F1 sin θ + F2 sin 2 θ + F3 sin 3 θ). (22)
1 g 9 k
Ek4 = ρ 2 ε2 ε2 ⋅ 2 . (14)
4 k 8S The expressions of Ei and Fi (i = 1, 2, 3) are given as follows. The
third-order Stokes wave horizontal and vertical velocities can be ob­
To summarize, adding Eq. (10) and Eqs. 12–14 together makes it
tained using the spatial derivative of velocity potential φ.
possible to obtain the kinetic energy of the second-order Stokes wave for
a finite water depth as follows: ⎧
⎪ E1 = A
⎪
⎪ ( )
{ ( )} ⎪
⎪
1 g 52S4 + 36S2 + 9 ⎪
⎪ C 2C2 + 1
Ek = ρ 2 ε 2 1 + ε 2 1 + . (15) ⎪
⎪ E2 = Aε
⎪ 3
4 k 16S6 ⎪
⎪ 4S
⎪
⎪ ( 6 )
⎪
⎪ 3 8C +1
The total energy per unit area under the free surface of the second- ⎪
⎪
⎪ E3 = Aε 2
⎪
⎪ 6
order Stokes wave is found as follows: ⎨ 64S
( 4 ))
( 2
{ ( )} ⎪ 1 ε 5S + 11S2 + 6
1 g 5 68S4 + 57S4 + 18 ⎪ F1 =
⎪ − ⋅cosh k(z + d)
E = Ep + Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 + . (16) ⎪
⎪
⎪ S 8S 5
2 k 8 32S 6 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 3ε
⎪
⎪ F2 = 4 ⋅cosh 2 k(z + d)
For deep water (kd→∞), Eq. (6) and Eqs. (15)–(16) can be simplified ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 8S
⎪
to obtain expressions for the potential energy, kinetic energy, and total ⎪
⎪
⎪ 2
energy: ⎩ F3 = ε2 9 − 4S ⋅cosh 3 k(z + d)
⎪
64S7

3
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

Fig. 2. Comparison of analytical solutions with numerical integration results in application range of second-order Stokes wave: (a) d = 10 m, within the application
range for the finite water depth, (b) d = 20 m, within the application range for the deep water depth.

Considering the third-order Stokes wave profile, substituting Eq. (21) The total energy per unit area under the free surface of the third-
into Eq. (1) makes it possible to obtain the potential energy of the third- order Stokes wave is found as follows:
order Stokes wave for a finite water depth as follows:
1 g ( )
E = Ep + Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ T1 + ε4 ⋅ T2 , (26)
1 g ( ) 2 k
Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ P1 + ε4 ⋅ P2 , (23)
4 k
in which,
in which,
1 1
( )2 T1 = (P1 + K1 ), ​ T2 = (P2 + K2 ).
4
1 16S + 21S + 9 2 9 8C6 + 1 2 2
P1 = + , P = .
For deep water (kd→∞), Eq. (23) and Eqs. (25)–(26) can be simpli­
2
4 16S6 642 S12
As for the third-order Stokes wave theory, the dispersion relations fied to obtain expressions for the potential energy, kinetic energy, and
can be substituted as follows (Hsu et al., 2006; Skjelbreia, 1959; Song total energy:
et al., 2012): ( )
1 g 1 9
Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 + ε4 , (27)
{ ( )}2 4 k 4 64
8S4 + 8S2 + 9
ω2 = gk ⋅ tanh kd⋅ 1 + ε2 . (24) ( )
16S4 1 g 3 9
Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 + ε4 , (28)
Eqs. (21)–(22) can be substituted into Eq. (2). The same method as 4 k 4 64
calculating the kinetic energy of the second-order Stokes wave is ( )
adopted to derive the kinetic energy of third-order Stokes wave. A 1 g 1 9
E = Ep + Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 + ε4 . (29)
considerable amount of symbolic calculation is involved to obtain the 2 k 2 64
expression for the kinetic energy of the third-order Stokes wave, which is In order to verify the correctness of the analytical expression, given
carried out with Matlab software. A kinetic energy value that is accurate the wave period T = 4 s, the water depth d = 10 m and d = 20 m, which
to the sixth order for a finite water depth can be found as follows: represent the application range for the finite and deep water depth,
1 g ( ) respectively. The dimensionless analytical solutions were compared
Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ K1 + ε4 ⋅ K2 , (25) with the numerical integration results in the application range
4 k
(Méhauté, 1976) of the third-order Stokes wave, as shown in Fig. 3.
in which, It was found that for both the potential and kinetic energy values, the
analytical solutions were in good agreement with the numerical inte­
3 24S4 + 30S2 + 9
K1 = + , ​ gration results. As the wave steepness increased, the kinetic energy and
4 16S6
potential energy were no longer equal, but the former was larger than
9 11904S + 42304S8 + 56064S6 + 34416S4 + 9720S2 + 729
10
K2 = + . the latter. Compared with the second-order Stokes wave, the difference
64 4096S12
between the two energy values was more significant.

Fig. 3. Comparison of analytical solutions with numerical integration results in application range of third-order Stokes wave: (a) d = 10 m, within the application
range for the finite water depth, (b) d = 20 m, within the application range for the deep water depth.

4
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

2.3. Fifth-order Stokes wave energy density

where Cj = cosh(jkd).
The wave profile and velocity potential expressions for the fifth- The total energy per unit area under the free surface of the fifth-order
order Stokes wave in a fixed coordinate system were taken from Fen­ Stokes wave is found as follows:
ton (1985):
1 g ( )
E = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ FT1 + ε4 ⋅ FT2 + ε6 ⋅ FT3 + ε8 ⋅ FT4 , (34)
η = η(1) + η(2) + η(3) + η(4) + η(5) , (30) 2 k

( )1/2 ∑5 ∑i in which,
g
φ(x, z, t) = (ca − cr )x + C0 εi Aij cosh jk(z + d)sin jθ, (31)
k 3 1( )
i=1 j=1 FTj = FPj + FKj ( j = 1, 2, 3, 4).
2
in which, For deep water (kd→∞), Eqs. (32)–(34) can be simplified to obtain
⎧ η = A cos θ expressions for the potential energy, kinetic energy, and total energy:
⎪
⎪ (1)
( )
⎪
⎪ η(2) = AεB22 cos 2 θ
⎨ 1 g 1 19 4 7495 6 140959 8
η(3) = Aε2 B31 (cos θ − cos 3 θ) Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 − ε2 − ε + ε + ε , (35)
⎪ 4 k 2 12 4608 73728
⎪
⎪ η = Aε3 (B42 cos 2 θ + B44 cos 4 θ)
⎪
⎩ (4) ( )
η(5) = Aε4 { − (B53 + B55 )cos θ + B53 cos 3 θ + B55 cos 5 θ} 1 g 19 4 47 6 30199 8
Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 − ε + ε + ε , (36)
4 k 12 72 4608
1/2
where C0 = (tan kd) ; Aij and Bij are series of coefficients from Table 1
( )
of the paper by Fenton (1985); ca is the absolute phase velocity; and cr is 1 g 1 19 4 1167 6 624143 8
E = ρ 2 ε2 1 − ε2 − ε + ε + ε . (37)
the phase velocity relative to a frame moving with the same velocity as 2 k 4 12 1024 147456
the mean (Eulerian) velocity cE below the wave trough level.
The first three terms for the potential energy in deep water in Eq.
According to Stokes’ first definition (Jonsson and Steenberg, 1999)
(35) and the first two terms for the kinetic energy in deep water in Eq.
of wave celerity (cE = 0, ​ cr = c), the first term on the right-hand side in
(36) (the factor on ε2 in the parentheses is zero) are in agreement with
Eq. (31) vanishes. Here, the wave energy in this situation can be
the results of Jonsson and Steenberg (1999), who presented sixth-order
calculated.
expressions for the potential and kinetic energy of a fifth-order Stokes
Substituting Eq. (30) into Eq. (1) makes it possible to obtain the
wave in deep water. A comparison of the results of Longuet-Higgins
potential energy of the fifth-order Stokes wave as follows:
(1975), who presented eighth-order expressions for the potential and
1 g ( ) kinetic energy in deep water based on the findings of Schwartz (1974),
Ep = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ FP1 + ε4 ⋅ FP2 + ε6 ⋅ FP3 + ε8 ⋅ FP4 , (32)
4 k showed that the present expressions for the energy are the same as his
results until the sixth order. However, the factors of the eighth-order
in which, term are different(De, 1955; Laitone, 1962; Skjelbreia, 1959; Tsuchiya
⎧
⎪ FP = B22 2 + 2B31 and Yasuda, 1981; Whitham, 1974; Wiegel, 1992).
⎪
⎨ 1
FP2 = 2B31 2 − 2B53 − 2B55 + 2B22 B42 In order to compare the present expressions with the previous re­
2 2
⎪ FP3 = B42 + B44 − 4B31 B53 − 2B31 B55
⎪ sults, given the wave period T = 4 s, within the application range for
⎩
FP4 = 2B53 + 2B55 2 + 2B53 B55
2
deep water, water depth d is equal to 20 m. The different analytical
solutions were compared to the numerical integration results (black
To consider the fifth-order Stokes wave velocity and wave profile,
solid line). As shown in Figs. 4 and 5, the present potential and kinetic
Eqs. (30)–(31) can be substituted into Eq. (2). The same method as
energy results are both more consistent with the numerical integration
previously used can be used for the necessary (very extensive) calcula­
results. Moreover, it is obvious that the dimensionless energy is less than
tion by Matlab software to obtain a kinetic energy value that is accurate
1.0. Thus, the energy of the fifth-order Stokes wave is less than that of
to the tenth order:
the first-order Stokes wave.
1 g ( )
Ek = ρ 2 ε2 1 + ε2 ⋅ FK1 + ε4 ⋅ FK2 + ε6 ⋅ FK3 + ε8 ⋅ FK4 . (33)
4 k
The parameters used in Eq. (33) can be found as follows:

⎧
⎪
⎪ 3(4 − 2C2 + C4 )
⎪
⎪ FK1 =−
⎪
⎪
⎪ 32S6
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 11083 + 20313C2 + 17532C4 + 10679C6 + 4656C8 + 473C10 + 108C12 − 25C14 − 19C16
⎪
⎪ FK2 =
⎪
⎪ 8192S12 (8 + 11C2 + 6C4 )
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 259553808 + 492963498C2 + 397241624C4 + 278483866C6 + 153988226C8 + 74995000C10 +
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ 29981381C12 + 13918486C14 + 3769740C16 + 1061304C18 − 56973C20 − 39114C22 − 846C24
FK3 =−
⎪ 37748736S18 (2 + 3C2 )2 (1 + 4C2 )
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 55637835104856 + 104631811394372C2 + 91080833890657C4 + 69876133995462C6 +
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 49637692964642C8 + 30507459945542C10 + 17222621624907C12 + 7983631472872C14 +
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 3350311001372C16 + 1009016838672C18 + 263561949377C20 + 12427567930C22 −
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 7755942978C24 − 6098843910C26 − 149520493C28 + 78720900C30 + 5435820C32
⎪
⎩ FK4 =
773094113280S24 (8 + 11C2 + 6C4 )2

5
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

Table 1
Coefficients of wave profile and velocity potential function.
j aj bj

1 − 1.15509030 − 7.39569843
2 0.17575222 0.08749017
3 − 0.04126163 − 0.00602857
4 0.01157247 0.00050626
5 − 0.00354661 − 4.3933E-05
6 0.00113060 3.7414E-06
7 − 0.00036122 − 2.8414E-07
8 0.00011198 1.8279E-08
9 − 3.2722E-05 − 9.5304E-10
10 8.7854E-06 3.9252E-11
11 − 2.1189E-06 − 1.2503E-12
12 4.4981E-07 3.0201E-14
13 − 8.2400E-08 − 5.4118E-16
14 1.2759E-08 6.9684E-18
15 − 1.6303E-09 − 6.2007E-20
16 1.6678E-10 3.4584E-22
17 − 1.3094E-11 6.7325E-22
18 7.3885E-13 − 1.4564E-23
19 − 2.6583E-14 − 3.2356E-23 Fig. 5. Comparison of different kinetic energy analytical solutions to numerical
20 4.5347E-16 − 1.6407E-23
integration results.

3. Wave energy density found with HAM

(1 − q)ℑi [φ̃(t,z; q)− φ0 (t,z),η̃(t;q)− η0 (t)] =ci0 qℜi [φ̃(t,z; q),η̃(t; q)] (i=1,2),
(42)
The nonlinear free surface conditions of water wave problems are
given as follows: where q ∈ [0, 1] is the embedding parameter, c0i is the convergence
( )
1 ∂φ 1 control parameter, ℑi is the auxiliary linear operator, η0 (t) and φ0 (t, z)
η= − − |∇φ|2 + B . (38) are the initial estimates of η(t) and φ(t, z) respectively. The following
g ∂t 2
expressions exist:
( )
2
∂2 φ ∂φ ∂ |∇φ| 1 φ̃(t, z; 0) = φ0 (t, z), φ̃(t, z; 1) = φ(t, z), (43)
+ g + + ∇φ ⋅ ∇|∇φ|2 = 0. (39)
∂t 2 ∂z ∂t 2
η̃(t; 0) = η0 (t), η̃(t; 1) = η(t). (44)
The homotopy analysis method is applied to solve this nonlinear
problem. The nonlinear operators are defined as: As q varies from 0 to 1, mapping functions φ̃ (t, z; q) and η̃(t; q)
( ) deforms from the initial estimates φ0 and η0 to the exact solutions φ and
1 ∂φ 1 η, respectively.
ℜ1 [φ, η] = − − |∇φ|2 + B − η. (40)
g ∂t 2 z=η Using the HAM, the wave profile and velocity potential can be
( ) expressed as follows:
( 2 )
∂2 φ ∂φ ∂ |∇φ| 1 ∑N
ℜ2 [φ, η] = + g + + ∇φ⋅∇|∇φ|2 . (41) η= aj cos(jθ), (45)
∂t2 ∂z ∂t 2 j=1
z=η

∑N
In the frame of the HAM, Eqs. (40)–(41) can be constructed to two φ= bj
cosh[jk(z + d)]
sin(jθ). (46)
deformation equation as: j=1 cosh(jkd)

Fig. 4. Comparison of different potential energy analytical solutions to nu­

merical integration results. Fig. 6. Horizontal velocity field contour within wavelength range.

6
G. Dong et al.
Fig. 7. Vertical velocity field contour within wavelength range.
Using the HAM scheme with wave period T = 4 s, water depth d = 20
m, and wave height H = 2.4 m, coefficients aj and bj are given in Table 1
in the case of N = 20.
The wave profile and the velocity field were compared with that
based on the fifth-order Stokes theory. As shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, the
HAM results were in good agreement with the fifth-order Stokes wave
theory.
Substituting Eqs. (45)–(46) into Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) makes it possible
to obtain the potential energy and kinetic energy based on the HAM
solution. Similarly, given wave period T = 4 s and water depth d = 20 m,
within the deep water application range, the present fifth-order Stokes
wave energy was compared with the wave energy calculated based on
the HAM. As shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9, the potential and kinetic wave
energy values calculated based on the HAM were both in good agree­
ment with the present fifth-order Stokes wave energy, except near the
wave of maximum steepness. The difference between the two results will
be discussed later.
4. Results and discussions
4.1. Nonlinear Stokes wave energy density
Energy density analytical expressions for the different-order
Fig. 8. Potential energy Ep as function of wave steepness H/L.
7
Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159
Fig. 9. Kinetic energy Ek as function of wave steepness H/L.
nonlinear Stokes waves for a finite water depth and deep water were
obtained based on the nonlinear Stokes wave theory. For the second-
order Stokes wave, the energy density expression was accurate to ε4,
which was the same as that of Zou (2005), but expressed in a different
form. For the third-order Stokes wave, the analytical expression was
accurate to ε6. These results were in good agreement with the numerical
integration results. For the fifth-order Stokes wave, an energy expression
that was accurate to ε10 for a finite water depth and deep water was
obtained. The result for deep water was the same as that obtained by
Jonsson and Steenberg (1999), who derived an energy expression that
was accurate to ε6 for deep water. Compared with Longuet-Higgins
(1975) eighth-order results for the fifth-order Stokes energy in deep
water, different factors were obtained for the eighth-order term, and the
present energy expression was more consistent with the numerical
integration results.
Méhauté (1976) presented the ranges of application of the various
wave theories, as shown in Fig. 10. Generally, an Ursell (Ur) value of 26
is the dividing line between the Stokes wave theory and cnoidal wave
theory. In the applicable range of deepwater Stokes waves, given wave
Fig. 10. Recommended wave theory selection.
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

Fig. 11. Comparison of potential energy density Ep values of different-order

′
Fig. 13. Comparison of total energy density E values of different-order
′

Stokes waves. Stokes waves.

by the interaction between the components of waves. The significance of

this interaction was revealed when it was strongly nonlinear.
Substituting the fifth-order Stokes wave profile and velocity into Eq.
(1) and Eq. (2) and expanding the square terms makes it possible to
obtain the following expression:

η2 = (η(1) + η(2) + η(3) + η(4) + η(5) )2

= η(1) 2 + η(2) 2 + η(3) 2 + η(4) 2 + η(5) 2 +
(47)
2η(1) η(2) + 2η(1) η(3) + 2η(1) η(4) + 2η(1) η(5) +
2η(2) η(3) + 2η(2) η(4) + 2η(2) η(5) + 2η(3) η(4) + 2η(3) η(5) + 2η(4) η(5)

u2 = (u(1) + u(2) + u(3) + u(4) + u(5) )2

= u(1) 2 + u(2) 2 + u(3) 2 + u(4) 2 + u(5) 2 +
2u(1) u(2) + 2u(1) u(3) + 2u(1) u(4) + 2u(1) u(5) +
2u(2) u(3) + 2u(2) u(4) + 2u(2) u(5) + 2u(3) u(4) + 2u(3) u(5) + 2u(4) u(5)
(48)
In order to explain the phenomenon that the fifth-order Stokes wave
energy is less than the linear wave energy, the contribution of each order
component of the wave to the fifth-order Stokes wave energy is calcu­
lated, as shown in Figs. 14 and 15. The black solid line represents the
Fig. 12. Comparison of kinetic energy density Ek values of different-order
′

sum of the energy values of all the components, which are expressed by
Stokes waves.
dashed lines in the figures. As shown in the figures, the first-order

period T = 4 s and water depth d = 20 m (the red (in Web version) solid
line in Fig. 10), it is possible to obtain the trend of the wave energy as the
wave steepness increases and compare the energy values of
different-order Stokes waves as follows.
As shown in Figs. 11–13, as the wave steepness increases, the second-
order Stokes wave energy is generally greater than the linear wave en­
ergy. However, the third-order Stokes wave energy is less than the
second-order Stokes wave energy because there is a wave amplitude
dispersion phenomenon when considering third-order Stokes waves, as
shown in Eq. (24). As the wave height increases, so does the wavelength,
and the wave energy is distributed over a longer range. As a result, the
small parameter (ε) of the third-order Stokes wave is smaller than that of
the second-order Stokes wave. Thus, the third-order wave energy den­
sity is slightly smaller than that of the second-order wave energy.
In addition, the fifth-order Stokes wave energy is even smaller than
the linear wave energy. The same conclusion could be obtained from the
previous expressions for the fifth-order Stokes wave energy density
(Jonsson and Steenberg, 1999; Longuet-Higgins, 1975). However, pre­
vious papers did not discuss the reasons for this phenomenon. The en­
ergy attenuation of fifth-order Stokes waves was considered to be caused
Fig. 14. Components of fifth-order Stokes wave potential energy.

8
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

expressions of the fifth-order Stokes waves and HAM into Eq. (50), the
pressure values at the free surface found using the two methods can be
compared. In general, the wave pressure at the free surface is considered
to be zero, as shown in Fig. 16. The pressure at the free surface obtained
by the HAM is closer to zero, and the fluctuation is smaller. Thus, the
energy obtained by the HAM seemed to be more accurate near the wave
of maximum steepness.

4.3. Distribution of energy in wavelength range

Given wave period T = 4 s, water depth d = 7.5 m, wave height H =

Fig. 15. Components of fifth-order Stokes wave kinetic energy.
component plays a dominant role and contributes the most to the en­
ergy, whereas the other terms are almost equal to 0, which is the same as
the results of the present study. It is worth noting that the first-order and
third-order interaction term (red (in Web version) dashed line) and the
first-order and fifth-order interaction term (pink (in Web version)
dashed line) are negative. As a result, the energy sum is less than the
first-order component. Thus, the energy of the fifth-order Stokes wave is
smaller than the linear wave energy.
4.2. Wave energy density found with HAM
According to Figs. 8 and 9, there is a slight difference between the
wave energy obtained from the HAM solution and the fifth-order Stokes
wave energy near the wave of maximum steepness. Here, the reasons for
this difference are discussed.
The free surface boundary condition for water wave problems is
given as follows:
∂φ 1 p gravity wave and obtain the energy density. Some of the major con­
+ |∇φ|2 + + gη = B, (49)
∂t 2 ρ clusions obtained are as follows:
2.4 m, and a wave steepness of 0.092, it is possible to obtain the wave
energy distribution of the fifth-order Stokes wave in a wavelength range.
As shown in Figs. 17–19, it is obvious that the energy below the wave
crest is greater than that below the wave trough. Thus, the kinetic en­
ergy was divided into two parts: the half-wavelength energy below the
wave crest, Ecrest , and the half-wavelength energy below the wave
trough, Etrough . The ratio of the energy values of these two parts is given
in Table 2.
In addition, how the ratio changed with the wave height was
calculated, as shown in Figs. 20–22. As for the first-order Stokes wave
theory, when calculating the wave energy, the upper limit of the integral
of Eq. (2) was approximately zero. Thus, the energy values below the
wave crest and trough were equal. As for the fifth-order Stokes wave,
with an increase in the wave height, the ratio of the crest energy to the
trough energy gradually increased, with the ratio of the total energy
below the wave crest to that below the wave trough changing from 1.00
to 2.60. This meant that when the wave nonlinearity increased, the
energy distribution inside the wave became more uneven. It is well
known that the breaking position of a wave usually appears at the wave
crest. This may provide a way to explain the breaking of waves from an
energy perspective.
5. Conclusions
In this study, for a finite water depth and deep water, the energy
density of each order of nonlinear Stokes wave was obtained by theo­
retical derivation. Then, the HAM was applied to solve the fully
nonlinear partial differential equation for a steady propagating periodic

where B is an integration constant often called the Bernoulli constant.

The pressure expression at the free surface can be obtained using Eq.
(49):
( )
p ∂φ 1
=− + |∇φ|2 + gη + B. (50)
ρ ∂t 2
Given wave period T = 4 s, water depth d = 20 m, wave height H =
2.4 m, and substituting the wave profile and velocity potential

Fig. 16. Pressure at free surface. Fig. 17. Distribution of potential energy in wavelength range.

9
G. Dong et al. Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159

Fig. 20. Ratio of potential energy below wave crest to that below wave trough.

Fig. 18. Distribution of kinetic energy in wavelength range.

Fig. 21. Ratio of kinetic energy below wave crest to that below wave trough.

Fig. 19. Distribution of total energy in wavelength range.

Table 2
Ratio of crest energy to trough energy.
Ratio Value

Ep crest/Ep trough 1.420

Ek crest/Ek trough 2.409
E crest/E trough 1.842

1. For the second- and third-order Stokes wave theories, the energy
density values were accurate to the fourth order and sixth order,
respectively. For the fifth-order Stokes wave, higher-order expres­
sions for the energy density were proposed, which were accurate to
the tenth order. Compared with previous findings, the present energy
density was more consistent with the numerical integration result.
2. With an increase in the nonlinearity, the kinetic energy and potential
energy of the wave were no longer equal, with the former larger than Fig. 22. Ratio of total energy below wave crest to that below wave trough.
the latter. The energy was no longer a univariate function of the

10
G. Dong et al.
wave height but varied with wave parameters such as the wave
height and wave number.
3. The energy density of the fifth-order Stokes wave was less than that
of a linear wave as a result of the interaction between the wave
components. The energy density obtained by the HAM was close to
that of the fifth-order Stokes wave, but there was a slight difference
between the two methods near the wave of maximum steepness. The
energy obtained by the HAM was more accurate near the wave of
maximum steepness.
4. With an increase in the wave nonlinearity, the energy distribution
inside the wave became more uneven. The ratio of the crest energy to
the trough energy gradually increased. It is well known that the
breaking position of a wave usually appears at the wave crest. Thus,
this may provide a way to explain the breaking of waves from an
energy perspective.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Guohai Dong: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resource, Writing -
review & editing. Xiang Gao: Investigation, Visualization, Writing -
original draft. Xiaozhou Ma: Conceptualization, Methodology, Super­
vision, Writing - review & editing. Yuxiang Ma: Writing - review &
editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their appreciation to Dr. Zhiliang Lin,
School of Naval Architecture, Ocean & Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao
Tong University for his codes of HAM and careful guidance. This work
was financially supported by the National Key Research and Develop­
ment Program of China (2017YFC1404200) and the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51720105010, 51979029) and
LiaoNing Revitalization Talents Program (XLYC1902114), and the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No.
DUT20ZD402, DUT2019TB02).
References
Abbaszadeh, M., Dehghan, M., 2020. An upwind local radial basis functions-differential
quadrature (RBFs-DQ) technique to simulate some models arising in water sciences.
Ocean Eng. 197.
De, S.C., 1955. Contributions to the theory of Stokes waves. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc.
51 (4), 713–736.
Dean, R.G., Dalrymple, R.A., 1991. Water Wave Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists.
World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 94–97.
Dehghan, M., Abbaszadeh, M., 2017. The use of proper orthogonal decomposition (POD)
meshless RBF-FD technique to simulate the shallow water equations. J. Comput.
Phys. 351, 478–510.
11
Ocean Engineering 218 (2020) 108159
Dehghan, M., Manafian, J., Saadatmandi, A., 2010. Solving nonlinear fractional partial
differential equations using the homotopy analysis method. Numer. Methods Part.
Differ. Equ. 26 (2), 448–479.
Dehghan, M., Shakeri, F., 2008. Use of He’s homotopy perturbation method for solving a
partial differential equation arising in modeling of flow in porous media. J. Porous
Media 11 (8), 765–778.
Fenton, J.D., 1985. A fifth-order Stokes theory for steady waves. J. Waterw. Port, Coast.
Ocean Eng. 111 (2), 216–234.
Gao, J., Chen, H., Zang, J., Chen, L., Wang, G., Zhu, Y., 2020a. Numerical investigations
of gap resonance excited by focused transient wave groups. Ocean Eng. 212.
Gao, J., Ji, C., Gaidai, O., Liu, Y., 2016. Numerical study of infragravity waves
amplification during harbor resonance. Ocean Eng. 116, 90–100.
Gao, J., Ji, C., Liu, Y., Ma, X., Gaidai, O., 2017. Numerical study on transient harbor
oscillations induced by successive solitary waves. Ocean Dynam. 68 (2), 193–209.
Gao, J., Ma, X., Zang, J., Dong, G., Ma, X., Zhu, Y., Zhou, L., 2020b. Numerical
investigation of harbor oscillations induced by focused transient wave groups. Coast.
Eng. 158.
Hsu, J.R.C., Tsuchiya, Y., Silvester, R., 2006. Third-order approximation to short-crested
waves. J. Fluid Mech. 90 (1), 179–196.
Jacobsen, N.G., 2016. Wave-averaged properties in a submerged canopy: energy density,
energy flux, radiation stresses and Stokes drift. Coast. Eng. 117, 57–69.
Jonsson, I.G., Arneborg, L., 1995. Energy properties and shoaling of higher-order Stokes
waves on a current. Ocean Eng. 22 (8), 819–857.
Jonsson, I.G., Steenberg, C.M., 1999. Characteristic velocities for higher-order Stokes
waves in deep water. J. Waterw. Port, Coast. Ocean Eng. 125 (3), 109–117.
Klopman, G., 1990. A note on integral properties of periodic gravity waves in the case of
a non-zero mean Eulerian velocity. J. Fluid Mech. 211, 609–615.
Laitone, E.V., 1962. Limiting conditions for cnoidal and Stokes waves. J. Geophys. Res.
67 (4), 1555–1564.
Liao, S., 2003. Beyond Perturbation Introduction to the Homotopy Analysis Method.
Chapman and Hall, pp. 35–37.
Liao, S., 2012. Homotopy Analysis Method in Nonlinear Differential Equations. Springer,
Berlin, pp. 56–59.
Lin, Z., 2016. Mass, momentum and energy flux in nonlinear water wave based on HAM
solution. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering (OMAE2016). Busan, South Korea.
Lin, Z., Tao, L., Pu, Y., Murphy, A.J., 2014. Fully nonlinear solution of bi-chromatic deep-
water waves. Ocean Eng. 91, 290–299.
Liu, Z., Lin, Z., Tao, L., 2016. Mass, momentum, and energy flux conservation for
nonlinear wave-wave interaction. Phys. Fluids 28 (12).
Liu, Z., Sun, J., Xie, D., Lin, Z., 2019. On the near resonances of collinear steady-state
wave groups in finite water depth. Ocean Eng. 182, 584–593.
Longuet-Higgins, M.S., 1975. Integral properties of periodic gravity waves of finite
amplitude. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Math. Phys. Sci. 342 (1629), 157–174.
Méhauté, B.L., 1976. An Introduction to Hydrodynamics and Water Waves. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 205–206.
Mei, C.C., Stiassnie, M., Yue, D.K.-P., 2005. Theory and Applications of Ocean Surface
Waves. World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 18–19.
Pihl, J.H., Bredmose, H., Larsen, J., 2001. Shoaling of sixth-order Stokes waves on a
current. Ocean Eng. 28 (6), 667–687.
Saadatmandi, A., Dehghan, M., 2009. He’s variational iteration method for solving a
partial differential equation arising in modeling of the water waves. Z. Naturforsch.
64 (12), 783–787.
Schwartz, L.W., 1974. Computer extension and analytic continuation of Stokes’s
expansion for gravity waves. J. Fluid Mech. 62, 03.
Skjelbreia, L., 1959. Gravity Waves Stokes’ Third Order Approximation; Tables of
Functions. Engineering Foundation Council of Wave Research.
Song, Z., Zhao, H., Li, L., Lü, G., 2012. On the universal third order Stokes wave solution.
Sci. China Earth Sci. 56 (1), 102–114.
Sorensen, R.M., 2006. Basic Coastal Engineering. Springer, pp. 36–37.
Stokes, G.G., 1847. On the theory of oscillatory waves. Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc. 8,
441–455.
Tsuchiya, Y., Yasuda, T., 1981. A new approach to Stokes wave theory. Bull. Disaster
Prev. Res. Inst. 31 (1), 17–34.
Whitham, G.B., 1974. Linear and Nonlinear Waves. Wiley-Interscience.
Wiegel, R.L., 1992. Oceanographical Engineering. Dover Publications.
Zou, Z., 2005. Water Wave Theories and Their Applications. Science Publishing
Company, Dalian, pp. 22–23 (in Chinese).