JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 86, NO.

C7, PAGES 6442-6450, JULY 20, 1981

Infragravity Energy in the Surf Zone

R. A. HOLMAN

Schoolof Oceanography,
OregonState University,Corvallis,Oregon,97331

Field measurements
of onshoreand longshorevelocitiesin the surf zonehavebeenobtainedon Marti-
niqueBeach,Nova Scotia,for the purposeof investigatingthe dynamicsof the infragravityband (0.003-
0.03Hz) of thespectra.
A totalof 35datarunswereobtained
duringa 1-week
period.Of particular
inter-
estis the responseof the infragravityenergyto the changingincidentwaves,which increasedconsiderably
in sizeduringthe latter haft of the week due to an approachinghurricane.It is showntheoretically,
using
equilibriumarguments,that the infragravityamplitudeshouldvary approximatelylinearly with incident
wave amplitude.This is supportedfrom the field data if signifier wave height is usedas a measureof
incidentamplitude.The incidentband of spectraobservedby instrumentsin the surf zone is limited by
breaking.Thus the infragravityband appearsto dominatethesespectraduring storms.The analysisis
carried out in terms of a spectraltransformation,the spectrumwhich would be observedat an offshore
instrumentif the shorelineamplitudespectrumwere white with unit spectralenergydensity.For onshore
velocitythe transformationpredictsthe observedspectralstructurein the infragravityband, showingthat
the structuredid not representany true frequencyselection.The match of theory and data also implies
that the onshoremotionsare free waves,forcednear resonance.The longshorespectraare red and show
no structurewhich would be associatedwith free waves.This is consistentwith the theoreticalprediction
that many edgewave modes,includinghigh modes,would be forcedgiven the broad directionalspread
of the stormwaves.It is notedthat further field experimentswouldbe simpleron the Pacificcoastwhere
the typical,narrow-band,incidentswellshouldforceonly a few, low, edgewave modes,a more accom-
modatingsituationto observeand analyze.

1. INTRODUCTION interactioncould be resonant,the edge wave amplitude was

The term 'infragravity' has been used to indicate motions
with time scalesof about 30-300 s, usuallyassociatedwith the
surf zone. Munk [1949] was the first to observeinfragravity
energyby using a tsunamirecorder,basicallya stilling well
which filtered out the higher frequency componentsof the
spectrum.He calledthe phenomenon'surf beat' to reflectthe
observedassociation of theselow frequencymotionswith the
beatin the incidentwaves.The term infragravityenergyis per-
hapspreferableto indicatethat it is the low frequencymotion
that is being referred to, not the simple beating of two, first-
order incident waves(which has no spectralrepresentationat
the beat frequencyand doesnot necessarilyprovide the forc-
ing at infragravityfrequencies).
Theoretical studiesof infragravity dynamicshave evolved
along two lines. The earlier theorieswere two dimensional,
with no longshoredependence[Munk, 1949; Tucker, 1950;
Longuet-Higginsand Stewart, 1964; Suhayda, 1974]. Associ-
ated with incidentgroups(definedby Bowenand Guza [1978]
as the amplitudemodulationin the incomingwave train) is a
second-order,forcedcorrectionto mean sealevel, progressing
shorewardwith the group. This forcedwave is then released
as a seaward-propagating free wave when the incident waves
break [Longuet.Higginsand Stewart,1964].The summationof
the inward and outward propagatingcomponentsshouldgive
a standingcomponentto the wave pattern. This mechanism
doesnot allow for longshoreperiodicity,and the responseis
limited since the interaction is not resonant.
More recently,three -dimensionaltheorieshave been devel-
oped in which longshoremodulation in the incident wave
field is also considered.Gallagher[1971] was the first to dis-
cussthis case,showingthat, under certain conditions,the in-
cidentwave groupscould force edgewaves.Longshoreperio-
dicity was thus introduced into the problem and, since the
Copyright¸ 1981by the AmericanGeophysicalUnion.
Paper 1C0314.
0148-0227/81/001C-0314501.00
not inherently limited. The mechanismwas further discussed
by Bowenand Guza [1978] who concludedfrom laboratory
evidencethat Gallagher'smechanismwasimportantand that
surfbeatmay in fact be primarily an edgewavephenomenon.
One importantmotivationfor the studyof the infragravity
portion of the spectrumis to understandnearshoresediment
transportand its role in the developmentof beachmorphol-
ogy. Bowenand Inman [1971] point out that the formation of
crescentic sandbarscan be explainedin termsof standing,in-
fragravityedgewaves.Similarly,linear barsmay be generated
by progressive edgewaves.However,for this to occur,the in-
fragravity energy must be in the form of narrow spectral
peakswhich, for crescenticbars at least, shouldeach contain
only one edgewave mode.
Field investigationshavefounddifficultydifferentiatingbe-
tween standing incident and edge wave models for in-
fragravityenergy.This is largely due to the similarityin off-
shoreprofile of the two wave forms;an extensiveinstrument
array would be neededto distinguishproperlywhich wave
form waspresent,particularlyff many high edgewave modes
were contributingto the wave motion. Thus past work has
generally described infragravity spectra and shown con-
sistencywith one or the other theory. Data discussedin terms
of the standingincidentwave theoryhas beenpublishedby
Munk [1949], Tucker [1950] and Suhayda[1974]. Field data
which was explainedin termsof edgewaveswas presntedby
Gallagher[1971],Huntleyand Bowen[1975],Sasakiand Hori-
kawa [1975],and Huntley [1976].
Field studieshave alsoattemptedto testthe relationshipbe-
tweeninfragravitywavesand beachmorphology[Short, 1975;
Wrightet al., 1978].Again, thesestudieswere unable to iden-
tify the form of the infragravityenergy.(It shouldbe noted
that this discussionpurposelyexcludesthe higherfrequency
subharmonicedge wave mechanismwhich Guza and Inman
[1975] show can generatebeach cusps.Greater successhas
been achievedin identifying subharmonicenergy as edge
6442
 HOLMAN: INFRAORAVlTY ENEROY IN THE SURF ZONE 6443

waves and linking these to beach features [Komar, 1973; EDGE WAVES

Huntley and Bowen,1978].) 0,8 REFLECTED NORMALLY

INCIDENT WAVE
Finally, severalstudieshavedemonstrated that beachmor-
phologyis mostactivelyalteredduringstorms[$chalk, 1963;
Short, 1975]. It is therefore of interest to know if the in-
fragravityband of the spectrumbecomesincreasinglyimpor- • (X)02n-.O
,/ \• n-2 ,..----...
tant duringstorms.High energyconditionshave beenstudied '% ."
o o
by Wrightet al. [1978]and Holman et al. [1978].
The purposeof this paper is to study the nature of in-
fragravityenergyon a real beachand the variationof the in- -o.7
fragravityresponse to varyingincidentwaveenergy.This is ac- -0.6
complished throughthe useof an extensivesetof field data.
The data are interpretedin termsof a superpositionof edge Fig. 1. Offshoredependence of edgewavesof modesn -- 0, 1, 2, 3
and of a reflectednormally incidentwave for a plane beachin terms
wave modes.Section2 thereforereviewssomenecessarytheo- of nondimensional
offshoredistance
x -- o•x/gfi.
reticalideasstartingwith basicedgewave kinematics.A spec-
tral transformation,M(f), is introducedasa necessary tool for
the analysisof offshoredata, and the methodof applicationof and k is the wave number (--2•r/L, where L is the longshore
the transformationto the data is discussed.Some general as- wavelength).The offshorebehavioris expressedin terms of
sumptionsaboutthe form of the forcingand dampingterms the nth order Laguerepolynomial,L,,
on a natural beachare then usedto extendthe theory of edge
wave dynamics.The physicsdescribedby the equationsis •.(x) -- e-•L.(2kx) (3)
then interpretedin termsof predictededgewave mode selec-
The dispersionrelation is
tion and strengthof the edgewave forcing.Conveniently,the
form of the resultsis not sensitiveto the preciseforms of the o: = gk(2n+ 1) tan fi (4)
assumptions. Finally, the responseof the systemundera vari-
ety of incidentwaveconditionsis discussed. It is showntheo- Figure I is a plot of • versusnondimensionaloffshoredis-
retically
thatonlyunder
veryspecific
circumstances
(a deep tanceX = o•x/g• for edgewavemodes0 to 3. Alsoplottedis
water angleof incidencenearly normal) would leaky modes the offshoreprofile for a standingincidentwave which is seen
be expectedto dominatethe infragravityband. Section3 dis- to be similar in form to the higher edgewave modes.For typi-
cussesthe field observationsof onshorevelocityduring storm cal valuesof o, x, and • for nearshoremeasurementsof in-
conditions. In section 4 the field data from calm and storm fragravityenergy,X is usuallysmall, of the order of 5. For
runs are comparedto determinethe relationshipbetweenthe these values, the edge wave modes (with the exception of
incidentenergyand the infragravityresponse. Finally, section mode 0) and even the reflected,normally incident wave, are
5 discussesthe field measurementsof the longshore com- virtually indistinguishable.
ponentof velocity. As the offshoreamplitudeof an edgewavevarieswith x
and o, offshoredata must be interpretedwith this in mind.
2. THEORY
Huntley [1976]investigatedthe variation of energyin particu-
Edge WaveKinematics lar frequencybandswith offshoredistance,showingthem to
Edgewavesare free surfacegravitywaveswhichpropagate match well the predictedvariation for edgewaves(Figure 1).
alonga slopingbeach,their energytrappedin the nearshore $uhayda[1974] carried out the analysisfor a fixed offshore
by refraction(thereis no radiationto the far field). This per- position,showingthat the variabilityof energywith frequency
mitsamplitudesto be built up throughweakincrementalforc- was consistentwith the modal structurefor standingincident
ing. The edgewavesolutionsto the equationsof motionhave waves. The latter circumstance,with spectra measured at
been found for severalanalytical expressionsfor the beach fixed offshorelocations,is typical for field data. It is evident
profile.The mostcommonlyusedis the shallowwater solu- that all offshoredata shouldbe analyzedin termsof a spectral
tion of Eckart [1951] for a plane beach,h(x, y) -- x tan fi, transformation,M(x, f), to separatethis expectedspectral
where x is the offshorecoordinate,positiveseawardfrom the structuredue solelyto offshorepositionfrom that which rep-
still water shoreline,y is the longshorecoordinate,h is the still resentsreal, physicalprocesses. Suhaydacarriesthis out as-
waterdepth,andtan fi is thebeachslope.Eckartdescribes the suming a plane beach.The assumption of a plane beachpro-
edgewavesin termsof the velocitypotential,•(x, y, 0, where file is often a good first approximation but plane beach
the velocity,u, and the elevation,•/, are given by profilesare not the norm in nature, concaveprofiles being
more common[Dean, 1977].An analytical solutionfor an ex-
I d• ponentialbeachprofileis providedby Ball [ 1967],but is diffi-
u--(u,•)--V• •1-- g dt (1) cult to useand of limited applicabilitysinceit assumesdepth
approaches an asymptoticvalue offshore.Holman and Bowen
whereg is the gravitationalaccelerationand t is time. Eckart's [1979]usea simplenumericalschemeto solvethe equationsof
solutionconsists of a setof edgewavemodes,describedby the motion for more realisticbeachprofiles,finding the dispersion
integermodalnumber,n, and havingthe form relationand •(x) for any edgewavefrequency,o.
Similarly the spectraltransformationM(f) must be found
• = a•gcos(cy - numerically.This is done for onshorevelocity (for example)
o
by numericallycomputingu(x,,f') for a setof valuesf', where
where a• is the shorelineamplitudeof the nth mode, o is the u is calculated for unit shorelineamplitude and x, is the in-
radial frequency(--2•r/T, where T is the edgewave period) strumentposition.M,(f) is interpolatedfrom the setof values
6444 HOLMAN:
INFRAGRAVITY
ENERGY
IN THESURFZONE

M,(xi,f') -- u•(xi,
f'). Thetransformation
willbea function
of
instrument
position
andof tidalelevationsince
thelatteraf-
fectsthebeachprofile.M will alsobe modedependentbut
onlyweakly
sosincethemodes aresosimilar
fortypical
Xval- ED6E
ues(Figure1).Testsfor MartiniqueBeach,NovaScotia, WAVES
showedM•(f)throughtheinfragravity
bandtobevirtually
in-
dependent
ofmode foredge wavemodes 2 orgreater.
Mode4
was chosenfor further calculations[Holmanand Bowen,
19791.
The transformation
is appliedto the databy shiftingthe
curvealongthey axisto maximize
thefit to thedata.The
amountof theshiftisa measure of theshorelineenergy(since
the curveis calculated
for unit shoreline
amplitude)and can
be usedasa consistency checkbetween instruments.Differ-
encesin theverticalshiftbetween runsreflecttimevariations
Fig.2. Thecomplete
setof solutions
•2, consisting
of theedge
in theinfragravity
energy.
Differences
between
thedataand waveregime
andtheleakymoderegime.Incident
forcing
at (kh o•)
the shiftedtransformationin a particularrun representtrue willforcealledge
wavemodes withwavenumber ki.Thestrength
of
structurein the shorelineamplitudespectrum. theforcingdependsonol2 - Oe
2(equation
(10)).
Edge WaveDynamics
Infragravity
waves
aremostlikelyforcedthrough
a non- Although
thedetails
ofthecalculation
canbecomplicated,
linearinteractionwithina modulated wavefield.The oneimportant
incident conclusioncanbedrawn. Regardless
ofthede-
formalism for thisinteraction
hasbeendiscussed
by Gallagher tailsof •(x) andf(x), bothfactors
areknownto increaseto-
ward the shoreline.Thus the dominantcontributionto the
[1971],
Witham
[1976],
andBowen
andGuza
[1978].
In general
terms,thesurfaceboundary condition is ex- coupling
fortheproblem integral
(7)willbeinthenearshore (generally
X-<10
pressed,to second
order,as forexamples calculatednumerically)withoffshorecontribu-
tionsbeingnegligible.
Thesimilarity oftheoffshoreprofiles
of
L(•2) -- Q(•,, •,) (5) thedifferent
edgewavemodes in thisregionhasalreadybeen
Q is a quadratic
operator
describing of two pointed
theinteraction out.Thusweexpect
thatthecoupling
integral
willbe
waves,in thiscasetakento betwoincidentwaves. onlyweakly
first-order modedependent. (In fact,k, whichismodede-
The interaction
will force•2, a motionwhichmustsatisfy(5). pendent, entersthe integral, but numerical examples have
The nonlinearforcing,Q(•,, •,), will occurat frequency shown the dependence to be veryweak.)
In theabsenceof a significant
longshore current,edgewave
ol --Io,- o21 (6a) dissipation
willdepend
ontherelative
importanceofue,a typ-
icaledgewavevelocity,
andUor•,
a typicalincident
waveor-
andthelongshore
component
of wavenumber
willbe bitalvelocity.
For lull<<Uo=an approach
maybeusedsimi-
= k,,,- = k, sin - sin lar to that usedby Longuet-Higgins[1972]in modeling
dissipation
of a steady
longshore
current
in thepresence
of
wherethesubscripts 1 and2 referto thetwo,interacting,in- breaking
waves;thatis,friction
term-- (C/h)uor•Ue,
where
Cis
cidentwaves,anda is the angleof incidence. Ursell[1952] thedragcoefficient.
Thisgives risetofriction
damping
ofthe
shows thatthecomplete setof solutions,
•2, ona beachcon- form:
sistsof thesetof discrete
edgewavemodes, for whicho• <
gk•andacontinuum
ofleaky
modes,
forwhich
o• > gky(Fig-
ure 2).
The interaction
of theincidentgroupiness
anda particular
Oae foøf'(X)•n(X)
dx (8)

--- -aea,
ot
edge
wavemode willberesonant
wavedispersion
relation.
Bowen
if olandk•satisfy
andGuza[1978]
theedge
discuss
this
foOO
•n2(X)
dx)
case,
showing
thattheedgewaveamplitude,
a•,willgrowas where f'(x) describes
theoffshoredependence
ontheproduct
of incidentwaveamplitude,a,,andtheedgewaveamplitude,
Oaea•a2 f(x)•bn(X)
dx d eß
Equation
(8)isonlya cruderepresentation
of dissipation.
Ot 2g ,b2(x)
dx (7)
GuzaandBowen[1976],foundthatedgewavedampingwas
dominatedby surfzoneturbulence whentheincidentwaves
wherea• anda2aretheamplitudes
of theincident
waves
and break.
In thatcasethe offshore
limit of the dampingintegral
f(x) isa complicatedexpression
describingtheoffshore shapein (8)maybereplaced bythebreak point,which depends on
of theincidentwaveforcingpatternarisingfromthebeating. a, sothedependence ofdissipationona,maybestronger than
Theintegral in thenumeratordescribesthecoupling of the linear.On the otherhand,the assumption lu,I << Uoris some-
forcing patternandtheedgewave.Theintegral in thede- timeslocallyviolatedin theinner surfzone (Figures 6 and7),
nominatoris the necessary normalization.(In practice,the although contributions
fromthisregion to theoffshore in-
breaking processreduces
theincident groupinessin thesurf tegralmaynotbelarge.Nevertheless, theremaybesomear-
zone,andit isconvenienttoignorethisregion,startingthein- gument for the useof the frictionterm(C/h)lu, lu,. Inter-
tegralatthemeanbreakpoint.Thisleads to anincident am- estingly,the results
derived in the following paragraphs are
plitudedependence somewhatlessthanquadratic.) notsensitiveto thischange.Theonlydifference will bein the
 HOLMAN: INFRAGRAVlTY ENERGY IN THE SURF ZONE 6445

details of the integral; the predicted dependenceof a, on SIN

oC
II o 9,,
will be unaffected.
For equilibrium,neglectinghigher-orderinteractions,forc-
ing equalsdissipation.Comparing(7) and (8) suggests
equilibriumedge wave amplitudemay vary as
that the
ß-'K
+ ••
a• ~ a,
foø]'(x)
oo
•n(x)
dx (9)

of'(n)•n(x)
dx
Equation (9) suggeststhat the relative importanceof the in-
fragravity and incident bands will be approximately inde-
pendentof incidentamplitude.Both integralsin (9) are domi-
nated by conditionsvery closeto the shore,which, for typical
infragravityfrequencies,correspondsto small X. Thus, for the
caseof two, deterministic,incidentwaves,the resultingequi-
librium edgewave amplitude will have at most a weak mode Fig. 3. Example of the reson•t •nditio• for ex6tmion of •
edgewave with frequencyo• mode nm•r n, by two •6dem waves
dependence.This resultis general,beinginsensitiveto the de- with frequencieso•, o•, on a beach of •t•t dope fl. The shaded
tails of the forcing or damping models. area •cmes the distribution of direction of •dden• a = 15 ø ß 10 ø.
Typically, the forcingwill not be exactlyresonant.A forced The dashed6rcle then •dicates the zone of •6dem wave for•g.
edgewaveresponsewill be at the wavenumber and frequency Forc•g e•ts • the edgewave •d leaky mode reg•es althoughthe
most•kely •teraction ½he•mer of the •tera•ion 6rcle) •es • the
of th6forcing,
(ks,os),andwillvaryas edgewave reg•e [•ter Bowenand •za, 1978].

a, - oD+ These resonancesare shown,for variousn, in Figure 3 by the

straightlines.Also shownis the leaky mode regime. It is dear
Q is the qualityfactor,an inversemeasureof damping,and o• that, for this example, many edge wave modes will be reso-
is the natural frequencyof the edgewave [Garrett, 1972]. nantly forced as well as the leaky modes.In fact, this will al-
Figure 2 showsthe completeset of second-orderwaves, ways be true for beamwidthsof this order (Aa -- 10ø). For
and an exampleof forcingat (ks, os)which lies in the edge very narrow beamwidths(of the order of 1o or less), Bowen
wave domain but between modes. For strong damping the and Guza's analysis of the colinear limit suggeststhat the
edge wave responsewill be broadbanded,and many edge forcing will be the strongestin (the interaction circle will be
wave modesmay be forcedat os. In mostcasesthis forcing centeredin) an edgewave regime out to a frequency
frequencywill not correspondto that for a free edge wave.
Thus spectraof measurementsat fixed instrumentswill not o• = 2•, sin a (12)
show any particular structureas describedby the spectral where 6i is the mean incident frequency.Thus, only for the
transformation. On the other hand, the observation of such case of near-normal incidence and very narrow beamwidth
structure in field spectra implies that only near-resonant will the forcingat very low frequenciesnot be strongestin an
modes(o, ~ os)contributesignificantly.This is onlytrueif the edgewave regime.
dampingis weak (large Q) and the resonancesare sharp. A connection can thus be made between the observation of
If the forcingliesin the leakymoderegime,os2 > gks,the spectralvalleys at predicted modal frequenciesand the con-
offshoremotion is describedby the confluenthypergeometric clusionthat free edge waves dominate the flow. The train of
function [Guzaand Davis, 1974].Guzaand Bowen[1976] show reasoningis as follows.The observationof spectralvalleys at
that for typical field values of beach slope and deep-water proper frequenciesimplies that off-resonanceforcing is com-
angle of incidence,this offshorebehavior can be dosely ap- parativelysmall.This is true only for high Q (weakly damped)
proximatedby the zerothorder Besselfunction,Jo [(4o2x/ systems.Our understandingof nonlinear forcingfor a realistic
g/0 m] [seealsoSuhayda,1974].Figure I showsJoto be virtu- incident wave field indicates the extreme likelihood of reso-
ally indistinguishable
from mostedgewavemodesfor smallX- nantly forcingmany edgewave modesas well as leaky modes
All edgemodeswith wavenumberkswill alsobe forced,theix and, in fact, the likelihood that the strongestforcingwill be in
responsebring describedby (10). The observationof spectral the edgewave regimefor low frequencies.Finally, for a high
structureas describedby M(f) again implies that near-reso- Q system,resonantlyforced edge waves, whose energy re-
nant modes dominate.
mains trapped to the nearshore,should dominate over leaky
BowenandGuza[1978]describe
the distribution
of ks,os un- modes whose energy is continually radiated away to the far
der natural stochasticforcing. If the incident spectrumis re- field. Thus the initial observationof the spectralvalleys is a
strictedin direction to a beam of central angle of incidence strong indication that free edge waves should dominate the
and beamwidthAa, then the possiblepairs of incident angles, motion.
a•, a•, will be shownbe a conceptualinteractioncircle (Figure
3). Each point in the circle representsa particular incident 3. FIELD OBSERVATIONS
forcing,ks,os,whichcanbe determinedfrom (6) (giveno• and
03. A free edgewave mode will be resonantlyforcedif A field program to study the infragravity band of the spec-
trum was carried out on Martinique Beach, Nova Scotia, in
1 August 1976.A total of 35 data runswere taken over a l-week
sina, = [1 - (o,/o,)]• sina• q-
sin
(2n
+ 1)•(ø'/ø')2(11) period. The run length was chosenas 50 min, the maximum
6446 HOLMAN:
INFRAGRAVlTY
'ENERGY
IN THESURF
ZONE

MARTINIQUE BEACH MMB2X

HIGH TIDE
MID TIDE .....................

MHW•. LOWTIDE
• ,
, '
f I ',,•/•/
I

I I I/'"/ ,
,•, ' ; ":..-'.•...•' "'35
h(m) 2.0 MMB2
• MMBi h.//•/'• t .• . ."..:1""' L/•' •
'•' ' '' • ,,
•' •':'•,
t
"" ......
I '
:" t '-'.."
\ .'L-'--'
I I
I :'""..;
\1
"r.... :54

=o.
' :' (; •'.: I .: • I

I I I I I I I
: ß "I-'. ,'••....•:- I ....•""'"X'
4. 20 40 60 80 I00 120 140 ßl.-E.'"';':"",
•"' '-," i,•
x(m) :'/?'t.,"'• .."..
;.....
.....
I......, ",:.
,L..:•
:..•.
:....' ,',/ •,'L/'•-Iv'hl\ I
Fig. 4. Profile for Martinique Beachand locationof flowmeters. ,.-' ,..-'..'--..
,', - ,_,..-....
•. L, ,/%•,
•t .•! I • "' •;j' • "•l :.'Xr
felt possiblewithout losingstationarityin the face of a chang-
ing tide, the mean tidal rangebeing 1.5m. The runswere cen- ........
i........
. ', ,
tered at high, low, and middle tides,althoughsomeearly runs T .:, :: '...... . ßrv.
• .,:•... ....•i.../... ,/I;-:•vZ,• 4"_ I.....26
were misseddue to equipmentproblems.
, ., ... ,,•....,
•.,-,.(
,•..,,,. ,•:.,. !•/.,,,%.:
•5
The data were collectedby using three electromagnetic ,. •.., .......••
.......
,,,.,
••,,
• • t :' •.•,
•-.....
•.
••,';',• ..
:....•..•/ , '
flowmeters.The resultsof two of these,deployedon an off- O• • • • ;I . I I ... ,..' I
shoretransect,will be discussed in this paper.The positionsof • •.o./'
'.' '.•..."t"'/_
"','"."•
the two ball-type flowmeters(labeledMMB 1 and MMB2 be-
cause they are of Marsh-McBirney manufacture) and the c:: - I": 21
•) / I

measuredbeach profile are shown in Figure 4. Sonar data, • 0'1•t , I I I • I

taken in 1974,showedthe offshoreprofile to be almostplane to 0.01l -• 1 • I J I I
out to 2 km with a slopeof 0.006, shownpatchedto the near- •)
i3.
.00 .04 .08 ß
12

shoreprofile in Figure 4. m f(hz)

The data setis of particular interestbecauseextremesof in-
cident conditionswere experiencedthrough the week. The
first haft of the week, correspondingto runs 1-20, was calm
with only low-amplitude,long-crestedswell.Stormconditions
prevailedfor the secondhaft of the week (runs21-35), a result
of the dose passageof hurricane Belle [Holman et al., 1978].
These sharply changingincident conditionsprovide an ex-
cellent opportunity to investigate the responseof the in-
HIGHTIDE /,• ,•,j
MIDTIDE....................
i ;, •,•.j.,
LOW
TIDE
• •
, ,,,,
• .'. I- •' •
' '
' '....'
Fig. 5b. Spectraltime seriesof onshorevelocityfor MMB2 during
storm conditions.
fragravity band. Further detailsof the experimentand some
initial analysisand interpretationare containedin Holman et
al. [1978]. The more extensive analysis described below
modifiessomeof our original interpretations.
Figures 5a and 5b show spectraltime seriesof onshoreve-
locity for the two instrumentsduring the stormconditions.A
MMBIX spectraltime seriesis just a sequenceof individual spectra
with eachspectrumoffsetslightlyfrom the previousto give a
visual impressionof how the energyin each frequencyband
•,.., , ,, varies with time. In this case the offset is vertical to allow
] • :%.....'t. •: :55
., [[ '-. ;'".
I
simple comparisonof the frequenciesof different features.
•1 "•. .... " iv
Here, 95% confidencelimits are 0.6 and 1.9 timesthe spectral
estimate(24 degreesof freedom). The bandwidth for the 10-
32 pointTukey filter is 0.0044Hz. Data from all stagesof the tide
are shown.Examinationof run 21 in Figure 5 showsan ener-
I / I ..x
getic swell peak at 16 s (0.0625 Hz), which Holman et al.
' •. I V I

•• • 29 [1978]identified as the storm forerunners.In subsequentruns

this peak shiftsto higher frequenciesas the stormapproaches,
in agreementwith the known dispersionof storm-generated
•'i:'//• • • •...'•.,• ;¾""•,-• & • waves [Munk et al., 1963]. The overall impressionof the in-
'" "• '""" • ' V•' "1/ 2G
•. , -, ...i/
v ,., ,, fragravityband is that thereis considerablestructurepresent.
Analysiswas carried out in terms of the spectraltransfor-
IU.U•' "1•, ' I -, A: ? q• • ,•.%•• mationfor onshorevelocity,M•(f). Figures6a, 6b, 6c, and 6d
-
•
½/
• i/
t,I
',
/ i
•"•
• ir.
showstormspectrafrom a high and low tide run (runs23 and
25, respectively)for each of the two instruments.Superim-
posed
overtheinfragravity
bandis thespectral
transforma-
tion, M,(f), for eachcase.The energyscalefor M•(f) is three
I ' • ' I
decadelogarithmic,the sameas the data, but the transforma-
: :,, , , ' tion has been shifted along the y axis to maximize the fit.
The similarityof the data and transformationsin Figure 6 is
.00 .• .08 .I•
striking.Most obviousis the ability of the transformationto
f(hz) explain the spectralvalleys,the main featuresof the spectra.
Fig. 5a. Spectraltime seriesof onshorevelocityfor MMB 1 during Interestingly,M• correctlypredictsthe shiftof thevalleyswith
storm conditions. tide, showingthat a rise in tide is accompaniedby a shift of
 HOLMAN: INFRAORAVlTY ENERGY IN THE SURF ZONE 6447

MMBIX MMBIX
low tide
high tide

95%
confidence
I0.0--

;-
I0.0-,
limits
4, • 95%
confidence
limits

1.0-
RUN 23
..., : I I I I i• _.• /•
data

--- Mu(f ) "ii ....

z 'iV / 0,1 RUN
25
• data
• 0.1
---M u (f)

0.01 ' ! ! i ß
0.01 , i i .oo .o:• .& .,•
.oo .04

FREQUENCY (hz)
FREQUENCY ( hz )
Fig. 6c. Comparisonof a low tide storm spectrumwith M,(f) for
Fig. 6a. Comparison
of a hightidestormspectrum
with thespectral MMB1.
transformation,M,(f), for MMB 1.

the firstspectralvalleyto higherfrequencies for MMB 1 but to first spectralpeak but matcheswell the secondpeak. This
lowerfrequencies for MMB2. The possibilityof thisbehavior, againindicatesa bluetrendto the equivalentshorelineampli-
contrary to intuition based on plane beach theory, was tude spectrum,althoughpossiblynot as strongas it was for
pointedout by Holmanand Bowen[1979]as resultingfrom the low tide case.
beach concavity. The degreeof shift of the transformationcurveswere mea-
As was pointedout in the theorysection,the similarityof sured. The measured values correspond to an equivalent
the spectraltransformation and the data in the infragravity shorelineenergylevelof 1.8m2 Af-• (the curve,M,(f), calcu-
band is strongevidencethat the flow was dominatedby free lated for unit shorelineenergy level, had to be shifted up
edgewave modes. slightly)for low tide and 1.2m2 Af-• for high tide. This in-
Comparison of the apparentinfragravity peak•with those creasedenergyat low tide is contraryto the speculationof
predictedby the transformation showssomedifferences but, Holman and Bowen[1979] and is not understood.
in general,goodagreement. What differences do existare con- It shouldbe noted that if the infragravityenergyis, in fact,
sistentbetweeninstrumentsfor a particular stageof tide, an in the form of edgewaves,then to explainthe presenceof two
encouraging checkof themodel,andevidence thatthediffer- (or three)spectralvalleysrequiresthat a significantpropor-
encesrepresent realstructure in the equivalentshorelinespec- tion of the energybe in modes2 (or 3) or greater.
trum. For the low tide spectra,the transformationoverpre-
4. INFRAGRAVITY RESPONSE TO HIGH AND LOW
dictsthe energyof the firstpeakbut underpredicts that of the ENERGY INCIDENT FORCING
second.This impliesthat the true shorelineamplitudespec-
trum wasnot white, but was blue, showingenergyincreasing Figures 7a and 7b compareonshorevelocity spectrafor
with frequency.The hightide data is somewhatobscured by MMB2 for storm and calm conditions. Runs 12 and 25 are
thepresence of a spectralredness at verylow frequencies. The typicallow tideexamplesof low andhighenergyrespectively,
nature of this energyis not known,but Holman [1979] sug- while runs 13 and 27 are typical for high tide. It is immedi-
gests,basedon cross-spectral analysis,that it may be in the ately evidentthat the increasein infragravityband energyis
form of forcedoscillations,not free waves.Excludingthis very muchstrongerthan the linear dependence on incidentenergy
low frequencyenergy,the transformationoverpredictsthe suggestedby the theory. However, it must be remembered

MMB2X MMB2X
high tide low tide

I0.0=
95%
confidence
limits
, 95% confidence

1.0 RUN 23
• data

--- Mu(f )

,.z, RUN 25
0.1 0.1
ß"J • data
a: ___ Mu (f)

0.01 0.01 ,
.0•4 ' .0•8 ' .1'2 ' .oo .& ' .& ' .,• '

FREQUENCY ( hz ) FREQUENCY ( hz )

Fig. 6b. Sameas Figure 6a but for MMB2. Fig. 6d. Sameas Figure6c but for MMB2.
 HOLMAN: INFRAORAVITY ENEROY IN THE SURF ZONE

._.•o.o,
T MMB2X aplane
beach
theratiooflongshore
toonshore
velocity
atthe
•'• r• lowtides shorelinefalls off very rapidly with mode

= o)
"'1.0 X\,,
>-
•
• •
•
• 95 % CONFIDENCE
LIMIT
u(x = O) 2n + 1

Z •
For offshore positionsand for concave beach profiles the
• • RUN 25 modal number dependenceis reduced,but it is clear that the
• 0,1 inclusion of significant energy contributions from higher
modeswill reducethe relativeimportanceof the longshoreve-
locity, possiblyallowing it to be dominatedby forced oscilla-
tions.
0.0•
,00 .05 .10 '.15 .20 .25 .•0 .•5
The ideas advancedin the theory sectionshowedthat the
FREQUENCY (hz) strengthof the forcing and damping were not significantly
mode dependent,nor were the resonantrestrictionsimposed
Fig. 7•. Comparisonof a typ[cs]tow energy(solidline) snd high
energy(desbedline) onshorevelocityspectrumfor MM8• duringlow by restrictingincidentwave directionto a beam,providedthe
tides. incident beam width was moderatelylarge. For this data set
the incident beam width is assumedto have not been small,
that the data presentedin Figure 7 are from within the surf althoughit was not measured.Supportfor the assumption
comes from the low u, v coherencesobserved in the incident
zone where the increasein incident energyobservedby an in-
strumentis limited by the breaking process. band for each instrument.Battjes[1972] demonstratesthe re-
A more appropriatetestof the theorywould requireobser- ductionin the $,,yvalueof radiationstress(and similarlythe
vations from an instrumentplaced outsidethe surf zone. In u, v coherence)causedby allowing a spreadin angle of in-
theabsence
ofsuchdata,
thevisually
observedsignificant
• cidence. Theobserved coherences ofless than 0.3correspond
waveheight
maybeused
asaroughmeasure
ofai.Taking
U to a very weak directional dependence. Visual observations
also confirmed the short crestedhess in the incident wave field.
to be the orbital velocity which representsthe energy in the
infragravity band, Thus we do expect to see many high modes contributingto
the spectrum.The lack of structure,predictedby the spectral
transformation,in the longshorevelocity spectrais then con-
u=
I f0.0511/2
2
Ig 0.00
s..(f) a/
sistentwith an edgewave explanation.
It may quickly be pointedout that the observeddata are
whereS.,, is the spectralenergydensity,and f is the frequency consistentwith a standingincidentwave explanationand that
in hertz, then Figure 8 showsthe dependenceof U on the sig- this data set, like othersin the past, is unable to definitively
nificantwave heightH•/3. While somescatterexists,the trend distinguishbetweenthe two mechanisms.However the theory
can reasonablybe approximatedas linear, in supportof the presentedin this paper (which is relativelygeneral)suggests
theoreticalprediction. that, as long as the incidentbeam width is moderatelylarge,
While the data presentedin Figure 7 are inappropriateto this distinctionmay never be made; a large number of high
testthe theoreticalamplitudedependenceof a, on a,, they are modeswill alwaysbe forced,and the resultingmotion will be
appropriateto the understandingof sedimenttransportproc- complex.This will be the typical case for Atlantic beaches.
essesin the surf zone. The sedimentwill respondonly to the We would be better able to make the distinction on the Pacific
local fluid motion. The observation of the increased relative
coastwherenarrow beam widthstypify the long Pacificswell.
importanceof the infragravityband during stormssuggests Bowenand Guza [1978] predictonly a few low modeswould
that sedimenttransportprocesses in the surfzonewill be in- be forcedin that casegiving a much simplersamplingprob-
creasingdominatedby the infragravitybandduringhigh en- lem and much greater chanceof successfullydistinguishing
ergy conditions. individual edgewave modes.

5. LONGSHORE VELOCITY SPECTRA MMB2X

high tides
Figure 9 showsa spectraltime seriesfor the longshoreve- •.•io.o•
locity componentfor MMB2 during stormconditions.A very
low frequencyspectralrednessis presentin all runs,similarto
that noted in Figure 6a. Again cross-spectralanalysisshows
• t RUN
27 t95%confidence
low coherencebetweeninstrumentsfor the very low frequen- !',,, limits

cies,possiblyindicatinga forcedmotion. Somestructureexists ',,,-,

,' --,
in the infragravityband but, contraryto the onshorevelocity
spectra,neither peaks nor valleys are consistentrun to run.
This impliesthat the longshoreenergyis predominantlyin the
form of forcedoscillationswithout the frequency-lengthscale
\ ,...-...-,,
relationshipshownin the onshorespectra.The observationof
wave-associated motionsin the onshorevelocityspectraonly is
consistent with an edgewave explanationonly if a numberof
higheredgewavemodescontribute.This is becausethe long-
shorecomponentof velocitybecomesdecreasinglyimportant FREQUENCY (hz)
with increasingedgewave modal number.For edgewaveson Fig. ?b. Sameas Figure6a but for high tides.
 HOLMAN' INFRAORAVITY ENEROY IN THE SURF ZONE 6449

0.5 k- high tide

m- mid tide
wavemotionsare forcedonly near resonance(i.e., the system
•- low tide has a relativelyhigh Q). The observationof two spectralval-
0.4 leys in each offshorevelocityspectrumimpliesthe wave mo-
tion has at least two offshorezero crossings.If the wave mo-
tion were in the form of edge waves,then significantenergy
0.3-
must have been presentin modestwo or greater.
Longshorespectrado not showthe equivalent,wave-associ-
0.2- ated, spectralfeatures,indicating a dominanceof motions
I iii forcedoff resonance.This is consistentwith an edge wave
model provided high edge wave modescontribute a signifi-
I I m h
0.1-
iii haI
cant portion of the energy.Bowenand Guza [1978] study the
hIll
h
h effectof the resonantconditions(4, 6) on the ability of an in-
0.0 ,
cident spectrumto resonantlyexcite edge waves of various
o.o modes. For the relatively broad directional spread of the
Hlib storm wavessuggestedby the low u, v coherencesin the in-
cident band and the visual observations for this data set,
Fig. 8. Variation of U, an orbital velocity which representsthe
Bowenand Guza [1978]predict that many edge wave modes,
energy in the infragravity band, with visually observedsignificant
wave height for high, middle, and low tide. includingall the high modesshouldbe resonantlyforced al-
thoughthe strengthof the forcingwill dependon the dynam-
ics and may be a functionof the particularmode.
CONCLUSIONS By usinggeneralassumptions about the form of the non-
linear forcing and the damping, an equilibrium edge wave
Field data of onshorevelocitytaken by flowmetersat fixed
amplitude,a,, can be predicted.The termsin the algebraicex-
positionswithin the surf zone shbwedsignificantspectral
pressionall grow towardthe shorelineindicatingthat the in-
structurethroughthe infragravityband. However, analysisof
tegralsinvolvedin the calculationof a, will be dominatedby
the spectraby usinga spectraltransformation(generatingthe
the nearshoreregion. The similarity of the offshorestructure
spectrumthat wouldbe seenat a particularoffshorelocation
of mostedgewave modesin the nearshorethen suggests that
for a white shorelineamplitudespectrumunit energydensity)
the dynamicsof the edgewaveforcingwill be, at most,weakly
showedthat mostof the structurewasdue to instrumentposi-
mode dependent.
tion and did not representfrequencyselection.The equivalent
shorelineamplitude spectrumwas slightly blue with a mean
Thetheoretical equation for theequilibrium edgeampli-
tude predictsthat a, shouldvary in an approximatelylinear
energydensityof 1.2m2 s at hightide and 1.8m2 s at low tide.
fashionwith the incidentamplitudea,. Comparisonof the var-
The observationof spectralvalleysin the data at frequencies
iations of U, an orbital velocity which representsthe in-
predictedby the spectraltransformationsuggeststhat the
fragravityband energy,with the visually observedsignificant
waveheightis in very goodagreementwith this predictedlin-
MMB2Y ear dependence.Velocity spectrataken from within the surf
HIGH TIDE RUNS zone can show only a limited increasein incident wave en-
MID TIDE RUNS ................. ergy;breakinglimitsthe waveheightto a simpleproportionof
I

I'• I•
tLOW
TIDE
RUNS 11 ' I I
depth.No suchlimit existsfor infragravitywaves.Thus the
observed spectra show increasing dominance by the in-
fragravityband duringstorms.This is an importantresultfor
beachmorphology,indicatingthat sedimenttransportin the
surfzonemay be dominatedby low frequencymotionsduring
storms.

• . • I ,/
For the moderatedirectionalspreadswhich typify Atlantic
coastincident spectra,the interactionconditionssuggestthat
I'•, • [ '• I I I i••
many edgewavemodeswill be resonantlyforced.The result-
ing wave motion will be the sum of the contributionsfrom
eachmodeand may be quite complicatedto analyze.A much
simplermotion may occuron the Pacificcoastwhere narrow
' " I" " ,- .... + I '
beamwidthstypify the long oceanswell.In that caseonly a
few low edge wave modesshouldbe forced, giving a much
simplersamplingproblem and a greaterchanceof success-
fully distinguishingindividualedgewave modes.

REFERENCES
• I• i i•:"vi" I•.'¾',¾"•.•..
22
• • • • • I 21 Ball, F. K., Edge wavesin an oceanof finite depth,DeepSea Res., 14,
79-88, 1967.
Batties,J. A., Radiation stresses
in shore-crested
waves,J. Mar. Res.,
• I • • I • , 30, 56-64, 1972.
,00 .• ,08 .12
(n f(hz) Bowen,A. J., and R. T. Guza, Edge wavesand surf beat, J. Geophys.
Res., 83, 1913-1920, 1978.
Fig.9. Spectral
timeseries
of longshore
velocity
forMMB2during Bowen, A. J., and D. L. Inman, Edge wavesand crescenticbars, .L
storm conditions. Geophys.Res., 76, 8662-8671, 1971.
6450 HOLMAN: INFRAORAVlTY ENEROY IN THE SURF ZONE

Dean, R. G., Equilibrium beach profiles:U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Longuet-Higgins,M. S., and R. W. Stewart,Radiationstressesin wa-
coasts,OceanEng. Rep. 12, Dep. of Civil Eng., Univ. of Delaware, ter waves:A physicaldiscussion,with applications,Deep Sea Res.,
Newark, 1977. 11, 529-562, 1964.
Eckan, C., Surfacewaveson water of variable depth, WaveRep. 100, Munk, W. H., Surf beats,Eos Trans.AGU, 30, 849-854, 1949.
ScrippsInst.of Oceanogr., Univ. of Calif., La Jolla, 1951. Munk, W. H., G. R. Miller, F. E. Shodgrass,and N. F. Barber, Direc-
Gallagher,B., Generationof surfbeatby non-linearwaveinteraction, tional recordingof swell from distant storms,Phil. Trans.R. $oc.
at.Fluid Mech., 49, 1-20, 1971. London, Ser. A, 255, 505-584, 1963.
Garrett,C. J. R., Tidal resonances
in the Bayof FundyandGulf of Sasaki, T., and K. Horikawa, Nearshorecurrent systemon gently
Maine, Nature, 238, 441-443, 1972. slopingbottom,CoastalEng. atapan,18, 123-142, 1975.
Guza, R. T., and A. J. Bowen, Resonantinteractionsfor wavesbreak- Schalk,M., Study of nearshorebottomprofileseastand southwestof
ing on a beach,Proc. Conf. CoastalEng. 15th, 560-579, 1976. Point Barrow, Alaska: Comparisonof profiles and the barrier is-
Guza, R. T., and R. E. Davis, Excitation of edgewavesby wavesin- landsin the Point Bay and Plover Island areas,final report, Arctic
cidenton a beach,at.Geophys. Res., 79, 1285-1291,1974. Inst. North America, Washington,D.C., 1963.
Guza, R. T., and D. L. Inman, Edge waves and beach cusps,at. Short, A.D., Multiple offshorebars and standingwaves,at. Geophys.
Geophys.Res.,80, 2997-3012, 1975. Res., 80, 3838-3840, 1975.
Holman, R. A., Infragravitywaveson beaches,Ph.D. thesis,Dal- Suhayda,J. N., Standingwaveson beaches,J. Geophys.Res., 72,
housie Univ., Halifax, 1979. 3065-3071, 1974.
Holman, R. A., and A. J. Bowen,Edgewaveson complexbeachpro- Tucker, M. J., Surf beats:Seawavesof I to 5 minutesperiod,Proc.R.
files,at.Geophys.Res.,84, 6339-6346, 1979. Soc. A, 202, 565-573, 1950.
Holman, R. A., D. A. Huntley, and A. J. Bowen,Infragravitywaves Ursell, F., Edgewaveson a slopingbeach,Proc. Roy. Soc.A, 214, 79-
in stormconditions,Proc. Conf. CoastalEng. 16th, 268-284, 1978. 97, 1952.
Huntley, D. A., Long-periodwaveson naturalbeaches,at.Geophys. Witham, G. B., Non-linear effectsin edge waves,J. Fluid Mech., 74,
Res., 81, 6441-6449, 1976. 353-368, 1976.
Huntley,D. A., and A. J. Bowen,Field observations of edgewaves Wright, L. D., B.G. Thom,and'J.Chappell, Morphological variabil-
and their effect on beach material, at. Geol. $oc., 131, 68-81, 1975. ity of high energybeaches,Proc. Conf. CoastalEng. 16th, 1180-
Huntley,D. A., and A. J. Bowen,Beachcuspsand edgewaves,Proc. 1194, 1978.
Conf. CoastalEng. 16th, 1378-1393,1978.
Komar, P. D., Observationsof beachcuspsat Mono Lake, California,
Geol. $oc. Am. Bull., 84, 3593-3600, 1973.
Lamb, H., Hydrodynamics,
6th ed., Dover, New York, 1932.
Longuet-Higgins,
M. S., Recentprogressin the studyof longshore (ReceivedFebruary 1, 1980;
currents,in Waveson Beaches,edited by R. E. Meyer, Academic, revisedJanuary6, 1981;
New York, 1972. acceptedFebruary 23, 1981.)