Wave run-up prediction and observation in a micro-tidal beach

Di Luccio, Diana; Benassai, Guido; Budillon, Giorgio; Mucerino, Luigi; Montella, Raffaele; Pugliese Carratelli, Eugenio

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2841-2018

Articles | Volume 18, issue 11

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2841-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2841-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 11

Research article

|

02 Nov 2018

Research article |

| 02 Nov 2018

Wave run-up prediction and observation in a micro-tidal beach

Diana Di Luccio, Guido Benassai, Giorgio Budillon, Luigi Mucerino, Raffaele Montella, and Eugenio Pugliese Carratelli

Download

Final revised paper (published on 02 Nov 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 22 Sep 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 17 Oct 2017
- SC1: 'Answer to anonymous referree #1', Guido Benassai, 31 Oct 2017
- AC1: 'Response Rev. #1', Diana Di Luccio, 30 Nov 2017
RC2: 'first revision', Anonymous Referee #2, 17 Oct 2017
- SC2: 'Answer to anonymous referree #2', Guido Benassai, 31 Oct 2017
- AC2: 'Response Rev. #2', Diana Di Luccio, 30 Nov 2017

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (02 Dec 2017) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Diana Di Luccio on behalf of the Authors (05 Dec 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (07 Dec 2017) by Ira Didenkulova

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (16 Dec 2017)

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (05 Feb 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

General comments.
This article describes the test implementation of an operational forecasting model chain of wave runup on an embayed beach of the Northern Mediterranean Sea. Offshore wind and wave conditions are forecast using available European wind and wave models. The local runup on the beach is forecast using 7 equations from cited literature sources (3 publications) and evaluated for several notable storm events. The runup forecasts are compared with video-based runup measurements. Statistical correlation between forecast and measured runup are presented. The authors briefly comment on the best match and consider future improvements.
The manuscript has improved since the first version, however grammatical errors, poor figure clarify, and a lack of relevant discussion and conclusions continues. No comparison is made to other operational forecasting tools or models (cf USGS). The manuscript contributes little new knowledge to runup forecasting discipline, and barely describes how the Model chain technique is useful or compares to other systems. Coastal hazards are part of the introduction, but no discussion is applying the results to the study of hazards, or new hazard knowledge.
Specific comments.
The article could be published with further major revisions and expansion of the discussion and conclusions. As a start, the following specific comments should be addressed in order to improve the manuscript for potential resubmission.
• The discussion and conclusions need expansion. The article could draw on many observations to tell a compelling story, and instruct other forecasters as to which models are best for operational runup forecasts, why each model performs better or worse, or how the article changes understanding of coastal hazard forecasting. Comparison to other runup forecasting tools and results would also be useful
• All figures need to be improved for readability (small text, no legend, obscured lines)
• All in-text references should be checked for extra parenthesis.
• All in-text equations should be italicised .

Technical corrections.
The attached file includes revision comments.

Referee Report: PDF

Hide

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (05 Feb 2018) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Diana Di Luccio on behalf of the Authors (16 Mar 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (19 Mar 2018) by Ira Didenkulova

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (06 Apr 2018)

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (23 Jul 2018)

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (31 Jul 2018) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Diana Di Luccio on behalf of the Authors (11 Sep 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (12 Sep 2018) by Ira Didenkulova

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (18 Sep 2018)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (03 Oct 2018) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Diana Di Luccio on behalf of the Authors (11 Oct 2018) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Forecasting and hindcasting the action of sea storms on piers, coastal structures and beaches is important to mitigate their effects. To this end, with particular regard to low coasts and beaches, we have configured a computational model chain based partly on open-access models and partly on an ad-hoc-developed numerical calculator to evaluate beach wave run-up levels. The results were validated by a set of specially conceived video-camera-based experiments on a micro-tidal beach.