Why does the speed of the water wave decreases as depth decreases?

AI Thread Summary
The speed of water waves decreases as they approach shallower regions primarily due to energy loss from friction between the water and the seabed, which affects wave height. As waves transition from deep to shallow water, their motion changes from orbital to elliptical, contributing to a reduction in speed. The phenomenon of wave shoaling, where waves increase in amplitude and decrease in wavelength as they approach the shore, also plays a significant role in this process. Additionally, opposing currents can influence wave heights and behavior, further complicating the dynamics of wave speed. Overall, while friction is a factor, it is not the sole reason for the decrease in wave speed in shallow water.
tlfx1996
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Why does the speed of the water wave decreases when the water wave approaches the shallower region? Is it because of the frictional force between the water molecules and the seabed? I have searched the net but i didn't get any clear answer to this questions. Please explain in details of the phenomenon without solely based on the formula, thx.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. The friction between the water and the sea bed robs the wave of energy so that it cannot raise up as high.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
but I still couldn't get a clue how does the change from the orbital movement to the elliptical movement will causes the speed to slow down.
 
That's a complex phenomena..as is evidenced by continued failures to prevent erosion...

but there are some good insights here:

http://web.utk.edu/~cnattras/Physics221Spring2013/modules/m11/Water_waves.htm

More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_waves#Wave_shoaling_and_refraction

I find this second article strange in that they neglect to mention the effects of opposing currents in the very first section but do properly attribute effects of currents in 'shoaling'. I can tell you from long personal experience that opposing current in shoal AND deep water significantly effects wave heights. In fact, current alone usually causes waves to form.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Viscosity (essentially friction) would certainly play a part. The other issue that immediately comes to mind is that as waves come to shore and grow, they become nonlinear and end up Rollin over and creatin whitecaps. These will dissipate a fair amount of energy.
 
I don't know much about waves, but looking at this GIF from Wikipedia:

220px-Propagation_du_tsunami_en_profondeur_variable.gif


Might it have to do with the fact the wave has to keep the same frequency? I don't know if that's true under certain circumstances. If so, then looking at the GIF it kind of makes sense that the amplitude would rise due to the shallow water. The rise in amplitude would shorten the wavelength, and in order to keep the same frequency, the speed has to slow down.

Don't know if any of what I wrote is true or makes sense...

Edit: Following the Wikipedia article, I reached another article on "wave shoaling". I just skimmed over it, but it seems that the answer would lie somewhere in that term.

I suspect friction is not the prime driver for the reduction in speed...
 

Attachments

  • 220px-Propagation_du_tsunami_en_profondeur_variable.gif
    220px-Propagation_du_tsunami_en_profondeur_variable.gif
    11.9 KB · Views: 684
  • 220px-Propagation_du_tsunami_en_profondeur_variable.gif
    220px-Propagation_du_tsunami_en_profondeur_variable.gif
    11.9 KB · Views: 689
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top