Free access
Corrections
May 19, 2016

Erratum for “Simulation of Wave-Plus-Current Scour beneath Submarine Pipelines” by Bjarke Eltard Larsen, David R. Fuhrman, and B. Mutlu Sumer

You are viewing the correction.
VIEW THE CORRECTED ARTICLE
Publication: Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering
Volume 142, Issue 5
Errors in reference citations introduced during composition by ASCE are being clarified in this erratum. The citations corresponding to the reference Fredsøe et al. (1992) were inadvertently changed to Fredsøe and Deigaard (1992) in four locations. The citations are being corrected in this paper, in the order of their appearance in the final published version.
ASCE regrets these errors.
1.
Line 5 of the first paragraph of the “Timescale” section beginning on page 04016003-9
Although practical methods exist (see Fredsøe et al. 1992; Sumer and Fredsøe 2002, p. 72) for predicting the scour time scale in both pure-current as well as pure-wave conditions, this quantity has not previously been investigated and properly parameterized for generalized wave-plus-current flow environments, to the authors’ knowledge.
2.
Preceding and following Eq. (18) on page 04016003-10
As a first attempt at parameterization of the wave-plus-current scour timescale, Fig. 15 shows the computed nondimensional timescales as a function of θcw for all cases considered in the present work. As a reference, the experimentally based relation for the timescale of Fredsøe et al. (1992)
T*=150θ53
(18)
is also shown as the full line, which was demonstrated to be valid for both pure-current as well as pure-wave scour conditions. Fig. 15 shows that both the pure-current (diamonds, m = 1) and especially the pure-wave (circles, m = 0) results match the reference line [Eq. (18)] reasonably, which is generally consistent with the experimental findings of Fredsøe et al. (1992).
3.
Last line of the paragraph following Eq. (19) on page 04016003-12
Although there is inevitably some scatter in the results, this appears to be of the same order of magnitude as typically seen in experiments (see Fredsøe et al. 1992).
4.
Line 13 of the last paragraph of the “Conclusions” section on page 04016003-13
Importantly, this function tends to Γ(m)=1/50 for both pure-wave and pure-current flows, hence unifying existing experimentally based expressions for the timescale at these limits (Fredsøe et al. 1992).

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering
Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering
Volume 142Issue 5September 2016

History

Received: Mar 30, 2016
Accepted: Mar 30, 2016
Published online: May 19, 2016
Published in print: Sep 1, 2016
Discussion open until: Oct 19, 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Bjarke Eltard Larsen [email protected]
Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Section of Fluid Mechanics, Coastal and Maritime Engineering, Technical Univ. of Denmark, 2800 Kongens, Lyngby, Denmark (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]
David R. Fuhrman
Associate Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Section of Fluid Mechanics, Coastal and Maritime Engineering, Technical Univ. of Denmark, 2800 Kongens, Lyngby, Denmark.
B. Mutlu Sumer
Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Section of Fluid Mechanics, Coastal and Maritime Engineering, Technical Univ. of Denmark, 2800 Kongens, Lyngby, Denmark.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share