When the incident wave angle is 10 degrees as shown in Figure 16, the wave energy dissipation is relatively small compared to the results in Figure 15.
(4) The wave energy dissipation was also found when the incident wave angle is zero which the waves come parallel to the wall face.
However, in the wave randomness point of view, there is no big difference of wave height variations between the monochromatic and random waves regardless of the chamber width, the wave condition, and the incident wave angle.
The third section shows the combination of test conditions including wave conditions (the wave height, the wave periods, and the incident wave angles).
A total of 16 different wave conditions were tested for the stem wave experiments in the experiments by considering the wave heights, the wave periods, the wave irregularity, and the incident wave angles as shown in Table 3.
Each figure shows the stem wave evolution under the different incident wave angles that range from 10 to 40 degrees when the relative chamber width ([C.sub.W.sup.*]) is 0.101.
The cross-sectional variations (y-direction) of the relative wave heights on the different configurations of front and side walls were compared to each other with respect to the incident wave angles. Over all incident wave angles, the results in PW and PV_NS cases show similar patterns and the relative wave heights on PV_NS are 10~20% smaller than those on PW.
Figure 10 shows the cross-sectional variations (y-direction) of relative wave heights for random waves with respect to different incident wave angles at [x.sup.*] = 2 when the relative chamber width is 0.042, which is nearly a half time smaller than the case of Figure 7.
Figure 13 shows the frequency spectra of free surface elevations in front of the four different configurations of the front and side walls when [C.sub.W.sup.*] is 0.101 and the incident wave angles are 10~40 degrees.