• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Performance of a data-driven technique applied to changes in wave height and its effect on beach response

    2016-09-07 07:31:36JosHorrilloCrlloHrshinieKrunrthnShunqiPnDominicReeve
    Water Science and Engineering 2016年1期

    Jos′e M.Horrillo-Crllo*,Hrshinie KrunrthnShun-qi Pn,Dominic Reeve

    aEnergy&Environment Research Group,Zienkiewicz Centre for Computational Engineering,Swansea University,Bay Campus,Swansea SA1 8EN,UKbHydro-environmental Research Centre,School of Engineering,Cardiff University,Cardiff CF24 3AA,UK

    ?

    Performance of a data-driven technique applied to changes in wave height and its effect on beach response

    Jos′e M.Horrillo-Caraballoa,*,Harshinie Karunarathnaa,Shun-qi Panb,Dominic Reevea

    aEnergy&Environment Research Group,Zienkiewicz Centre for Computational Engineering,Swansea University,Bay Campus,Swansea SA1 8EN,UK
    bHydro-environmental Research Centre,School of Engineering,Cardiff University,Cardiff CF24 3AA,UK

    Available online 2 March 2016

    Abstract

    In this study the medium-term response of beach profiles was investigated at two sites:a gently sloping sandy beach and a steeper mixed sand and gravel beach.The former is the Duck site in North Carolina,on the east coast of the USA,which is exposed to Atlantic Ocean swells and storm waves,and the latter is the Milford-on-Sea site at Christchurch Bay,on the south coast of England,which is partially sheltered from Atlantic swells but has a directionally bimodal wave exposure.The data sets comprise detailed bathymetric surveys of beach profiles covering a period of more than 25 years for the Duck site and over 18 years for the Milford-on-Sea site.The structure of the data sets and the data-driven methods are described.Canonical correlation analysis(CCA)was used to find linkages between the wave characteristics and beach profiles.The sensitivity of the linkages was investigated by deploying a wave height threshold to filter out the smaller waves incrementally.The results of the analysis indicate that,for the gently sloping sandy beach,waves of all heights are important to the morphological response.For the mixed sand and gravel beach,filtering the smaller waves improves the statistical fit and it suggests that low-height waves do not play a primary role in the medium-term morphological response,which is primarily driven by the intermittent larger storm waves.

    ?2016 Hohai University.Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

    Beach profile;Canonical correlation analysis;Data-driven technique;Empirical orthogonal function;Forecast;Statistical model;Wave height threshold

    1.Introduction

    Shorelines are changing due to construction and development,as part of strategic approaches to flood and coastal management and shoreline management plans.As a result,in recent years there has been a greater need for more robust methodologies for incorporating risk assessments within coastal engineering design.The anticipated changes in climate arising from a rise in global temperatures will change wave and water level conditions,affecting the susceptibility of coastlines and beaches(Sutherland and Gouldby,2003).The stability of many coastlines and beaches depends on the characteristics of the area in which they are located.Taking this into account,there is a need to understand how coastlines, and,in particular,beaches,react during storms,and how beach profiles respond to sequences of waves and storms.Without this knowledge,it is extremely difficult to provide accurate assessments of how coastlines and beach profiles interact and how these interactions are likely to change over time. Furthermore,it is important that shoreline management plans include this information so that coastal managers are able to have confidence in predictions of beach behaviour.Such plans typically require possible morphological changes to be assessed over a period of up to 100 years into the future.This requirement is difficult to meet with current forecastingmethods,and estimates are often determined in an ad hoc manner on a case by case basis.Process-based morphological models have been developed to estimate meso-scale coastal morphological changes,but are yet to be used as a routine part of coastal management.The process-based models have performed well for short-term predictions,but they encounter difficulties when applied to meso-scale cases.Not only are these models difficult to operate,they can also suffer from instability and require significant computing and data resources for medium-to long-term prediction.As a result,some of the broad morphological tendencies observed in practice are difficult to reproduce reliably(de Vriend et al.,1993;Pan et al.,2010).

    This has encouraged the development of data-driven techniques that are based entirely on analysis and extrapolation of observations(R′o.zy′nski,2003;Haxel and Holman, 2004;Reeve et al.,2016).With the growing amount of observations available from coastal monitoring programs in the UK and elsewhere and with the development of more sophisticated statistical analysis techniques,data-driven methods offer an additional alternative to the traditional methods available for meso-scale prediction.The underlying argument for employing data-driven methods is as follows: Predicting beach morphology is difficult.Predicting the wave characteristics is also difficult but is being done on an almost routine basis for navigation,logistics,and coastal management applications.If we can establish a strong relationship between the wave characteristics and beach response from historical records,then we can use this relationship,together with forecasts of the wave characteristics,to create forecasts of beach morphology.The method should work if(a)a strong relationship can be established between some measurements of wave activity and beach response,and(b)the conditions experienced in the forecast period are statistically similar to those upon which the relationship has been determined. This leaves open the question of which measurements of wave activity and beach morphology will provide the best linkage.

    One method that has proven to be very useful in this context is canonical correlation analysis(CCA).CCA belongs to the family of methods based on correlation techniques and measures the relationship between the observed values of two sets of variables.It has been used with measurements from the Field Research Facility(FRF)at the Duck site in North Carolina,USA,by Larson et al.(2000)to detect coherent patterns in the wave and beach profile data and then to use these to predict the beach profiles on the basis of the waves alone.The researchers used a parametric description of waves based on the wave height and wave energy,and found the best results with wave height.Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2008) extended this study to investigate how the choice of distribution function used to describe the wave height can influence the quality of predictions.R′o.zy′nski(2003)used CCA to evaluate the evolution patterns of multiple longshore bars and the interactions between them in Lubiatowo,Poland.The sensitivity of the method to the data sampling rate and the duration of the records were investigated by Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2010).They analysed the quality of forecasts made using CCA for beaches at Duck,USA and Milford-on-Sea,UK.They concluded that there is no strong reduction in prediction accuracy over the forecast period and that there is an increase in the forecast error when the duration and density of the records used to determine the regression matrix are degraded.Reeve and Horrillo-Caraballo(2014) used data-driven methods to forecast the behaviour of beaches with different exposures caused by nearby structures.They found that CCA could obtain strong correlation between the local beach behaviour and the offshore wave conditions, thereby encapsulating the effects of diffraction on beach evolution.This study extended that investigation to examine the sensitivity of the relationship between the wave height and beach response by invoking a graduated threshold for the wave height.

    Fig.1.Location of study sites.

    We studied two different sites:the Duck site,located in North Carolina,on the east coast of the USA,which has sandy beaches,and the Milford-on-Sea site,located at Christchurch Bay,on the south coast of England,where beaches are classified as mixed sand and gravel beaches(Fig.1).

    At the Duck site,the US Army Corps of Engineers has maintained a long-term campaign of measurement of waves, tides,currents,local meteorology,and beach response since its creation(FRF,2007).For this study we used historical wave records and monthly beach profiles covering a period of 25 years.For the Milford-on-Sea site,the approximately biannual beach profile surveys and continuous wave recordings cover a period of over 18 years.This measurement program is part of the local shoreline management plan and the response of the mixed sand and gravel beaches in this area have been monitored since 1987(Bradbury et al.,2003).

    The two data sets have been described in detail by Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2010)and the interested reader may find more information in that paper.Just as different sediment transport equations are required to describe the movement of sand and gravel in process-based models,so it might be thought that different statistical methods might be required to describe the two different beach types.Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2010)demonstrated that this was not the case and that CCA could perform well with both beach types.Furthermore, degrading the sampling rate of the Duck data to make it similar to the Milford-on-Sea measurements resulted in only a small increase in forecast errors.Earlier studies have focused on establishing the relationship between the wave height or wave energy and beach response,on the basis that the active beach profile is shaped predominantly by wave action.Here, we extended this concept based on the hypothesis that the significant changes in beach morphology are caused by the events that cause the greatest sediment transport,that is,larger waves.We revisited two sites that were the subject of earlier studies to investigate whether imposing a threshold on the wave height can improve the correlation between waves and beach response,thereby leading to an improvement in forecasting ability.

    This paper is structured as follows:In section 2 a brief outline of CCA is provided.The measurements at the two study sites are described in section 3.The analysis methodology is given in section 4,followed by a presentation of the main results in section 5.The paper closes in section 6 with conclusions.

    2.Canonical correlation analysis

    CCA is one of a family of correlation techniques but is distinct from factor/principal component analysis despite certain conceptual and terminological similarities.CCA is used to investigate the intercorrelation between two sets of variables,whereas factor/principal component analysis or the empirical orthogonal functions(EOFs)method identifies the pattern of relationships within one data set(Clark,1975). Before CCA is performed,it is customary to smooth the observations to reduce noise.Here,we expanded each data set into EOFs,truncated the EOF expansion,and then recombined the EOFs to create filtered data sets.If the two original data sets are denoted as Y(for example,if the wave height probability density distributions constitute a data matrix with size nt×ny),and Z(for example,if the time sequence of beach profiles constitute a data matrix with size nt×nz),a regression matrix can be derived between the two matrices,representing the established correlation between the dominant patterns in the two variables.This means that if the variable Y is known for some future time,the other variable Z can be predicted using the regression matrix(Larson et al.,2000).The predictions Zp,based on a predicted wave matrix Yp,are given by the following: where A is a regression matrix that defines the relationship between the two variables based on historical measurements. A detailed explanation of CCA and the solutions of Eq.(1)can be found in R′o.zy′nski(2003).The variable Zpcontains the beach profile measurements and the variable Ypcontains the corresponding values of wave conditions represented as a probability density function(pdf).As wave measurements are generally easier to obtain than beach profile measurements, Eq.(1)can be used to forecast beach profiles from wave conditions(Larson et al.,2000).The quality of the data used to define the regression matrix will of course constrain the quality of the prediction obtained.

    3.Field data

    3.1.Duck site

    3.1.1.Beach profiles

    The US Army Corps of Engineers coastal monitoring facility,i.e.,FRF,at Duck,North Carolina,USA,has been monitoring the nearshore area for more than 33 years, surveying some of the area at least twice a month,resulting in hundreds of surveys.

    The area is characterized by regular shore-parallel contours, a moderate slope,and bars in the surf zone.An outer storm bar is present at about 4.5 m of depth,relative to the mean water level,and an inner bar is present between 1.0 and 2.0 m of depth relative to the mean water level.The sediment includes a medium-to-fine sand mixture with a grain size decreasing from 1 mm on the foreshore to 0.1-0.2 mm offshore.According to Birkemeier et al.(1981),the tide in the area is considered micro-tidal,with a tidal range between 0.7 m for neap tides and 1.5 m for spring tides.

    The beach profile data used for this study were obtained from the FRF webpage labelled as Profile 62(FRF,2007), covering the period from July 1981 to January 2006(226 profiles).The elevations of the profile data were measured relative to the US 1929 National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD29).Profiles were interpolated to regular spacing at a 2-m resolution using the spline method described in Li et al. (2005).The interpolation was carried out over a domaindefined as 70 m from the main baseline(dune level position), up to 910 m offshore(around 8 m of water depth),in order to maximize the number of usable profiles and to extend the profiles out to the depth of closure.The depth of closure at this site has been estimated to be in water depths of between 4 and 6 m by Larson and Kraus(1994).The resulting data set is shown in Fig.2 as a colour-coded plot of elevations.

    3.1.2.Wave data

    Wave measurements may also be accessed from the FRF webpage.Significant wave height(Hs),and peak spectral wave period(Tp),were obtained from a directional waverider buoy located approximately 3 km offshore at a water depth of 17.4 m(FRF,2007).The wave data obtained from the buoy are regularly recorded every 6 h and,during some particular periods,hourly values have been recorded(Fig.3).

    3.2.Milford-on-Sea site

    3.2.1.Beach profiles

    Christchurch Bay encloses a shallow embayment with an average depth of approximately 7 m relative to the chart datum (CD),demarcated by Hengistbury Head to the west and Hurst Spit to the east(Fig.1(b)).Waves undergo shoaling and refraction in this area due to the shallow and wide shoreface of Christchurch Bay.The bay is characterized by dominant waves from the southwest(http://www.scopac.org.uk/scopac_ sedimentdb/chrst/chrstmap.pdf),and Hengistbury Head has played a mooring role for Christchurch Bay,resulting in a classical spiral beach planform(Halcrow Group,1999). Christchurch Bay is more exposed to swell waves originating in the Atlantic Ocean than the wind waves coming from the east and southeast;this,combined with the shallow bathymetry,means that storm waves are more depth-limited in this area(http://www.scopac.org.uk/scopac_sedimentdb/chrst/ chrstmap.pdf).

    The beach profile data used for this study were accessed from the Channel Coastal Observatory(CCO)webpage(CCO, 2006)and are labelled as Profile 5f00107.Surveys for the period from November 1988 to January 2006(50 profiles) were obtained.All profile elevation data are referenced to the Ordnance Survey Datum Newlyn(ODN).Only surveys extending from the dune region out to a water depth of the mean low water level(MLWL)were incorporated into the analysis.Each profile was interpolated to regular spacing with a 0.5 m resolution according to the method of Li et al.(2005). Fig.4 displays the subset of measured profiles along Profile 5f00107 that were used in CCA.

    Fig.2.Historic bathymetric surveys of Duck profile from July 2,1981 to January 13,1998.

    Fig.3.Hsmeasurements at Duck site from July 2,1981 to January 13, 1998.

    3.2.2.Wave data

    Measurements from a waverider buoy deployed at approximately 10-12 m of water depth are available.Hsand Tphave been obtained from this buoy.The predominant wave direction in this area is from the southwest.Data from the wave buoy site have been compared with the synthetic offshore wave data from the UK Met Office that have subsequently been transformed to the wave buoy site,through numerical modelling.Bradbury et al.(2004)compared a one-month sample of measured and synthetic data.They noted that there was a clear relationship between measured and modelled conditions,concluding that their confidence in the offshore synthetic wave data,the numerical wave transformation process,and the wave buoy measurements was high (Fig.5).

    Fig.4.Historic bathymetric surveys of Milford-on-Sea profile from November 1,1988 to January 13,1998.

    The beach profiles at the Duck site and the Milford-on-Sea site present some clear differences.The beach material at the Duck site is sand,whereas,at the Milford-on-Sea site,it is a mixture of sand and gravel.Due to these differences,thecharacteristics of the beaches of the two sites also differ (Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve,2010).The extent of the survey data is one of the significant differences between the sites.The Duck beach profile measurements extend considerably further offshore,to what is considered the depth of closure,while at the Milford-on-Sea site,the beach profile measurements extend to the low water level(LWL).While this makes comparison of beach volumes over time problematic,it is practical to assume that the LWL and the mean high water spring(MHWS)are quite sensitive to nearshore processes on an annual and biannual time scale and can be used as indicators of morphological changes in the beach profile.The active part of the upper beach was the focus of this study.The surveys of both sites covered this section of the beach.

    Fig.5.Hsmeasurements at Milford-on-Sea site from November 1, 1988 to January 13,1998.

    4.Methodology

    The measurements at the two sites have been processed to generate series with the same sampling rate for both profiles and wave conditions,a requirement for the application of CCA.At the Duck site,the first 155 profiles were used in CCA and the remaining 71 profiles were used for comparison against the predictions obtained based on the regression matrix.For the Milford-on-Sea site,the first 29 beach profiles were analysed using CCA and the remaining 21 profiles were used for comparison with the predictions obtained from CCA on the basis of the regression matrix.Table 1 shows a summary of the data used for the analysis.

    We followed the procedure detailed in Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2010)and described the waves with a nonparametric empirical distribution function.The wave conditions for each interval were converted into a single function by creating a pdf of significant wave height.CCA was then applied to the sequence of beach profiles and Hspdfs.Figs.6 and 7 show the empirical wave height distributions for the two sites.For the Duck site there is more information,as the FRF was established at the beginning of the 1980s and because of the relatively high frequency of sampling.The data at the Milford-on-Sea site are not as frequent as at the Duck site.It has been monitored from the late-1980s and profiles are measured generally twice a year.The empirical wave height distributions were created by combining the separate distributions calculated from each interval.In order to investigate the importance of large waves to the response of the beach morphology,the empirical wave height distributions were calculated for different wave height thresholds(TH),which were set at intervals of 1 m,yielding six different pdfs for the Duck site and four for the Milford-on-Sea site.The height of individual peaks in the distribution could change as TH varied because TH was applied to the pdfs for each interval before the combining.For the Duck site,TH was increased to a maximum of 5 m,while for the Milford-on-Sea site the maximum TH was 3 m.

    5.Results

    The first step in CCA was to correlate the profile response to the offshore wave height.The purpose was to investigate whether there was any relationship between the wave statistics and the observed pattern of variation in the profile response. CCA was carried out using three canonical modes,following the procedure of Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve(2010),who found that this led to the best performance of the prediction analysis.

    Comparisons are shown for the Duck and Milford-on-Sea data sets using the data defined in Table 1 and the predictions of eight years into the future(up to 2006),where the prediction for each particular date was made on the basis of the regression matrix and the pdf of significant wave heights in the period between that date and the date of the previous survey.For the Duck site,the CCA regression matrix was based on the data from July 2,1981 to January 13,1998.For the Milford-on-Sea site,the CCA regression matrix was determined using beach profiles and significant wave heights for the period from November 1,1988 to January 13,1998, and the profile predictions for the two sites were calculated using wave data over the period from January 13,1998 to January 30,2006(see Table 1).

    Prior to the analyses,the temporal mean was subtracted from all data sets.According to Fig.8(a),the first three spatial EOFs obtained from the profile data sets at the Duck site explained 69%of the variation in the data.The first spatial eigenfunction(E1)explained 35%of the variation around themean,the second(E2)explained 21%,and the third(E3) explained 13%.At the Milford-on-Sea site(Fig.8(b)),79%of the variation is explained by the first three spatial EOFs.E1 explained 43%of the variation,E2 explained 25%,and E3 explained 11%.The difference in percentages between the two sites can be interpreted as follows:The data from the Milfordon-Sea site need fewer modes to describe the entire data set and so contain less complexity than the data from the Duck site.This is partly explained by the length of monitoring at the two sites and the frequency of observations.The Duck site captures shorter-term fluctuations and is also more likely to contain extreme events due to its greater duration.For both sites,the EOFs describing the profile shapes show a rich structure due to the presence of bars,but the shapes of the EOF modes can be used to determine mean properties of the impact of the bar over the profile(Larson et al.,2000).Additionally, the temporal EOFs(not shown in this paper)can be used to determine trends of profile changes,oscillatory cycles,and relate them to coastal processes(Horrillo-Caraballo et al., 2015).

    Table 1 Summary of data used in this study.

    Fig.6.Empirical wave height distribution with different TH values at Duck site.

    The root mean square error(RMSE)was used to determine the quality of fit between measured and predicted profiles. Two cases are shown:the RMSE between the prediction and measurement as a time averaged function over the profile,and the RMSE as a spatially averaged function over the forecast period.

    Fig.9(a)shows results for the Duck site,for the cases with TH=0 m,TH=1 m,TH=2 m,TH=3 m,TH=4 m,and TH=5 m.The general behaviour of the results from the use of different wave height thresholds is similar:The time-averaged RMSE increases where major changes in the elevations are present.This is due largely to the movement and change of position of the bars in the beach profile.If no wave height threshold is considered(TH=0 m),the time-averaged RMSE decreases between 70 m and 180 m of the cross-shore distance with respect to the other thresholds,but the time-averaged RMSE increases when predicting the first bar and the offshore area(between 470 m and 850 m of the cross-shore distance).The area between 270 m and 420 m is more affected by larger waves and the change of position of the bars.

    Fig.10(a)shows the results for the Milford-on-Sea site,for the cases with TH=0 m,TH=1 m,TH=2 m,and TH=3 m.At the upper beach,where there is very little movement,the time-averaged RMSE is,not surprisingly,very small.Further seaward the RMSE rises,with an average valueof about 0.7 m,ranging between 0 and 1.3 m.The time averaged RMSE is largest at the upper beach crest and at around 25-27 m of the cross-shore distance.As at the Duck site,the general trends with use of different wave height thresholds are similar:The time-averaged RMSE increases where major changes in the elevations are present.If CCA is carried out with no threshold,the time-averaged RMSE increases between 17 m and 47 m of the cross-shore distance with respect to the other thresholds.The time-averaged RMSEs at the Duck site are generally smaller across the profile when no threshold is employed.However,at the Milford-on-Sea site,setting a wave height threshold leads to an improvement in forecast error over 20-50 m of the crossshore distance.

    Fig.7.Empirical wave height distribution with different TH values at Milford-on-Sea site.

    An investigation of the dependence of forecast error upon the forecast window was also made.Figs.11 and 12 show the spatially averaged RMSE for the Duck and Milford-on-Sea sites over the eight-year forecast period.They demonstrate one of the advantages of data-driven methods over process based methods.As the forecast window lengthens,there is no evidence of a commensurate increase in error,as one often finds with a time-stepping solution of differential equations. Instead,the general trend of errors is remarkably consistent.At the Duck site,there are two periods where there is an increase in the spatially averaged RMSE that can be traced to unusual sequences of storms(Capobianco et al.,1997;FRF,2015). This highlights one of the disadvantages of data-driven methods when an unusual wave event occurs that is notrepresented in the data used to compute the regression matrix: Large discrepancies can be expected between forecasts and actual beach profiles.The spatially averaged RMSE at the Milford-on-Sea site(Fig.12)fluctuates between 0.2 m and 1.0 m,with a peak after the beginning of 2004.The explanation for this peak can be related to a gap in the wave records at the end of 2003.In this case,the calculation of the empirical wave height distribution for this time of the year is uncertain. Fig.12 also clearly shows that the condition of TH=1 m provides consistently better forecast accuracy than the condition of TH=0 m.

    Fig.8.First three spatial EOFs determined from measured beach profiles at two sites.

    Fig.9.Time-averaged RMSE for predictions made with different TH values and mean,maximum,and minimum elevations of measured beach profile at Duck site.

    Almeida et al.(2011)concluded in their study in Praia de Faro,in southern Portugal,that waves higher than 2.3 m were responsible for the main morphological changes in the berm and beach face and waves higher than 3.2 m were responsible for the changes in the sub-tidal area and long-shore bars.We have found a rather more nuanced picture from our analysis.

    Based on the wave height threshold analysis,there is a difference in the relationship between waves and morphological response at the two sites.Removing the smaller waves leads to an increase in the forecast error for the upper beach and a decrease in the forecast error for the lower beach at the Duck site,while it leads to a reduction of the forecast error across the whole profile at the Milford-on-Sea site.An initial interpretation of these results is that,for the more gently sloping sandy beach at the Duck site,the contribution of smaller waves to the morphological evolution of the upper beach should not be ignored,whereas for the mixed beaches at the Milford site the contribution of smaller waves is less important.

    Fig.10.Time-averaged RMSE for predictions made with different TH values and mean,maximum,and minimum elevations of measured beach profile at Milford-on-Sea site.

    6.Conclusions

    In this study we have investigated the medium-term prediction of beach profiles using a data-driven technique based on CCA.Measurements from two sites have been used:the Duck site,in the USA,and the Milford-on-Sea site,in the UK. The Duck site is dominated by mildly sloping sandy beaches while the Milford-on-Sea site is a mixed sand and gravel beach with a steep gravel upper beach.

    Data-driven techniques rely on finding a strong correlation between measurements of the processes causing beach changes and the beach response to these processes.Once such a correlation is established,then it can be used,in conjunction with knowledge of the forcing processes,to formulate predictions of the corresponding beach profile.Here,we have used CCA to establish correlation properties between sequences of wave conditions and corresponding measurements of beach profiles.The correlation was determined from the initial portion of the measurements.Forecasts,or,more accurate,hindcasts of beach profiles were made for the remaining portion of the measurements using the correlation and wave information for the period up to the date at which the beach profile was required.A validation of the forecast was made against the corresponding measured beach profiles. Forecasts were performed for periods of up to eight years in advance.

    The choice of metric for processes and beach response has been investigated elsewhere(e.g.,Larson et al.,2000; Horrillo-Caraballo and Reeve,2008),and it has been found that the empirical wave height distribution and beach profile are good metrics.

    Fig.11.Spatially averaged RMSE for predictions made with different TH values and measured Hsat Duck site.

    Fig.12.Spatially averaged RMSE for predictions made with different TH values indicated by label key and measured Hsat Milford-on-Sea site.

    Here,our primary interest has been in investigating the hypothesis that changes in beach profile morphology are driven primarily by the largest,most energetic waves.To this end we have performed repeated analyses with wave heights exceeding a series of thresholds.A secondary aim has been to test the dependence of forecast error on the length of the forecast window.Our specific question was,is there a degradation in forecast quality within the forecast period?

    We have found that the RMSE of the forecasts is dependent on the wave height threshold(TH).At the Milford-on-Sea site the forecasts were improved by setting a TH of 1 m.Further improvement in the error does not occur uniformly with increasing TH,which might be expected if beach response were being driven purely by the largest wind waves.At the Duck site,forecasts for the upper beach are best when no threshold is employed,whereas for the lower beach a small improvement in forecast error is found when a threshold is imposed.It is concluded that small-amplitude waves play an important part in shaping the upper beach profile at the Duck site,and have a rather less significant role in influencing the evolution of the lower beach,suggesting that a small amplitude swell is not a significant driver of the mediumterm evolution of the beach morphology.

    The forecast errors at both sites do not exhibit growth with the forecast period,as is often found with time-stepping process-based models due to the accumulation of numericalinaccuracies.However,the forecast error can vary over time, particularly when an unusual wave condition occurs that is not represented in the data used to determine the correlation.

    As coastal monitoring programs continue,and new programs begin,more data will become available,and means of extracting information useful for coastal management can be anticipated.Further research is required to determine the best metrics for correlation studies,limitations on forecast periods, the spatial and temporal distribution of forecast errors,and the dependence of forecast errors on beach type and exposure.The data-driven method based on CCA described here is one example of the sophisticated statistical techniques that can be brought to bear on this challenge,and it has been demonstrated how medium-term forecasts can be formulated.

    Acknowledgements

    The authors would like to thank the staff at the FRF,Field Data Collections and Analysis Branch,of the US Army Corps of Engineers in Duck,North Carolina,USA and at the Channel Coastal Observatory in Southampton,UK for making the field data available for both sites.

    References

    Almeida,L.P.,Ferreira,O.,Pacheco,A.,2011.Thresholds for morphological changes on an exposed sandy beach as a function of wave height.Earth Surf.Process.Landf.36(4),523-532.http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/esp.2072. Birkemeier,W.A.,DeWall,A.E.,Gorbics,C.S.,Miller,H.C.,1981.A User's Guide to CERC's Field Research Facility.Miscellaneous Report No.81-7. U.S.Army,Corps of Engineers,Coastal Engineering Research Center (U.S.).National Technical Information Service,Springfield.

    Bradbury,A.P.,Colenutt,A.J.,Cross,J.,Eastick,C.,Hume,D.,2003.Evaluation of coastal process impacts arising from nearshore aggregate dredging for beach recharge:Shingles Banks,Christchurch Bay.In:The International Conference on Coastal Management.Institution of Civil Engineers,Brighton,pp.98-112.

    Bradbury,A.P.,Mason,T.E.,Holt,M.W.,2004.Comparison of the performance of the Met Office UK:Waters wave model with a network of shallow water moored buoy data.In:Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Wave Hindcasting and Forecasting.North Shore Oahu,Hawaii.

    Capobianco,M.,Larson,M.,Nicholls,R.J.,Kraus,N.C.,1997.Depth of closure:A contribution to the reconciliation of theory,practice,and evidence.In:Proceedings of the 3rd Coastal Dynamics.American Society of Civil Engineers,Reston,pp.506-515.

    Channel Coastal Observatory(CCO),2006.Channel Coastal Observatory, England.http://www.channelcoast.org[Retrieved June 18,2006].

    Clark,D.,1975.Understanding Canonical Correlation Analysis.Concepts and Techniques in Modern Geography,No.3.Geo Abstracts Ltd.,Norwich.

    de Vriend,H.J.,Capobianco,M.,Chesher,T.,de Swart,H.E.,Latteux,B., Stive,M.,1993.Approaches to long-term modelling of coastal morphology:A review.Coast.Eng.21(1-3),225-269.http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/0378-3839(93)90051-9.

    Field Research Facility(FRF),2007.Field Data Collections and Analysis Branch.US Army Corps of Engineers,Duck.http://www.frf.usace.army. mil/frf_home.shtml[Retrieved Aug.17,2007].

    Field Research Facility(FRF),2015.Field Data Collections and Analysis Branch.US Army Corps of Engineers,Duck.http://www.frf.usace.army.mil/AnuRpt/programs/storms/storm_table.txt[Retrieved Jun.23,2015].

    Halcrow Group,1999.Poole and Christchurch Bay Shoreline Management Plan.Volume 2:Physical Environment.Poole and Christchurch Bays Coastal Group,Swindon.

    Haxel,J.H.,Holman,R.A.,2004.The sediment response of a dissipative beach to variations in wave climate.Mar.Geol.206(1-4),73-99.http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.margeo.2004.02.005.

    Horrillo-Caraballo,J.M.,Reeve,D.E.,2008.An investigation of the link between beach morphology and wave climate at Duck,NC,USA.J.Flood Risk Manag. 1(2),110-122.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-318X.2008.00013.x.

    Horrillo-Caraballo,J.M.,Reeve,D.E.,2010.An investigation of the performance of a data-driven model on sand and shingle beaches.Mar.Geol. 274(1),120-134.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2010.03.010.

    Horrillo-Caraballo,J.M.,Reeve,D.E.,Karunarathna,H.,Pan,S.,Burningham,H., 2015.Multi-scale statistical analysis of beach profiles on the Suffolk Coast, UK.In:Proceedings of the Coastal Sediments 2015.World Scientific Publishing,Singapore.

    Larson,M.,Kraus,N.C.,1994.Temporal and spatial scales of beach profile changes,Duck,North Carolina.Mar.Geol.117(1-4),75-94.http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(94)90007-8.

    Larson,M.,Capobianco,M.,Hanson,H.,2000.Relationship between beach profiles and waves at Duck,NC,determined by canonical correlation analysis.Mar.Geol.163(1-4),275-288.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0025-3227(99)00119-X.

    Li,Y.,Lark,M.,Reeve,D.E.,2005.The multi-scale variability of beach profiles at Duck,N.C.,USA,1981-2003.Coast.Eng.52(12),1133-1153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2005.07.002.

    Pan,S.,Reeve,D.E.,Davidson,M.,O'Connor,B.,Vincent,C.,Dolphin,T., Wolf,J.,Thorne,P.,Bell,P.,Souza,A.,et al.,2010.Larger-scale morphodynamic impacts of segmented shore-parallel breakwaters on coasts and beaches:An overview of the LEACOAST2 project.Shore Beach 78(4),35-43.

    Reeve,D.E.,Horrillo-Caraballo,J.M.,2014.Analysis and prediction of the differential beach response within a coastal defence scheme:Herne Bay. UK.Proc.ICE Marit.Eng.167(MA1),29-41.

    Reeve,D.E.,Karunarathna,H.,Pan,S.Q.,Horrillo-Caraballo,J.M.,R′o.zy′nski,G., Ranasinghe,R.,2016.Data-driven and hybrid coastal morphological prediction methods for meso-scale forecasting.Geomorphology 256,49-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.10.016.

    R′o.zy′nski,G.,2003.Data-driven modelling of multiple longshore bars and their interaction.Coast.Eng.48(3),151-170.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0378-3839(03)00024-3.

    Sutherland,J.,Gouldby,B.,2003.Vulnerability of coastal defences to climate changes.Proc.Inst Civ.Eng.Water Marit.Eng.156(2),137-145.http:// dx.doi.org/10.1680/wame.2003.156.2.137.

    29 June 2015;accepted 6 January 2016

    This work was supported by the UK Natural Environment Research Council(Grant No.NE/J005606/1),the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council(Grant No.EP/C005392/1),and the Ensemble Estimation of Flood Risk in a Changing Climate(EFRaCC)project funded by the British Council under its Global Innovation Initiative.

    *Corresponding author.

    E-mail address:j.m.horrillo-caraballo@swansea.ac.uk(Jos′e M.Horrillo-Caraballo).

    Peer review under responsibility of Hohai University.

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wse.2016.02.006

    1674-2370/?2016 Hohai University.Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

    97在线人人人人妻| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 日韩视频在线欧美| 国产成人精品无人区| 操美女的视频在线观看| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 悠悠久久av| 免费看不卡的av| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 日本wwww免费看| 国产av国产精品国产| 亚洲精品在线美女| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频 | 满18在线观看网站| 免费不卡黄色视频| 高清欧美精品videossex| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 | 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 桃花免费在线播放| 不卡av一区二区三区| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 制服诱惑二区| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 观看美女的网站| 国产乱来视频区| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 久久性视频一级片| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 欧美日韩av久久| 综合色丁香网| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 丁香六月欧美| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 乱人伦中国视频| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| www.自偷自拍.com| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 色吧在线观看| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| av视频免费观看在线观看| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| av国产精品久久久久影院| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 亚洲在久久综合| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 高清不卡的av网站| 午夜影院在线不卡| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| av线在线观看网站| 免费观看av网站的网址| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 国产在视频线精品| av视频免费观看在线观看| 久久99精品国语久久久| 99久久综合免费| 日本91视频免费播放| 免费观看av网站的网址| 中国国产av一级| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 黄片小视频在线播放| www.自偷自拍.com| 999久久久国产精品视频| 国产又爽黄色视频| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 国产精品.久久久| 免费观看人在逋| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站 | 久久久久久久精品精品| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 国产av精品麻豆| 91国产中文字幕| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 成人漫画全彩无遮挡| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久 | 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| videosex国产| av卡一久久| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 亚洲成人手机| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 免费不卡黄色视频| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 中国三级夫妇交换| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 久久婷婷青草| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯 | 成人手机av| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| videos熟女内射| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 国产成人精品福利久久| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 国产1区2区3区精品| 国产又爽黄色视频| av福利片在线| 免费av中文字幕在线| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 高清不卡的av网站| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 中国国产av一级| 黄色 视频免费看| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 97在线人人人人妻| 色94色欧美一区二区| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 精品午夜福利在线看| www日本在线高清视频| 国产色婷婷99| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 国产色婷婷99| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区 | 久久热在线av| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 九草在线视频观看| 又大又爽又粗| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 超碰成人久久| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 日本午夜av视频| 丝袜美足系列| 18禁观看日本| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 在线观看三级黄色| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 电影成人av| 精品国产国语对白av| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看 | 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| av电影中文网址| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 日韩av免费高清视频| 黄色 视频免费看| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看 | 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 欧美日韩精品网址| 黄频高清免费视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 成人影院久久| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 捣出白浆h1v1| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 美女午夜性视频免费| 精品国产一区二区久久| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 制服诱惑二区| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 最黄视频免费看| 久久人人爽人人片av| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 看免费av毛片| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 免费av中文字幕在线| tube8黄色片| 成人国产麻豆网| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影 | 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 午夜日韩欧美国产| av有码第一页| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 免费看不卡的av| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 自线自在国产av| 午夜av观看不卡| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 亚洲综合精品二区| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 一本久久精品| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 久久 成人 亚洲| 久久av网站| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆 | 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 久久久久久人妻| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 日本av免费视频播放| 一级黄片播放器| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 国产在线免费精品| av国产精品久久久久影院| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 欧美精品av麻豆av| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 搡老岳熟女国产| 中国三级夫妇交换| 午夜影院在线不卡| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 美女中出高潮动态图| 成人国产av品久久久| 操出白浆在线播放| 如何舔出高潮| 观看av在线不卡| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 日本av免费视频播放| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 中文天堂在线官网| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 一级毛片电影观看| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 久久久精品94久久精品| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 成人影院久久| 久久久欧美国产精品| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 久久热在线av| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| av在线播放精品| 欧美人与善性xxx| 久久热在线av| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产探花极品一区二区| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲成人手机| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 亚洲综合精品二区| 满18在线观看网站| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 飞空精品影院首页| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 国产av一区二区精品久久| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 亚洲国产看品久久| 欧美另类一区| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 高清不卡的av网站| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 黄频高清免费视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 一级毛片我不卡| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 97在线人人人人妻| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久 成人 亚洲| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 亚洲av电影在线进入| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 久久精品亚洲av国产电影网| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 | 国产探花极品一区二区| netflix在线观看网站| 色网站视频免费| 五月天丁香电影| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 999久久久国产精品视频| 日日撸夜夜添| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 无限看片的www在线观看| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 久久av网站| 综合色丁香网| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲av男天堂| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 美国免费a级毛片| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 久久人人爽人人片av| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久 | 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 免费不卡黄色视频| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 91老司机精品| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 在现免费观看毛片| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 国产成人精品在线电影| 五月天丁香电影| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 国产成人精品福利久久| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| av天堂久久9| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 制服人妻中文乱码| av视频免费观看在线观看| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 天天添夜夜摸| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 色播在线永久视频| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 亚洲中文av在线| 国产av国产精品国产| av有码第一页| 美女福利国产在线| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 成人免费观看视频高清| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 久久久久久人妻| 日韩av免费高清视频| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 国产精品免费大片| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 色播在线永久视频| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| av天堂久久9| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 国产成人91sexporn| 免费看不卡的av| 9191精品国产免费久久| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o | 在线天堂中文资源库| 五月天丁香电影| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 久久97久久精品| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 嫩草影视91久久| 国产精品三级大全| 亚洲成色77777| 亚洲精品第二区| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 色播在线永久视频| 亚洲人成电影观看| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 中国国产av一级| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区 | 成人国语在线视频| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 不卡av一区二区三区| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 一级爰片在线观看| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 免费av中文字幕在线| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 深夜精品福利| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 男女之事视频高清在线观看 | 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 人人澡人人妻人| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 街头女战士在线观看网站| 免费少妇av软件| 久久 成人 亚洲| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 18禁观看日本| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 久久久久久久国产电影| 国产视频首页在线观看| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 男女国产视频网站| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 飞空精品影院首页| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 丝袜在线中文字幕| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 一级片免费观看大全| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 国产野战对白在线观看| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 丝袜喷水一区| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 麻豆av在线久日| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 一级毛片我不卡| av福利片在线| 黄片小视频在线播放| 下体分泌物呈黄色|