The National Academies Press: Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/1445 SHARE

   
Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)
DETAILS
130 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK

ISBN 978-0-309-04129-4 | DOI 10.17226/1445
CONTRIBUTORS
GET THIS BOOK Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems, Marine Board, National
Research Council
FIND RELATED TITLES
SUGGESTED CITATION
National Research Council 1989. Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes.

Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/1445.

Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get:
– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientiﬁc reports

– 10% off the price of print titles
– Email or social media notiﬁcations of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts

Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press.
(Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences.
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes
Measuring and
Understanding Coastal
Processes for
Engineering Purposes
Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems

Marine Board
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS

Washington, D.C.1989
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
ii
National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the
National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy
of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of
the panel responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for
appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors, according to procedures
approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sci-
ences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distin-
guished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of sci-
ence and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter
granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the fed-
eral government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National
Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences, as parallel organisation of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous
in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sci-
ences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering
also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and
research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president
of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to
secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy mat-
ters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the
National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal govern-
ment and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr.
Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organised by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to
associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of further-
ing knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general poli-
cies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to
the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is adminis-
tered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M.
White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
The program described in this report is supported by Cooperative Agreement No.
14-12-0001-30416 and 14-35-0001-30475 between the Minerals Management Service of the U.S.
Department of the Interior and the National Academy of Sciences.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-04129-5
Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution
Avenue Washington, DC 20418
Printed in the United States of America
First Printing, November 1989
Second Printing, November 1990

iii
Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems
WARREN W. DENNER, Chairman, Science Applications International

Corporation, Monterey, California
DAVID G. AUBREY, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole,
Massachusetts
OGDEN BEEMAN, Ogden Beeman and Associates, Inc., Portland, Oregon
EUGENE E. HARLOW, Soros Associates, New York, New York
EDWARD B. THORNTON, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California
ROBERT O. REID, NAE, Texas A&M University, College Station
NOLAN C. RHODES, Port of Corpus Christi Authority, Corpus Christi, Texas
RICHARD W. STERNBERG, University of Washington, Seattle
WILLIAM L. WOOD, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Government Liaison
THOMAS W. RICHARDSON, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg,
Mississippi
ASBURY H. SALLENGER, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia
JOSEPH R. VADUS, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration, Rockville, Maryland
JAMES A. BAILARD, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme,
California
Staff
DONALD W. PERKINS, Staff Officer
GLORIA B. GREEN, Project Secretary

iv
Marine Board
SIDNEY WALLACE, Chairman, Hill, Betts & Nash, Washington, D.C.

BRIAN J. WATT, Vice-Chairman, TECHSAVANT, Inc., Kingwood, Texas
ROGER D. ANDERSON, Cox's Wholesale Seafood, Inc., Tampa, Florida
ROBERT G. BEA, NAE, University of California, Berkeley
JAMES M. BROADUS III, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods
Hole, Massachusetts
F. PAT DUNN, Shell Oil Company, Houston, Texas
LARRY L. GENTRY, Lockheed Advanced Marine Systems, Sunnyvale,
California
DANA R. KESTER, Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode
Island
JUDITH KILDOW, Department of Ocean Engineering, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
WARREN G. LEBACK, Consultant, Princeton, New Jersey
BERNARD LE MEHAUTE, University of Miamia, Florida
WILLIAM R. MURDEN, Murden Marine, Ltd., Alexandria, Virginia
EUGENE K. PENTIMONTI, American President Lines, Ltd., Oakland,
California
JOSEPH D. PORRICELLI, ECO, Inc., Annapolis, Maryland
JERRY R. SCHUBEL, State University of New York, Stony Brook
RICHARD J. SEYMOUR, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla,
California
ROBERT N. STEINER, Operations, Atlantic Container Line, South Plainfield,
New Jersey
EDWARD WENK, JR., Seattle, Washington
Staff
CHARLES A. BOOKMAN, Director
DONALD W. PERKINS, Associate Director
ALEXANDER STAVOVY, Staff Officer
SUSAN GARBINI, Staff Officer
PAUL SCHOLZ, Research Fellow
DORIS C. HOLMES, Staff Associate
DELPHINE GLAZE, Administrative Secretary
AURORE BLECK, Administrative Secretary
GLORIA B. GREEN, Project Secretary
CARLA D. MOORE, Project Secretary

PREFACE v
Preface
Understanding the effects of the sea's forces in the rapidly changing, high-
energy environment of the surf zone is a difficult task for both the scientist and
the engineer. But this knowledge is fundamental to planning and managing
coastal development and protection. Our understanding of nearshore ocean
environmental forces and their relation to the movement of sediment and beaches
directly affects many of the 125 million citizens living within 50 miles of the
U.S. coast who rely on the coastal resources and beaches for their living and
recreation.
Over a third of the coastline of the contiguous states is rapidly changing—
mostly eroding. This change places an increasing pressure on public
administrators, who must make judgments about coastal land use, as well as on
developers and engineers, who must gauge the economic and physical risks to
homes, structures, harbor entrances, and to the rapidly diminishing public lands.
What makes the development of shoreline and coastal environmental
measurement capability a matter of immediate concern, and even of national
interest, is the present emphasis on cost sharing between the federal and local
governments or public authorities for development and maintenance of coastal
and port facilities and projects (such as deeper shipping channels, beach
nourishment and protection schemes, and wave barriers). The adverse effects
resulting from

PREFACE vi
inaccuracies in planning, often stemming from inaccurate measurement and poor

understanding of environmental forces and changes, are likely to have more
public impact as local responsibilities for undertaking coastal projects
increasingly press the taxpayers and local economies.
Over the past decade, remarkable advances have been made in the general
field of measurement systems—sensing, processing data, and modeling. There is
every reason to expect that such improvements would enable the engineer to
respond more effectively to the pressures impinging on the use of coastal areas
and on construction on and near the beach. However, the potential for such
advances in coastal environmental measurement systems has not been fully
realized. Accordingly, at the request of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the
National Research Council appointed the Committee on Coastal Measurement
Engineering Systems to:
• assess the needs for coastal data for planning, design, construction, and
maintenance;
• identify the areas where the theoretical underpinnings are inadequate to
establish measurement needs;
• assess the availability and suitability of instrumentation to meet these
needs; and
• provide recommended actions about where new or better instrumentation
is needed, with a relative priority.
Two questions asked of the committee were fundamental to the conduct of

its assessments and development of its recommendations. In identifying the needs
for coastal data, the key question is, "What engineering requirements have
significant influence on these data needs?" In regard to the role of modeling in
analyzing and forecasting coastal changes and the relation between modeling and
engineering measurement, the fundamental question posed to the committee was,
"How does the capability and practice of modeling in the high-energy coastal
waters influence the development of measurement systems?" The committee
considered an evaluation of the development costs for specific measurement
systems to be outside the scope of this study; however, the assessment of
measurement alternatives does include an evaluation of the present state of
development for various measurement systems and identifies the difficulties that
must be surmounted in development.
The committee—in its assessment of coastal data needs, instrumentation,
and analyses—addressed only the in-water aspects of

PREFACE vii
the measurement of noncohesive sediment in this report, but chose to exclude

cohesive sediments (such as clays and muds) in its assessment.
A committee of nine members provided expertise in coastal engineering,
physical oceanography, sedimentology, and engineering for coastal and harbor
dredging. In addition, representatives of four agencies provided much useful
technical program and background information for the committee's
consideration.
The committee reviewed measurement system development and witnessed
several tests conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers during its 1986
SUPERDUCK Project at the Corps' Coastal Engineering Test Facility in Duck,
North Carolina. In addition, the committee conducted a survey of over 30 coastal
engineers and scientists from the United States, Canada, and Europe to obtain
their views about measurement development needs and the associated engineering
requirements and what new technology can be practically applied to improve
present measurement practices. The questions and a summary of results are
presented in the Appendix.
The committee met six times over a two-year period, identified the salient
engineering concerns, reviewed the physical oceanographic processes occurring
near the shore that could affect engineering activities, and identified
measurements needed to understand these physical processes. The committee
then determined how well those measurements meet design or modeling
requirements and made recommendations regarding development. The
organization of this report reflects this analytical process.

PREFACE viii

CONTENTS ix
Contents
Executive Summary 1
1 Introduction 7
Previous Relevant Reports and Studies 10
Coastal Engineering and Processes 13
Measurement Complexities 14
Analytical Methods in This Study 16
2 Coastal Engineering Applications 19

Engineering Application Areas 20
3 Processes and Measurement Requirements 26

High-Frequency Water Motions 28
Low-Frequency Water Motions 44
Fluid/Sediment Interactions 49
Fluid/Structure Interactions 56
4 Modeling Coastal Systems 66

Physical Models 69
Mathematical Models 70
Modeling Forces on Structures 85

CONTENTS x
5 Data 87
Quality Control 88
Standards and Calibration 91
Data Assimilation and Synthesis 92
6 Conclusions and Recommendations 95
Appendix: Survey Findings 105
References 107

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
Executive Summary
Coastal scientists and engineers are faced with a wide variety of problems in
the coastal zone. In most cases the resolution of these problems involves
measurements of water and particulate motion and coastal processes—currents,
waves, tides, bathymetry, sediment transport, and so on. These measurements
may be needed for a variety of purposes:
• research into the fundamental processes,

• design data,
• input data for developing physical and mathematical models and for
validating them,
• monitoring, and
• documentation of extreme events.
Some coastal engineering problems will present increasingly difficult

challenges in the next few years. Examples of these problems are the rapid
erosion of the barrier islands along the Atlantic and Gulf coastlines, the possible
impact of sea level change on shore stability and structures; construction,
protection, or preservation of some expensive coastal structures and
developments; and the cost and impact of the extensive harbor entrance dredging.
Although no one has evaluated the total cost of coastal engineering works in
the United States, much less defined the entire scope of such activity, we do know
that the cost of maintenance dredging

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
alone amounts to over one-half billion dollars in federal and local government
funds annually, hurricane losses along beach areas exceed hundreds of millions
of dollars, and more ordinary winter storms cause property damage in the tens of
millions. The capability to understand and anticipate how and when coastal
changes occur in and near the high-energy wave zone can significantly reduce the
public and private costs and losses; the ability to measure change is directly
related to this capability.
Unfortunately, many coastal processes are poorly understood, largely due to
the difficulty of making good measurements. The processes represent a large
range of space and time scales, from the smallest turbulence scales to sea level
changes occurring over decades. Often a great deal of sensitivity and precision is
needed in the instruments, yet they must function over an extended period of time
in one of the most energetic and corrosive of ocean environments.
Instrumentation in remote sites must operate unattended for weeks or years.
Biological fouling can be a major consideration in subarctic regions. In some
cases sensors do not exist to make some very important measurements—
nearshore sediment transport near the seabed, for example. Only a few of the
available coastal engineering measurement systems (e.g., tide gauges, current
meters, wave gauges) can be bought off-the-shelf. Most systems are built in
small numbers and are often ''customized'' for the particular measurement
requirement.
With this background, this report sets out to answer the following questions:
• What are the coastal measurement needs, and what are the engineering
requirements having a major influence on these needs?
• What is the relationship between engineering measurement needs and the
use of physical and mathematical models for analyzing and forecasting
coastal changes?
• What are the implications of the modeling capability and practices on
development of measurement systems?
• What new technology can effectively be applied to improve present
measurement practice, and what gaps will exist in measurement
techniques and systems?
• What improvements in measurement techniques and approaches will
have a significant influence in accuracy and cost of analysis and
forecasting of coastal change?
The committee attempted to be as realistic as possible in preparing its

conclusions and recommendations. Every effort was made to

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
relate the measurement needs to realistic coastal engineering problems. In most

cases, the measurements are made to define processes and their impact on the
shore or a structure, existing or planned. The measurements may be used to
characterize or model the particular process—such as sediment transport—or they
may be deterministic, as in an actual measurement of a load on a structure.
Coastal engineering problems are divided into four general features, according to
where they occur: shore areas, backshores, entrances, and harbors. These
problems are in turn treated in regard to the following coastal processes:
• kinematics and hydrodynamics of high-frequency flows, including wave

and current motions with periods of five minutes or less, such as ocean
waves;
• kinematics and hydrodynamics of low-frequency flows with periods of
more than five minutes, including tides and storm surges;
• fluid/sediment interactions; and
• fluid/structure interactions.
In each general process category, the requirements, present capabilities, and

needs are assessed. The status of existing models and the modeling requirements
for measurements are treated as well.
To assist the committee in identifying the major coastal engineering
problems, a questionnaire containing the above questions was sent to over 30
leading coastal engineers. In part, the conclusions reached by the committee
represent their input.
The committee conducted this study to assess the needs and availability of
suitable coastal instrumentation and measurement systems, and to provide
recommendations regarding specific developments. The committee was also
responsible for providing guidance on development priorities.
The committee agreed that there is a pressing need for the development of
instruments and measurement systems to promote our understanding of coastal
processes. Presently, the user community is small and cannot attract sufficient
industrial interest in developing the needed technology. To stimulate this
development, we need a commitment of resources at the national level, as well as a
forum to provide information, collaboration, interaction, and coordination on
measurement system development.
The committee recommends 19 specific steps for improving

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
coastal instruments and measurement systems, each recommendation derived

from a conclusion reached by a consensus of the committee members. Of the 19
recommendations, 4 were ranked as high-priority, 5 were ranked high-to-
medium, 9 were ranked as medium, and 1 was ranked as medium-to-low–
priority. The nine recommendations ranked as high-to-medium are regarded as
essential to coastal engineering advancement in the rest of this century. The
committee, being well aware that specific local or regional coastal problems may
argue for a different ranking of the recommendations, would only remind the
reader that these recommendations are based on a national point of view.
HIGH-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
Wave data and measurement techniques:
1. Directional wave energy spectra and their rapid dissemination to

forecasters and researchers are needed; a national coastal
measurement system to expand a small-area coverage now in place is
recommended.
2. Directional resolution improvements are essential for more accurate
forecasting of littoral processes—instrumentation techniques to
measure wave directionality (2° to 5° accuracy) both in situ and
remotely should be developed.
Sediment transport processes and their measurement:
3. High-resolution measurement of concentrated sediment motions near

the mobile sea bed cannot now be made in the surf zone and tidal
inlets; this capability should be developed.
4. Models of sediment transport are largely empirical and are poorly
verified; improvements in understanding the underlying theoretical
relationships and field tests (interactive) of existing models are
needed.
HIGH-TO-MEDIUM–PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The internal dynamics of rubble-mound structures are not well

understood by coastal engineers, as the number of divergent opinions
about the causes of structural failure show. Both modeling and in situ
measurements of such structures should be undertaken to enhance the
basis for better and safer design.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
2. The causes of breakwater failure are still not well understood. Core
pressures in breakwater cross sections should be measured during
storms, and modern pressure-sensing and signal transmission
technology should be adapted to acquire and process such data.
3. Wave set-up process is not well quantified; measurements of wave
forcing and sea-level response during storms are needed.
4. Sediment transport prediction is closely linked to understanding and
predicting turbulence; instruments for measuring turbulence in the
nearshore environment are needed, and related modeling capability
should be developed.
5. Limited-area hydrodynamical circulation models (2-D and 3-D) need
to be improved; this progress is dependent on developing low-cost
current meters and associated telemetry systems to be able to verify
and develop new models. Development of such meters is urged.
MEDIUM-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Improve and verify, through field measurements, a 3-D current

model for complex bathymetry.
2. Develop reliable current meters for measuring low-frequency
currents in tidal inlets during storms.
3. Improve storm-surge models and verify them through field
measurements development to enhance predictions of overland
flooding.
4. Improve means to measure velocity profiles in energetic, rapidly
varying flow fields to allow better estimates of boundary shear
stress.
5. Determine ways to measure small-scale (centimeter to decimeter)
changes in seabed topography to understand scour processes around
structures.
6. Develop measurement capability to obtain cross-coastline profiles
under high-wave conditions.
7. Develop and verify, through field measurements, an operationally
useful numerical model for refraction/diffraction for general use in
complex bathymetry conditions.
8. Improve and design for lower cost production of slope arrays to
measure wave momentum in shallow coastal water.
9. Improve models of nonlinear wave and current interaction and wave
interaction with the bottom and verify these models through field
measurements.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
A medium-to-low–priority recommendation identified the extension to deep

water, seaward to the continental slope off the West Coast, of seismic pressure
sensors, to be better able to quantify tsunami models and coastal tidal models;
this action would improve tsunami forecasting in several Pacific and Alaskan
areas.
The committee agrees that measurements are most needed under high-energy
conditions and close to the interfaces (sea surface, bottom, and structure). Many
of the processes of interest are subject to numerical modeling, but in many cases
the data needed to specify initial and forcing conditions have been lacking. Many
of the processes of interest are nonlinear and interactive and require relatively
complex physics in simulation models. Advances in computer technology and
modeling open the door to modeling some of these processes—if the data
requirements for the models can be satisfied.
In short, recent developments in sensor technology, data telemetry, recording
systems and computers offer promise of significant advances in the resolution of
many serious coastal engineering problems in the next decade. To meet the
recommendations of this report, a national commitment is called for—involving
government departments and agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and the National Science Foundation, as well as universities and industry—to
develop the necessary instrumentation and measurement systems.

INTRODUCTION 7
1
Introduction
Coastlines border 30 of our 50 states and Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands. Approximately 85 percent of the nation's population resides in these
coastal states and possessions, with nearly 53 percent of the total U.S. population
now living within 50 miles of a coast.1
Concurrent with this growing population is an increasing strain on
economic, legislative, and political decision-making processes that attempt to
maintain a balance between population pressures and environmental equilibrium.
As an example, harbors are essential for linking our nation's land transportation
systems to vital overseas trade routes. But few harbors, if any, have been built
without a significant effect on adjacent shoreline configuration. The appropriate
design, construction, and maintenance of harbors is still a major issue in coastal
engineering.
Harbors are only one example of the growing need for coastal and ocean
engineering research. Numerous other issues must be addressed before the nation
can cope with the increasing pressures
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1984. The population of all coastal counties
and municipalities in 1984 (123 million persons) was 52.6 percent of the total U.S.
population (235 million persons). A county is designated as being "coastal" if the
geographic center of the county is 50 miles or less from the ocean or the Great Lakes.
INTRODUCTION 8
being focused on its coasts. In a presentation made in 1976 at the Specialty

Conference on Dredging and its Environmental Issues in Mobile, Alabama, Mr.
W. H. Sanderson, Chief of Construction Operations Division 1 (Wilmington
District), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers noted that, while dredging is one of the
oldest forms of engineering works, the modern-day engineer faces practically the
same ocean inlet and navigation problems that confronted settlers in colonial
times in their efforts to gain and keep access to the open sea.
The long-standing problem of how to stabilize and maintain our harbor
entrances and assure the use of navigational waterways continues to challenge
coastal engineering. The size of the task is evidenced by the fact that maintenance
dredging now costs the nation over half a million dollars annually. However, with
the cost-sharing provisions of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(P.L. 99-662), related large-scale combined Corps of Engineers and local
government research is searching for ways to reduce the cost of dreding while
enhancing shore protection. One example of such research, which reflects the
close relationship between dredging technology and coastal engineering, is the
feeder berm concept. The feeder berm will take beach-quality material excavated
from harbor entrances or offshore channels and place it at selected sites just off
the beach where storm wave action would gradually move the material in the
downdrift direction. This sediment movement would increase the volume of
material available in the littoral zone, resulting in a more gentle underwater slope
or gradient, and contribute to reducing shoreline erosion rates. The success of this
innovative approach must be gauged largely by the ability of the engineer and
researcher to measure coastal changes.
The drive to live and play near the water has led to urbanization, which has
presented significant challenges for coastal engineers. Structures have been built
on the beaches, in the dunes, on the cliffs, and even over the water. Developers
have flattened dunes, built in natural cuts, and sliced through natural barriers.
Canals have been carved and dredged in wetlands and lowlands, sometimes with
little regard to circulation, potential erosion, and sediment disposal. Indeed, our
society has often disregarded the forces of the sea and the natural phenomena
associated with them. Now we must cope with the resulting environmental
damage.
To repair this damage and prevent further destruction, coastal

INTRODUCTION 9
engineers require better and more complete data on coastal processes.

Additionally, theoretical and modeling studies, requiring specific data sets, are
needed to develop a better understanding of coastal processes and their effects on
beaches, harbors, and structures. These data needs require that better coastal
engineering measurement systems be developed and deployed.
According to the jointly sponsored National Science Foundation and Office
of Naval Research report titled "Natural Hazards and Research Needs in Coastal
and Ocean Engineering" (NSF, 1984),
Each year in the United States, natural and man-made hazards in our coastal and
ocean environs cost many lives and sometimes billions of dollars in loss of
property and commerce. These losses can be reduced through engineering
research which produces better understanding of the hazards and better ways of
dealing with the physical and economic results of severe events.
Clearly instrumentation and measurement systems are required to provide

the data and models necessary to the attainment of this "better understanding."
Reports and articles such as "Shrinking Shores," in Time, August 10, 1987,
or "Bayside Owners Fight Erosion, Inevitable Tide," in The Washington Post,
October 3, 1987, highlight the dilemma of coastal residents. The Time article
indicates that development and poor planning have contributed to several coastal
problems and cites examples of beach erosion undermining fashionable homes on
Long Island, bluffs dropping out from under homes on the California coast, and
beaches receding in the Carolinas at rates from a few feet to as many as 100 feet
per year. Beach recession is further exacerbated by the episodic onslaught of
tropical storms and damaging hurricanes. Adding to these conditions is the rise in
relative sea level over the past 100 years.
Seldom can an accurate economic value be placed on the damage caused by
winter storms on areas exposed to high-energy wave forces. The January 1988
storm that hit the Southern California coast was one exception; the coastal
damage was estimated to cost $28 million. Equally important to the evaluation of
the storm's effect was the ability to quantify the characteristics of that storm—to
measure wave parameters and document beach erosion and benthic profile
changes. This knowledge can be attributed partly to the in-place coastal wave
monitoring program for the San Diego Coastal Region of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE, 1989). This system costs

INTRODUCTION 10
less than $500,000 to install; annual operating expenses are about $100,000.
We are hearing cries for environmental protection, for determination of
cause, and for solutions. Calls for design skills in the construction of jetties,
groins, seawalls, and other protective structures to hold receding beaches are
commonplace. Some actions being taken are beach restoration and sand by
passing by using weirs in jetties and using small dredges in channel areas to
return sand to beach areas.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT REPORTS AND STUDIES

The growing awareness of coastal engineering problems has in the past
decade resulted in a number of studies directed at specialized and general needs
for future research and development. A comprehensive conference on ocean
current measurements was sponsored by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE, 1982). Recommendations from this conference indicated the
need for hardware and software standards and a government-sponsored central
testing and calibration facility. The National Research Council (NRC)
Symposium and Workshop on Wave Measurement Technology (NRC, 1982)
emphasized the need for long-term wave-recording systems to establish reliable
wave statistics for engineering design. Additional NRC conferences have been
held, including one on remote sensing of the ocean surface (NRC, 1986) and
another on directional wave spectrum applications (NRC, 1982). The Institution
of Civil Engineers (ICE, 1985) in England convened a panel in 1984 to assess the
research and development requirements in coastal engineering. This panel
concluded that the most common design requirement for coastal engineers is the
need for good wave information, particularly directional information. Adequate
knowledge of waves in deep water is necessary to forecast the impact of waves in
shallow water.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored a workshop called
"Shallow-Water Ocean Engineering Research: Research Needs and Facilities" in
1983. The NSF, in cooperation with the Office of Naval Research (ONR), also
sponsored an ad hoc Committee on Natural Hazards and Research Needs in
Coastal and Ocean Engineering, in 1984 (NSF, 1984). Both groups identified
specific research needs that should be addressed.
The Shallow-Water Ocean Engineering Research workshop group

INTRODUCTION 11
identified needs in eight primary areas of research in coastal engineering.

Within five of these eight research areas specific needs were identified for
coastal instrumentation and measurement systems. These needs included the
following:
AREA NEED
breaking waves
• instrumentation to measure velocity fields in aerated water;
wave attenuation
• instrumentation for measurement of bottom shear stress;
coastal protection
• measurement of wave-impact forces on structures,
• measurement of fluid flow in and around protection structures,
• more wave data in vicinity of coastal structures,
• more monitoring of submerged and detached breakwaters;
sediment transport
• instrumentation to withstand severe storm waves for high-
energy-surf-zone measurement;
diffusion and mixing

• measurement in multilayer and reversing flow,
• measurement of wind-induced shear and wave formation,
• measurement of velocity gradients in the horizontal and
vertical.
The Shallow-Water Ocean Engineering Research workshop group also

stressed physical and mathematical modeling of coastal processes as a critical
area for development.
The ad hoc Committee on Natural Hazards and Research Needs in Coastal
and Ocean Engineering identified needs in five areas of field-related research.
Within each of these five areas there were either specified or implied needs for
coastal measurement systems.
Following is a summary of these needs:
AREA
hazard assessment
• information about physical and statistical anatomy of natural
hazards such as winter storms, hurricanes, and tsunamis,

INTRODUCTION 12
• long-term measurement of wind speeds, wave heights, and

recurrence intervals,
• instruments and techniques for measurement of physical
phenomena in the surf zone and nearshore during high-
energy events;
long-term studies
• long-term studies (years) to identify important slowly
varying phenomena such as gradual changes in ocean sea
level and shifting of geological features;
post-event surveys
• rapid response to measure post-storm damage to obtain data
otherwise lost within a few weeks of the event;
prototype measurements
• accurate measurements of the response (stresses, motions)
of seawalls, breakwaters, moored platforms, piers, pipeline
ballast, and other structures.
Certain of the aforementioned research measurement needs have been

investigated in recent cooperative field studies. The Nearshore Sediment
Transport Study (Seymour, in press, 1989) provided two extensive sets of data on
nearshore currents and surf-zone waves, bottom response, and sediment
transport. The Canadian Coastal Sediment Study (NRC-Canada, 1986) was a
research study designed specifically to investigate sand transport on beaches. The
Nearshore Environment Research Center (Horikawa, 1988) project in Japan was a
multi-institution study that incorporated field measurements in an attempt to
develop numerical models for predicting beach evolution caused by coastal
structures. DUCK '82, '85, and '86 (SUPERDUCK) were three multi-institution
field experiments conducted at the Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC)
facility in Duck, North Carolina. DUCK '82 focused on storm-induced nearshore
processes related primarily to morphologic response (changes in shape at the
seabed). DUCK '85 was a more broadly based study to enhance fundamental
understanding of nearshore processes under both low-and high-energy wave
conditions. Finally, SUPERDUCK was conducted as an improved and expanded
version of DUCK '85, intended to provide high quality, comprehensive sets of
data to evaluate and improve numerical and analytical models of nearshore
processes.
Common to all of these field studies was the use and testing of state-of-the-
art measurement systems and techniques. Various findings emanating from these
field studies provide useful input to the assessment of measurement needs
undertaken in this report.

INTRODUCTION 13
Specifically, there was an overall concern for better ways of measuring

bed-load sediment transport, as well as for continuous measurement of suspended
sediments in the vertical water column. Concern was expressed for improved
methodology for making high-wave–energy surf-zone measurements on
bathymetric, sedimentologic, and fluid dynamic parameters.
All of the preceding studies and committee recommendations focus attention
on the urgent need for a well-coordinated national effort to develop coastal
measurement systems. It is the intent of this report to integrate previous findings
with a comprehensive evaluation of existing needs and capabilities in order to
provide a specific set of conclusions and recommendations to the research and
development community. It is hoped these recommendations and conclusions
will spur expanded efforts to develop measurement systems for coastal
engineering.
COASTAL ENGINEERING AND PROCESSES

The term ''coastal engineering,'' as discussed in this report, has been limited
to the inner continental shelf and nearshore zone, ranging from water depths that
are just within the zone of wave shoaling to the shoreline, where the energy from
these waves is dissipated. The report also addresses backshore engineering
considerations where damage from storm surge often occurs. By restricting
consideration to these zones, several critical coastal environments are not
addressed, including estuaries and lagoons and the mid-to-outer continental shelf.
Recent NRC reports have addressed some aspects of estuarine-lagoonal
engineering; the mid-to-outer continental shelf presents engineering design
problems somewhat different from those of the inner shelf–nearshore zone and is
beyond the scope of this report. Successful engineering within this inner coastal
zone is essential if people are to live there in harmony with the environment.
MEASUREMENT COMPLEXITIES
Diversity of Conditions
Processes in the open ocean show a broad uniformity over large (kilometers
and more) space scales. The coastal zone, on the other hand, exhibits
nonuniformity in the cross-shore direction because of wave shoaling, in the
longshore direction because of changes in shoreline orientation and shoreline
structures, and in every direction

INTRODUCTION 14
because of distributed shoals, bars, and irregular bottom bathymetry. The

diversity of scales makes this environment unique, as does the overall high-
energy characteristic of the coastal region. Coastal engineering measurement
systems for the inner continental shelf and nearshore zone must be designed to
accommodate the diverse space-time scales of processes and conditions that
interact within this shallow-water column.
Measurement systems must be designed to characterize the broad, basin-
wide atmospheric pressure systems driving waves toward the coast; other
measurement systems must resolve2 the much smaller, beach-scale processes—
prediction of which is the ultimate goal of much of coastal engineering.
Conditions in the coastal wave zone are exceedingly "noisy to measure"; that is,
the signal-to-noise ratio there is often very low. Measurement systems must be
fast enough to measure processes occurring within the few seconds of a single
breaking wave while also acquiring accurate data over much longer time scales,
including climate-change-induced occurrences like relative sea level change.
Most of these measurement systems must survive the large forces accompanying
breaking waves, strong tidal and nontidal currents, and high levels of sediment
concentration within the water column. The combination of shallow water, high
sediment mobility, eroding shorelines, and poor predictability—not to mention
constantly changing wave conditions, currents, and bottom forms (small-scale
topography features)—all make this environment a difficult one to monitor.
Winds, Waves, Currents, and Tides

The important driving forces in the coastal zone include winds, waves,
currents, and tides. While local winds generate local waves and create higher
water levels during storms, pressure systems thousands of kilometers from the
coast create winds that ultimately may have a severe impact on the shoreline.
Waves are perhaps the outstanding characteristic of the inner shelf-nearshore
zone. Waves change from their relatively predictable deep-water form once they
encounter the shallow water of the shelf.
2 Resolution in measuring systems refers to the minimum unit or quantity that can be
discerned. For example, on a ruler, one millimeter might represent the resolution limit. At
the other extreme, atmospheric pressure gauges are not typically close enough together to
resolve compact storms like tornados.
INTRODUCTION 15
Complexities of bottom topography, currents (such as the Gulf Stream), and

local winds mold these deep-water waves into forms that are poorly predictable in
many important circumstances, such as during storms. The constant change in
waves as they move into shallow water and interact with each other and the sea
bottom or seabed combines with the time variation in wave conditions to make
description and prediction elusive. Winds drive and modify surface currents.
Waves, as they break and run up on beaches, drive currents that parallel the
shore.
Tides also contribute to the complexity of the nearshore environment. Near
the many coastal inlets characteristic of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United
States, tides alter wave height and direction and coastal currents in an intricate
fashion. Varying tidal elevations (in some areas exceeding 10 meters) cause the
waves to act on different parts of a beach during low tide and high tide;
sometimes the high-tide position can reach inland several kilometers.
Topography
Coastal engineering measurement systems are used to monitor the shape of
the shoreline and submarine topography. A central difficulty in predictions based
on these measurements is the interrelation of physical forces such as wind,
waves, currents, and tides and the resulting responses. A wave may alter the
bottom topography in an area, and that change in bottom topography can in turn
change the characteristics of the wave. A common example is the nearshore
sandbar. Under certain wave conditions, a nearshore bar is formed by moving
sediments from the beach out to deeper water, forming a local shoal. The
presence of this shoal in turn changes the breaking characteristics of the incoming
waves, causing them to break over the bar first instead of on the beach. This
interaction or feedback is a limiting factor in our understanding of coastal
processes. One cannot study waves by themselves, or bed forms by themselves,
neglecting the other processes. Instead, this feedback requires the engineer to
model or measure both the bed and the driving forces, a difficult theoretical and
observational problem.
Summary of Measurement Complexities

The diversity of scales and the interactive nature of the water and shoreline
complicate the design of coastal engineering measurement

INTRODUCTION 16
systems. Although measurement systems can be designed for specific conditions

with some considerable success, it is doubtful whether a small number of
instruments or techniques ever will be sufficient to make all the measurements
coastal engineers require to perform their design tasks. The nature of the inner
shelf-nearshore zone will require a diversity of techniques and approaches.
Although some universal and versatile tools may be available for many coastal
engineering applications, specialized tools always will be required to perform
specific measurements or to provide predictions under certain conditions.
ANALYTICAL METHODS IN THIS STUDY

The purpose of this study was to identify the development needs for
instrumentation and measurement systems in coastal engineering. The committee
gathered the available pertinent literature and analyzed and synthesized the
results. A large volume of information had to be organized into meaningful and
defendable conclusions and recommendations. Since an understanding of coastal
engineering requirements involves such a diversity of measurements and
modeling applied to a wide variety of coastal engineering projects, a scheme or
structure was needed to organize and focus the results of this review. Determining
that the most important measurements are those that are most needed to solve
coastal engineering problems, the committee agreed on a structural approach that
proceeded along the path shown in Figure 1-1.
The committee saw this as a hierarchical analysis—that is, each engineering
problem has a variety of processes that must be understood, generally requiring a
variety of measurements which in turn are used in engineering design or
modeling to produce an engineering solution. The following example illustrates
the approach used.
ENGINEERING ISSUE: Design of a dredged harbor entrance channel.
IMPORTANT PROCESSES AND MEASUREMENTS:
PROCESS MEASUREMENTS
Sea Surface Motion and Level
• Wave parameters Direction; Height; Period or Directional; Wave Energy;
Spectrum

INTRODUCTION 17
Elevation
• Tidal parameters
Magnitude; Direction
• Currents
Storm Parameters
Duration; Strength; Origin
• Storm conditions
Volume; Location
• Runoff
Sediment Movement Type of sediment

Volume
Transport rate in suspension
Transport rate by bed-load
From the literature and the individual experience of its members, the
committee determined measurement and modeling capabilities in meeting the
design requirements and, if necessary, identified the needs for further refinement
or development.
Some measurements are, of course, more critical than others; some can be
measured with confidence (tides) and others not well at all (bed-load sediment
transport). Using this structured approach it was possible to see how each
measurement requirement affected the solution to the engineering problem.
Another consideration of importance to the measurement evaluation process
is the difference in need that may arise from assessment of an applied engineering
versus a basic research requirement. For example, the resolution of velocity and
direction required for measuring longshore current is much less than that required
for determining similar phenomena on a small scale (e.g., shear or drag forces).
Often the differences are not conflicting but simply represent immediate applied
engineering needs versus the more subtle basic research requirements.
In reviewing physical processes in the high-energy shore area—such as
wave breaking and its relation to wave-force effects, for example—the committee
noted where our theoretical understanding is weak. A comprehensive
identification and assessment of all areas where theory is in doubt would be a
large undertaking. In its assessment the committee chose to highlight those areas
that have the greatest impact on the data required for coastal engineering.
The remainder of this report applies the committee's analytical approach
(shown in Figure 1-1) over the full range of coastal

INTRODUCTION 18
processes that must be considered and understood by the engineer and those who
are responsible for developing the technical basis for decision-making about the
use and protection of our beach and coastal resources.
Figure 1-1
Structural approach to collecting infor mation on coastal engineering problems.

COASTAL ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS 19
2
Coastal Engineering Applications
The coastal engineer operates in a dynamic, intricate, and multifaceted

environment. Application of coastal engineering knowledge to the solution of
problems is complicated by a host of physical and environmental factors. For
example, in order to design and build a structure, engineers need a firm
understanding of coastal ocean motions, sedimentation rates, stresses of the wave
and water motion, and other forces on the shoreline and on the structure. Further
complications result from the great range of ocean movement over space and
time. Extreme events like breaking storm waves, storm surges, tides, and
tsunamis add to the already complex nature of the coastal engineering discipline.
To perform the job properly requires detailed and accurate information on the
conditions under which a structure must perform and survive. Measurements and
measurement systems are required to determine the range of influence, strength,
and timing of the forces of nature in the coastal zone.
For this study, the committee first identified those issues or problem areas
recognized as important to the engineering community; some issues are more
urgent and must be given greater priority. Then it was necessary to identify and
evaluate the state of knowledge of coastal processes related to each engineering
issue. This evaluation in turn considered the state of theoretical development and
analytical and numerical modeling in each coastal process area.

The latter consideration was necessary because modeling plays such an

important role in coastal engineering.
ENGINEERING APPLICATION AREAS

The committee identified four major problem areas where coastal
engineering skills must be applied. (See Figure 2-1, adapted from the Corps of
Engineers' Shore Protection Manual, [1984].) The four engineering problem
areas are identified simply as shorelines, backshores1, entrances (or inlets), and
harbors. These broad areas, either exclusively or in combination, encompass
most coastal engineering problems, as defined by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
Coastal Process Categories

Taken in the broadest sense, four categories of coastal processes act on the
coastal areas identified in Figure 2-1. Two of these categories may be considered
primary and the other two, interactive.
Primary processes consist of:
• kinematics2 and dynamics3 of high-frequency coastal water motions

(periods of 0.1-5 minutes) and
• kinematics and dynamics of low-frequency coastal water motions
(periods greater than 5 minutes).
Interactive processes consist of:
• fluid/sediment interaction and

• fluid/structure interaction.
In general, the short-period, high-frequency phenomena are related to wind-

wave generated water motions; long-wave period, lowfrequency phenomena are
generated, for example, by pressure effect, tidal motions, and such catastrophic
events as slides, slumps, or earthquakes. The categories were specified because
of the need to
1 "Backshore" is a general term referring to the area above and behind the normally
active beach face. The backshore is typically affected only during storms or extreme high
tides.
2 "Kinematics" refers to the motions of a fluid element, in this case the trajectory of a
small patch of water.

3 "Dynamics" refers to the effects of external forces on fluid motion (effects on
kinematics).
recognize spatial and temporal differences in the coastal measurement systems

and instrumentation required for each category.
Figure 2-1
General classification of coastal engineering problems.
Coastal Features and Coastal Engineering Applications

Each of the four general coastal features previously categorized in Figure 2-1
and illustrated in Figure 2-2 (shoreline or shore, backshore, entrance inlet, and
harbor) presents a distinct set of problems for instrumentation and measurement
system development. Some measurement problems cross two or more features.
The following paragraphs provide a brief overview of each feature or area of
engineering application and emphasize a few perceived measurement goals.
Shore
Shore stabilization is a primary engineering goal along large sections of the
U.S. coastline. Achieving this goal requires understanding the behavior of the
shore or shoreline and effects adjacent to both hard engineering structures (e.g.,
seawalls, revetments, groins) and

soft structures (e.g., beach nourishment). Basic to the knowledge required is an

understanding of shore response to wave action and currents. Because present
modeling capability to predict shoreline response is inadequate, measurements of
the sediment transport rate, concentration, and distribution are necessary in both
longshore and cross-shore directions. It is important to make these measurements
under conditions of moderate-to-high-wave energy. Likewise, the ability to
rapidly and accurately measure beach and nearshore profile changes under a
broad range of wave-energy conditions is essential to verification of prediction
models. An essential consideration for all of
Figure 2-2
Illustrative examples of coastal engineering problems.

these measurements is the ability to carry them out successfully under high-
energy episodic conditions associated with storms, because these energetic
conditions result in maximum sediment transport.
The need for understanding shore processes is illustrated by the erosion of
the shore at the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse on the Outer Banks of North Carolina.
The 110-year-old historic tower is endangered by changes in the shoreline that
have brought the high-water line to within 100 feet of the structure. A series of
studies has sought to ascertain the reasons for past variations in the position of the
shore, in order to forecast the future. But the basic understanding of shore
processes is inadequate for reliable prediction of the rate of shoreline change
during high-energy wave conditions (NRC, 1987).
Another factor in shoreline processes is relative sea-level change. Rising
relative sea level exerts an inexorable pressure on most sections of the world's
shoreline (but not all). For instance, many high latitude shoreline segments in
Canada and Europe are emergent, contrasting with the U.S. shoreline which is
primarily submergent. Whereas past relative sea-level rise in the United States
has averaged about 30 cm per 100 years, this value exhibits considerable spatial
variability.
Relative sea-level rise presents a future challenge to coastal engineers, but it
is one that can be anticipated in engineering planning (NRC, 1987). If projections
of increases in relative sea-level rise are correct, engineering projects designed
for 25-50 year time scales will have to incorporate rising sea levels more directly
into their design phase. Meanwhile, existing facilities and structures will have to
be shored up to account for this long-ignored factor in the design equation.
Nevertheless, unpredictable changes caused by coastal storms and hurricanes
pose a greater concern than does the effect of sea-level rise.
Backshores
Much like shore stabilization, backshore protection requires an
understanding of processes that vary in nature and importance from one location
to another. Knowledge of dune, bluff, and beach response to extreme wind and
wave events is essential to this understanding. Measurements of runup4 and setup5
under high-energy
4 ''Runup'' is the travel of waves up the face of the beach above the still water level.
5 "Setup" refers to a general local increase in sea level caused by the momentum of
breaking waves.
wave conditions and a knowledge of storm surge6 histories are necessary.

Measurement problems involving immersion, burial, and exposure of sensors may
be more pronounced and problematic in these locations.
Unusually high lake levels along many shores of the Great Lakes during the
mid-1980s provided an example of where backshore protection was paramount.
When lake levels rise, backshores are likely to suffer damage from wave and
current erosion during storms, especially when low-pressure systems combined
with wind setup accentuate the already high water levels. Then, severe bluff and
beach damage often result in significant environmental impact and property
damage. The ability to measure wave direction and runup would support more
reliable predictions of areas of greatest impact and how to safeguard them.
Entrances
Entrances include both natural inlets and constructed harbor mouths and
channels. Stabilization of entrances is a primary engineering goal in certain
natural and almost all constructed channels. The annual cost of maintenance
dredging of inlets and harbors by the Corps of Engineers alone is rapidly
approaching $400 million. A major measurement problem related to maintenance
dredging of inlets and channels is the determination of transport and deposition
of sediment during high-energy wind and wave events that frequently close
navigation passages. This fact reinforces the need for measurements of sediment
transport and concentration during high-energy tidal flows.
A good example of this problem is the entrance of the Columbia River
leading to the major ports of Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington. At
this entrance, a large curving sandbar often produces serious depth restrictions to
the passage of ships as Pacific swells interact with strong river currents. The
severity of navigation problems requires a specialized pilot for bar passage,
separate from the river navigation pilot. Extensive studies of the pitching motion
of ships crossing that bar under varying wave, tide, and current conditions (Wang
and Noble, 1982) have verified the critical need to predict the movement of the
shifting bar in order to avoid grounding or broaching.
6 Storm surge is increased sea level over a broad area caused by wind forcing.
Systems for diverting sand are being constructed to keep entrances open and
to maintain sand nourishment to downdrift beaches. These systems require
prediction of sand transport volumes that are dependent on local wave and
current conditions. Presently, the use of sand diversion systems is severely limited
by inadequate capability to predict sediment transport, largely owing to the lack
of coastal engineering measurement systems.
Harbors
Design of safe, effective harbors with low operation and maintenance costs
is another primary coastal engineering goal. Essential to achievement of this goal
is an understanding of the stability of breakwaters formed from mounds of rock,
the failure of concrete elements used to increase this stability, the leakage of
wave energy through the breakwater, and scouring away by the waves of the
sediments that form the breakwater's foundation. The cost of these structures is
very large. Therefore, there is a strong economic pressure to improve prediction
capabilities, thereby eliminating over-design. Measurement of wave forces on and
within breakwater structures is required, as well as measurement of wave and
current forces adjacent to and along the breakwaters. This is a particularly
complex area of engineering, where theoretical development is sparse and
empirical determinations are often based on indirect relations between wave
forcing and structural response. Few measurements have been made of the forces
and structural interactions on actual structures. Only recently have measurements
been undertaken on the external structural elements. To the best of our knowledge
no measurements internal to the structures have been made. This is an
engineering area that requires development of specialized measurement systems.
A well-known example of this need is the failure of the harbor at Sines,
Portugal. A massive breakwater constructed on the Atlantic coast was designed to
provide a vast port and industrial complex. Before the structure was completed, a
period of violent Atlantic storms produced waves that severely damaged the
breakwater, destroying much of the capwall and roadway and preventing
completion of ship berths planned for the lee side. Extensive investigation of the
wave conditions that led to the Sines failure did not lead to a consensus
judgment; rather, it resulted in 13 different opinions as to the principal cause of
the breakwater damage.

PROCESSES AND MEASUREMENT REQUIREMENTS 26
3
Processes and Measurement Requirements
Coastal measurement systems designed for sensing the properties of waves

and currents are usually categorized into one of two temporal domains: high-
frequency and low-frequency. High-frequency wave and current motions are
defined here as those with periods of five minutes or less and include both the
gravity1 and the infragravity2 portions of the surface wave spectrum (see
Figure 3-1). Low-frequency motions are defined here as those having periods
greater than five minutes and range from tsunami to tidal or longer oscillation
periods. The current velocity measurement techniques can be categorized as
Eulerian or Lagrangian, and in situ or remotely sensed. Eulerian measurements
are those collected by moored current meters measuring velocity at a fixed
location. Lagrangian measurements are obtained by a tracer (drifter floats, dye, or
tagged particles) following the current stream over a period of time. In situ
measurements are obtained by placing instruments in the ocean. Remote-sensing
measurements are those collected by "noncontact" methods from satellites,
aircraft, ships, or ground stations, using electromagnetic
1 Gravity waves are those waves with lengths between their creats of a meter or so to a
few hundred meters—typical of wind-generated waves.

2 Infragravity waves have lengths of hundreds of meters to tens of kilometers and are
usually driven by gravity waves.

PROCESSES AND MEASUREMENT REQUIREMENTS
Figure 3-1

Approximate distribution of ocean surface wave energy illustrating the classification of surface waves by wave band, primary disturbing force, and
primary restoring force. SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Shore Protection Manual, 1984; after Kinsman, 1965.
27
radiation. Modern acoustic-Doppler current meters and similar sensors that

sense current velocity using acoustic waves scattered from particles drifting with
the current should be considered a combination of in situ and remote-sensing
techniques.
After the hydrodynamic forces generated by high- and low-frequency waves
are determined, the engineer and researcher must measure and understand the
responses of the sediment particles to these wave and current forces. This chapter
addresses the various measurement techniques used for determining sediment
movement on scales from particle-size up to regions and locations from near
(within a few centimeters) the seabed to the upper water column.
Finally, the engineer must be able to measure the effect of the hydrodynamic
forces of the sea on structures in, or at, the wave zone. How structures, in turn,
affect both hydrodynamics and sedimentary response also must be gauged if the
engineer is to establish adequate design guidelines. This chapter also deals with
these fluid structure interactions.
HIGH-FREQUENCY WATER MOTIONS
Processes
High-frequency motions in the coastal environment can be categorized as
being wave-induced flows (including gravity and infragravity waves), turbulent
flows, and averaged currents (that is, averaging the current in time for more than
five minutes). Because Lagrangian measurement techniques generally do not lend
themselves as well to high-frequency field measurements, only Eulerian systems
are considered here.
In contrast to waves, currents are physically difficult to measure with a
single instrument except in extremely simple cases. Spatial variation in waves
primarily depends on the bathymetry, whereas current variation is influenced by
the shape of both the bottom and the shoreline. Also, strong vertical variation in
the current velocities can exist due in part to inhomogeneity in the water density
caused by salinity and temperature variations, as well as changes caused by the
viscous boundary layer effects on turbulence and velocity. Currents modify wave
velocities in a complicated fashion when both are varying in time, particularly
where the shape of the bottom is also changing as a result of this interaction.

TABLE 3-1 Summary of Data Needs for Coastal Engineering

1. SHORE STABILIZATION 3. INLET STABILIZATION
Sediment Characteristics Sediment Characteristics
Grain size distribution Grain size distribution
Concentration of suspended fraction Packing density
Inlet Characteristics
Near-bed transport rates Bathymetry
Beach Characteristics Net sediment flux
Beach profiles Patterns of erosion and deposition
Local areas of deposition or erosion Protective structures
Stabilizing structures Hydrodynamic Characteristics
Hydrodynamic Characteristics Wave height and steepness
Incident wave heights and steepness Wave direction
Current velocities
Wave direction Bottom shear stress (wave/current interaction)
Velocities of wave-driven currents
Velocities of other currents
Bottom shear stress
Turbulence characterization
2. BACKSHORE PROTECTION 4. HARBOR PROTECTION
Sediment Characteristics Sediment Characteristics
Grain size distribution Grain size distribution
Beach Characteristics Harbor Characteristics
Beach profiles Bathymetry
Longshore sediment transport Shoreline changes
Cross-shore sediment transport Protective structures
Patterns of erosion and deposition
Hydrodynamic Characteristics
Wave direction Hydrodynamic Characteristics
Wave height and steepness Wave height and steepness
Wave runup Wave direction
Storm surge Current velocities
Tsunami runup Bottom shear stress
Measurement Requirements
The proper design of a measurement system requires (1) knowledge of the
expected environmental conditions at the measurement site, (2) appropriate
design of the supporting moorings of platforms, and (3) the selection of suitable
measurement devices. Each of these components, and their interaction,
contributes significantly to the quality of the data, and a total system must be
considered collectively. The requirements for precision and resolution of the data
must also be considered.
The set of measurement requirements listed in Table 3-1 was established by
assessing the engineering needs of each of the four

application areas or features discussed in Chapter 2 (see Figure 2-1). The optimum
spatial and temporal resolutions are specified for each measurement requirement
(see Tables 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4) and existing sensing systems are identified for
evaluation of their measurement capability. If the measurement capability of an
existing sensing system failed to meet the necessary spatial and temporal
resolution requirements, a need was then identified for instrument or system
development.
Measurement Capabilities
Velocity Measurements—In Situ

A wide variety of physical measurement techniques incorporate current
measurements taken at a point. A primary difficulty for nearshore velocity
measurements is that oscillatory wave-induced velocities are generally present
throughout the water column, superimposed on steady currents. In the wave,
simple impeller (speed) and vane (direction) current meters were found to rectify
the oscillatory velocity imposed by the waves, thereby biasing the results (e.g.,
McCullough, 1978). Vanes generally do not respond to wave motion rapidly
enough to resolve direction accurately, giving "aliased" or noisy directional
information. This condition has led to the development of a number of current
meters that respond to wave motion and that have been adapted especially for
shallow-water measurements. These instruments resolve the wave motion into
velocity components at right angles to each other. Instruments include biaxial
rotor vector-measuring current meter (VACM) (Figure 3-2), electromagnetic
current meters (Figure 3-3), forward-scatter or backscatter acoustic-Doppler
current profiler (ADCP) (Figure 3-4), and laser velocimeter. The Eulerian current
meters have a relatively high capital cost per unit, ranging from over $4,000 for a
meter to as much as $65,000 for a current profiler system, depending on the data
recording and internal processing capability. Some of the difficulties and
problems encountered with Eulerian measurement systems are biological fouling,
corrosion, orientation uncertainties, disturbance of the flow fields by the
instrument, bubbles, cavitation, extreme storm waves, and disturbance of sensors
by fishermen.
Velocity Measurements—Remote Sensing

Remote-sensing techniques avoid many of the disadvantages of

Figure 3-2
Davis-Weller Vector Measuring Current
Meter, Model 630. SOURCE: EG&G Environ
mental Equipment Division, Burlington, Mass.
Figure 3-3
Electromagnetic Current Meter, Model 511.
SOURCE: Marsh-McBirney, Inc., Gaithersburg, Md.

Figure 3-4
75-KHz Self-Contained Acoustic-Doppler Current Profiler.
SOURCE: RD Instruments, San Diego, Calif.

in situ measurements and have the advantage of generally providing rapid

coverage of a wide area. The disadvantages in most techniques include sensing
only of the surface currents (providing no information about the subsurface
velocity profiles) and integrating over large areas so that the local gradients are
filtered out.
One method for the remote sensing of currents relies on the scattering of
radar signals from the sea surface. Current speed is determined from the Doppler
shift (frequency change) in the scattered signal after a theoretical shift due to
wave speed has been removed. The speed of the current in the direction of the
radar beam is determined. Directional components are measured by turning the
radar or using multiple radars. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) uses a single
radar mounted on a moving platform (plane or satellite), which allows good
definition of currents over large areas. Other remote-sensing techniques are being
developed, including optical systems, which offer additional capabilities for the
future. Because of the large surface area observed by most of these systems, they
are not generally applicable to the nearshore region, where currents change
rapidly over short distances.
Wave Measurements—In Situ

A wide variety of wave-measuring devices for waves based on various
physical principles have evolved, including direct, indirect, and remote
techniques. Each technique has inherent advantages depending on the
application. Desirable characteristics of any wave sensor should include good
accuracy, linearity, ruggedness, dependability, and low cost. The utility of any
wave sensor is highly dependent on the type of installation for which it can be
adapted, such as bottom or pier mountings.
The most common direct measurement of the sea surface is by wave staffs
(wires that penetrate the sea surface) that measure resistance, capacitance, or
inductance. The disadvantages of wave staffs are that they usually require
mounting on a rigid structure such as a tower or pier piling. In measuring
plunging breakers there is a question as to exactly what is measured, because of
multiple interfaces in the plunge portion of the wave. The influence of foam is
unknown for direct wave sensors.
Other direct measurement techniques include acoustical devices directed up
from beneath—such as inverted fathometers—and lasers and microwaves
(infrared) looking down from above; both of these

techniques are based on measuring the time for a pulse to travel from the sensor,
be reflected off the surface, and return. Acoustical and electromagnetic methods
have the advantage that they do not disturb the surface. The disadvantage of the
inverted fathometer is that the speed of sound is a function of temperature and
salinity, which can vary temporally and spatially over the vertical. Steep waves
may not provide a good acoustic return mirroring exact surface configuration
because of side-lobe reflection problems. The inverted fathometer does not work
in the highly turbulent region near the surf zone due to scattering of the sound by
turbulence and bubbles. Because of beam spreading, the sampled surface area
may be wide and as a result, the signal return provides an area average depth; this
may be an advantage or disadvantage depending on the intended use of the
device. The inverted fathometer does offer the advantage that it can be mounted
on the bottom, generally a much easier type of mounting than that required for a
laser beam or microwave, which must be mounted from a structure looking down
onto the surface.
Pressure sensors that provide indirect measurements of the wave surface
generally have the advantage of ease of installation, durability, and low
vulnerability to environmental forces. For this reason and because pressure
sensor technology is highly advanced, they are a popular means of measuring the
waves. The water column above the pressure sensor acts as a hydraulic filter,
partially filtering out the high-frequency components of the wave spectrum. The
wave spectrum is increasingly filtered as the depth of the sensor increases. A
practical deep-water limit is approximately 20 m for placement of the pressure
sensors to determine sea and swell waves. Some uncertainty exists concerning the
performance of the sensors when the waves are quite steep (Forristall, 1982).
Nearshore direction characteristics are typically either measured locally in
shallow water with ''slope arrays'' or measured in deep water with buoys and then
transformed to the nearshore location. The important problem in predicting
littoral sediment transport is that an accuracy of 1-3° is required to obtain good
estimates. This means that the deep-water waves must be resolved to within 2-5°
to obtain the desired nearshore directional accuracy after transformation.
Wave directional buoys are used primarily in deep water to measure the
heave, pitch, and roll with accelerometers and an inclinometer. A second type of
"orbit following" directional buoy, developed by ENDECO (Brainard and
Gardner, 1982) infers the surface slope due to the forcing by the horizontal
motion of water particles. The

buoys have their own individual dynamic response functions, and the mooring
also can influence the dynamic response of the buoys. Therefore, the dynamic
response of the combined system of the buoy and mooring system must be known
so that proper calculation of
TABLE 3-2 Assessment of Needs for Measurements of High-Frequency Motions
Measurement Accuracy Measurement Capability Need
Objective Requirements Technique
Currents
Longshore ±2 cm/s Electromagnetic I 2, 6, 7
cross-shore 5 Hz Acoustic
1-2° Mechanical
Turbulence ±1 cm/s Acoustic III 2, 4, 6,
7
high-frequency Hot film
Water level
Tides ±5 cm Pressure, I 7
Mechanical
Storm surge ±5 cm Pressure I 7
Wave setup ±5 cm Pressure III 7
Wave runup ±5 cm Photo/Video I 4, 6, 7
Electrical
Wave 0-15 m ±5% Many I 6, 7
characteristics
Wave direction Slope array III 1, 2, 6,
7
deep water >> 2-5° Remote sensing
10m
shallow water 1-3°
Breaker Photographic II 2, 6, 7
characteristics
Meteorological
Wind velocity 5% Many I 7, 8
Wind direction 10% Many I 7, 8
LEGENDS:
Need: Capability:
1 Major development I Good
2 Improve information II Adequate
detail III Possible but not satisfactory
3 Improve physics IV None
4 Improve efficiency
5 Improve tuning
6 Special data needed
7 Verification needed
8 None

surface displacement can be made. Buoys have not been used as reliably in
shallow water as in deep water because of the demand placed on shallow-water
surface moorings (large displacements, steep waves, etc.). Although buoys
provide some directional wave information in deep water, these buoys do not give
the high-resolution direction information often required for coastal engineering
(see Table 3-2 to 3-4). More accurate, inexpensive inertial compasses based on
optical interferometry should be available soon. These solid-state devices may
give improved accuracy and reliability to the directional buoy measurements but
will probably not improve the directional resolution.
TABLE 3-3 Assessment of Needs for Measurements of Low-Frequency Motions
Objective Requirements Technique(s)
Currents
Offshore 3 cm/s EMCM, ATTCM, III 3, 4, 5,
(10-20 m depth) VACM, ADCM 6
Nearshore 3 cm/s (same as above) II 3, 4, 5
Inlets 3 cm/s (same as above) III 3, 4, 5,
6
Radiation stress 10% Slope array II 5
Water level
Offshore 10 cm relative Pressure sensor, II 5, 6, 7,
Remote altimeter 8
Nearshore 10 cm absolute Pressure sensor, I 5, 6, 7,
Tide gauge 8
Backshore 20 cm absolute Pressure sensor, I 5, 6, 7,
Float gauge 8
Runup 0.3 m Contact sensors, II 3, 4, 5
Photogrammetry
Wave setup 10 cm Slope array III 5, 6
Direction spec. 10%, 25° Buoys, SAR, PUV, II 3, 4, 6
Slope array
Meteorological
Wind velocity 5%, 10° Many I 6, 7, 8
Barometric 1 mb Many I 6, 7
pressure
Morphological
Bathymetry 5% or 0.5 m Fathometer, I 9
(large-scale)
Precise leveling
Bathymetry 0.3m Fathometer, III 2, 8
(small-scale) Precise leveling,
Side-scan


Objective Requirements Technique(s)
Natural 0.3 m Precise leveling I 8
topography
Structures 0.3 m elevation Precise leveling, I 8
10% horizontal Photos
Vegetation 10% area Photos II 8
Water properties
Temperature 0.1°C CTD I 7, 8
Salinity 0.1 ppt CTD I 7, 8
ACRONYMS:
EMCM electromagnetic current meter SAR synthetic aperture radar
ATCM acoustic travel-time current PUV pressure sensor combined with
meter current meter
VACM vector-averaging current meter CTD conductivity (salinity)-temperature-
depth meter
ADCM acoustic-Doppler current meter
LEGENDS:
Need:
1 Major development 5 Improve tuning
needed 6 Special data needed
2 Improve information detail 7 Verification needed
3 Improve physics 8 None
4 Improve efficiency
Capability:
I Good
II Adequate
III Possible, but not satisfactory
IV None
Slope arrays are designed to measure the directional wave characteristics in
shallow water using three or more bottom-mounted pressure sensors (Higgins et
al., 1981). Although the directional spectrum resolution is the same as a pitch and
roll buoy, the wave momentum flux is well estimated. A measurement system
comparable to the slope array is provided by using a pressure sensor and a two-
component electromagnetic velocity sensor (PUV) (Grosskopf et al., 1983). An
intercomparison of directional measuring capabilities for the buoys, slope arrays,
and PUV was accomplished during the



ARSLOE3 (Vincent and Lichy, 1982) experiment, and all methods gave
similar results.
Recent developments in radiation stress (momentum flux) measurements
include using differential pressure sensors to make direct measurements of the
surface slope (Bodge and Dean, 1984) and using acoustic travel time to infer
velocity gradients (Guza, personal communications).
Wave Measurements—Remote Sensing

Several techniques are available for remote sensing of waves and the sea
surface, and more are under development. Remote sensing offers the advantage
that the sensors can be mounted on movable platforms such as airplanes or
satellites, and large areas can be measured rapidly. Other advantages are freedom
from shore connection and the ability to sample extreme wind and wave
conditions. The key disadvantage presented by using remote sensing of sea
surface conditions is poor temporal coverage; observations of a series of events
at an area are difficult to obtain by aircraft-mounted sensing.
Remote-sensing techniques are based on the scattering of electromagnetic
radiation from the ocean surface, either coherently or incoherently. Early
techniques utilized photography to determine surface slopes from sun-glint
patterns. Stereoscopic photography was used to determine directional wave
spectra, although this method proved to be cumbersome. Present image-analysis
techniques make stereophotogrammetry a viable technique to estimate the
directional spectrum.
Wave heights (but not directions) over the ocean are measured operationally
using an altimeter aboard the Navy satellite GEOSAT. The altimeter measures
wave height from the shape of the reflected radar pulse. NASA's plans for the
next decade include a dedicated wave altimeter mission, TOPEX/POSEIDON,
proposed for launch in 1991.
The airborne Surface Contour Radar (SCR), developed jointly by NASA and
the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), was designed
3 ARSLOE: Atlantic Remote Sensing Land-Ocean Experiment for sensor
intercomparison, sensor development tests, and data wave-model verification; October 6 to

November 30, 1980, offshore Duck, North Carolina. The tests were organized by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Center and the National Ocean
Survey of NOAA.
to measure the directional wave spectrum (Walsh et al., 1986). An oscillating

mirror scans a 0.85° × 1.2° pencil beam laterally to measure the sea surface
elevation at 51 evenly spaced points within a swath approximately half the
aircraft's altitude. Ground truth comparisons were made by a variety of slope-
measuring buoys during the ARSLOE experiment, and reasonable comparisons
were obtained (Walsh et al., 1986).
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) has been operated from both aircraft and
satellites. The imaging mechanism is complex, but the primary signal is that due
to scattering from the centimeter-scale ocean waves. This signal can be
accentuated at the crest of the long wave and may become the principal image for
large waves (Harger, 1986). Thus, the SAR requires the presence of short waves
of a few centimeters that result when winds are greater than approximately 3 m/s.
Due to present resolution limitations, only significant wave heights greater than 1
m and wave lengths exceeding 25 m can be measured.
The SEASAT satellite system obtained a resolution of approximately 25-40
m using a 23-cm wavelength SAR to acquire radar images of the ocean surface in
swaths 100 km wide and varying in length from 300 to 3,000 km. Vesecky et al.
(1986) compared the results to intensive ship, buoy, and aircraft wave
measurements during the Joint Air-Sea Interaction (JASIN) experiment.
Comparisons between SAR and buoy estimates of wave length and direction
agree to within about ±14 percent and ±10°. Correlations with buoy
measurements suggest that significant wave height could be estimated to about ±1
m. SAR data from European and Japanese SAR-equipped satellites, to be
launched in 1989 and 1991 respectively, will also provide valuable wave
information.
During the space shuttle oceanographic mission in 1984, Shuttle Imaging
Radar-B (SIR-B) SAR obtained images of the ocean surface. These were
compared to those obtained from two aircraft scanning radars, the SCR and the
continually scanning Radar Ocean-Wave Spectrometer (ROWS) (Beal et al.,
1986). The ROWS obtains a high-resolution slope spectrum. A surface elevation
spectrum can be obtained from all three systems.
High-frequency (HF) radars have been used to measure ocean waves
(Barrick, 1982). These systems use polarized electromagnetic waves that are
scattered from the ocean surface wave component in-line with the radar signal.
Huang (1982) reports accuracies of ±8 percent for wave height greater than 1 m
and ±7° for direction. Full

directional information would require at least two radars looking in different

directions.
Promising radar systems for coastal applications are broad-beam surface-
wave radars. These systems can yield the same directional information as heave-
pitch-roll buoys. An example is CERC's operational Coastal Imaging Radar
System (CIRS), which is a shore-based X-band radar. The system is designed to
obtain long-term statistics of wave direction and wave length, but does not
provide wave height. It can operate unattended in all weather. Data can be
collected up to 5.5 km off shore. Modal wave direction can be resolved within
±3° and wave length to 10 percent (COE, 1984).
Surface-scanning acoustic-Doppler sonar technology has demonstrated the
ability to measure surface directional wave spectra (Pinkel and Smith, 1987).
Doppler sonars mounted on the floating instrument platform FLIP have been used
to scatter 75-kHz sound from the underside of the sea surface at range intervals
of from 60 to 1,400 m. Complete wave directional information has been obtained
from a single location using a pair of sonars aimed at right angles. Although some
aspects of this technique are not fully understood, the observed motions are
consistent with linear wave theory. This technology allows a single-point
instrument in the open ocean to resolve wave direction as well as an array of
conventional measuring devices 1,000 m in length.
Measurement Needs
Cost of installation, recording, and analysis can easily exceed the cost of the
instrument; these cost considerations should be a part of instrument design and
selection. The availability and experience in the use of microprocessors and other
technologies can allow for preprocessing or analysis of the data in situ. New
expanded storage media such as bubble memories, optical discs, and high-density
digital tape allow for larger and more reliable recording capability. Satellites for
telemetry links such as system ARGOS and improved ground telemetry can be
used to obtain real-time data. Cable technology for data links to shore using fiber
optics is rapidly advancing.
Waves
The National Research Council-sponsored symposium and workshop on
wave measurement technology (NRC, 1982), which was mentioned earlier,
assessed the needs, status, and future directions to be

pursued. Operational and research needs were described in that NRC report. Five
major research areas for wave data were described and, for the most part, these
areas have been aggressively pursued in the intervening seven years as noted (in
italics):
1. Properties of a sequence of large waves need to be studied, both in

the field and theoretically. This phenomenon has been identified as a
primary mechanism for damage to structures. The workshop
participants recommended investigation of the nonlinear aspects of
wave interaction. This area of research has been aggressively
pursued (see e.g., Elgar et al., 1985), but not all aspects of the
problem still need to be solved.
2. Understanding is lacking of wave interaction—particularly the
nonlinear aspects of waves with currents, bottom bathymetry, and
winds. Progress has been made in the understanding of the weakly
nonlinear evolution of waves due to shoaling (see e.g., Freilich and
Guza, 1984), but our knowledge still needs to be greatly improved.
3. Progress has been made on refraction/diffraction models, but a fully
operational model is not available and field verification data are
lacking. This assessment is still true, although significant
improvements have been made (see discussion in Chapter 4, wave-
induced currents).
4. There is a need to improve understanding and ability to measure
extreme events and the effects of such events on structures and the
nearshore environment. This is still true, as long-term wave records
are needed to establish reliable wave statistics.
5. Improvement is needed in wave directionality measurement and
analysis, both in situ and remote. This is still a requirement today—
see Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations.
Velocity
A need has been identified by this committee for a high-frequency
turbulence measurement capability for application in sediment-laden or aerated
waters that occur within the surf zone. Laser- and acoustic-Doppler measuring
devices offer nonintrusive methods for measuring near the bed but need to be
adapted for in situ application in the surf zone. These instruments offer promising
areas for technology advances, as do improved recording and analysis systems.
At the 1978 IEEE conference on current measurements, subgroups made
specific recommendations, most of which still apply today. One recommendation
was that the engineering community

sanction standardized testing methods and procedures. The idea of some sort of
government-sponsored central testing and calibration capability, perhaps open to
all who have a need, was proposed as a cost-effective service to the nation. It was
agreed that there is a need for both hardware and software ''standards'' applied to
the measurement of currents.
The need for standards and calibration facilities is exemplified by the
continuing controversy over the capabilities of electromagnetic flow meters—the
standard instrument used in the surf zone for the last decade (Aubrey and
Trowbridge, 1985, 1988; Guza, 1988; Hamblin et al., 1987; Doering and Bowen,
1987).
The remote sensing of waves and currents is an area that requires more
development and holds promise for obtaining simultaneous measurements over a
broad area.
A question was raised in 1978, and is still valid today, as to who should
underwrite the cost of research and development of new ideas in current-
measurement technology. Should government or industry bear the cost of
instrument development? A problem for manufacturers is the small volume in a
specialized market. Manufacturers continually must incorporate technological
advances or risk being noncompetitive. A new current-meter concept can quickly
make older meters obsolete.
LOW-FREQUENCY WATER MOTIONS

This section addresses long-period phenomena, at time scales of five
minutes to years or decades. Classifications of such phenomena are shown here:
Classification Range of Period
Tsunami4 5 minutes to 1 hour
Harbor seiche 1 to 10 minutes
Shelf wave minutes to hours
Astronomical tide semi-diurnal to annual
Storm surge hours to days
Seasonal sea level 1 to 12 months
4 A tsunami is a long wave generated by vertical movement of the ocean floor caused by
an offshore earthquake. In the past, tsunamis were often referred to as "tidal waves"
although they have nothing to do with astronomical tides.
Long-term sea level years to decades

Ground-water intrusion years to decades
Concerns with such phenomena include navigation of inlets to harbors (tidal

currents), backshore and harbor protection (tsunamis, storm surges, tides, and
long-term changes in sea level), and berthing of vessels (tidal range and harbor
seiches).
This report does not address the inner harbor wave motions as these are not
considered normally to be a shoreline, high-energy measurement concern. Tides
are global and ever-present, whereas tsunamis are of local origin and rare in
occurrence but can have significant impact on shorelines and backshores. Storm
surges, while also event-related, are as frequent as the intense storms that cause
them and are of major concern to localities on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico
coasts. Pacific coastal regions of the United States are less affected by storm
surges because the narrow continental shelf inhibits surge. Measurements of the
strength and tracks of storms are needed for use both in design of sea walls and
other protective works and in evaluation of risk to coastal communities. Shelf
waves excited by longshore winds, or seasonal and long-term changes in sea
level or land level, compound such considerations.
Measurements Requirements
The most predictable of the low-frequency water motion phenomena are the
astronomical tides, at least for those coastal locations where long-term tide data
are available. Storm surge prediction (either in real time or in the hindcast mode)
demands accurate wind velocity information characterizing the storm in space
and time. It also demands accurate bathymetric data near shore, and land
elevations in the backshore if overland flooding is an important consideration.
Numerical models for storm surges need water-level data during storm events and
adequate astronomical tide data to verify the models. Longshore current data,
particularly for currents at key locations such as inlets, are valuable, if not
indispensable, for refining the model algorithm for computing the friction
between the water and the seabed.
Existing water-level data for verification and possible improvement of
model performance are generally not adequate for two reasons: lack of a
sufficient number of tide gauges within backwater regions and lack of
combination of tide gauges and wave gauges in regions offshore of the breaker
zone during storm events. The

water-level evolution during a storm depends on the integrated effect of the wind
stress and atmospheric pressure, and indirectly on the wind-induced surface
waves that produce a low-frequency water-level anomaly near shore (referred to
as "wave setup"). The next-generation storm surge models need to allow for this
phenomenon using computationally efficient numerical models of waves.
Verification of such model upgrading requires water-level and wave data to infer
the contribution of wave setup to the total rise in sea level near shore. Bottom
pressure gauge data at the continental shelf break also would be useful in fine-
tuning the outer boundary conditions that are used in present surge models.
Another area for improvement in coastal flooding surge models is the effect
on the flow caused by vegetation and other natural or constructed obstructions.
The effect of vegetation on wind-wave propagation over flooded land is
addressed by Camfield (1977) and in a report of the National Research Council
(NRC, 1977). Verification of the proposed methodologies and their extension to
low-frequency flow impedance is largely lacking because of insufficient data on
prototype conditions. The requirement is for strategically placed wave and
water-level gauges on both sides of such natural obstructions during storm
events. Although such information is highly site-specific, it is a necessary step in
the development of models that might be applied to different generic classes of
natural and constructed obstructions. Photogrammetric techniques (using
photography in surveying) together with in situ surveys would be useful in
attempting to develop a measure of the extent and effect of such overland
morphological features.
In the design of coastal protection structures or in the evaluation of risk of
flooding for coastal communities, the data on high-water-level events at any
particular location are usually inadequate to determine the probability that a
water-level anomaly will exceed a given value in a given period of time (e.g., 50
years). In the absence of data for coastal regions where storm surges constitute
the main threat (combined with tide), the historical behavior of storms can be
employed together with surge models to give reasonably meaningful estimates of
such probability (NRC, 1983; Office of Chief of Engineers, 1986). Good storm
data for the region are needed to validate the storm surge model used to simulate
flooding. Evaluation of risk for coastal communities threatened by tsunamis is
much more difficult because of the lack of adequate data on seabed motions
associated with the seismic events that cause tsunamis. Seismic data

themselves yield quantitative information on the location and magnitude of the

event, but are not sufficient to determine whether a tsunami has been generated
(Murty, 1977; Van Dorn, 1984). Data required for proper characterization of the
source are those derived from benthic (deep-water) pressure gauges such as those
in the Pacific Ocean (Gonzalez et al., 1987; Eble, 1988), well away from the
influence of continental shelf, and in harbors, where most tide gauges are
located.
Long-term changes in sea level, whether due to a change in the land level
(subsidence, uplift) or climatic conditions, are important in designing to mitigate
possible flooding scenarios over time spans of several decades (NRC, 1987). The
long-term change not only adds directly to water elevations due to surge, but also
affects such things as wave climate and seawater intrusion into aquifers. The
measurement requirement is for accurate long-term tide gauge data where sea-
level changes are of concern. Satellite-based measurement systems such as Very
long Baseline Interferometry (VBI) and Differential Global Positioning Systems
(DGPS) show great promise for measuring relative sea-level changes accurately
and rapidly (Carter et al., 1986).
Measurement objectives related to engineering needs are summarized in
Table 3-3, and specific accuracy requirements for each measurement objective
are given.
The capability for most of the required measurements exists as shown in
Table 3-3 (capability I, II, and III). For water level, both stilling-well tide gauges
and bottom-mounted pressure gauges are generally adequate to measure sea-level
variation with time periods of a few minutes or more (capability I and II).
However, for variations with periods of months or longer, the accuracy of
pressure gauges may be inadequate due to instrument drift. If sea-level changes
are to be corrected for barometric pressure or water density, these data must also
be available.
Currents associated with low-frequency phenomena can be measured by a
variety of means including tracking of drifters, in situ current meters, and remote
acoustic-Doppler systems. The Lagrangian tracking methods are well suited for
measurements offshore during normal weather conditions. However, for
measurements during storm

conditions, the existing capability is marginal in terms of ruggedness, reliability,

installation, and portability. For measurements in channels, the bottom-mounted
acoustic-Doppler current-meter systems appear to have the most promise
(Lhermitte, 1981). In theory, acoustic tomography could be a useful technique.
However, practical limitations may preclude the use of acoustic tomography in
shallow water as there are many unanswered questions concerning the stability of
acoustic paths and the signal processing required to resolve currents in shallow
water. Electromagnetic and acoustic techniques have been rated, therefore, as
capability level III—passable, but not yet satisfactory. Modeling of low-
frequency motions requires much data for validation of the models, including the
shape of the bottom contours. Not only is large-scale bathymetry required for
modeling needs, but also small scale features (such as bedforms), primarily for
modeling bottom frictional terms.
Nearshore bathymetry data can be obtained by fathometer (acoustic travel-
time measurement); however, precision leveling is required to provide a known
elevation or bench mark for reference. The existing capability (level I) is quite
adequate to determine the general bottom shape, but the capability for
determining small-scale features relevant to bottom roughness is only marginally
adequate (capability level III). Bed forms (periodic or quasi-regular changes in
the elevation of the sea floor) having length scales from centimeters to hundreds
of meters and amplitudes of centimeters to meters are difficult or impossible to
measure during storms, when they are changing rapidly. Existing technology
does not permit these measurements to be made during high-energy events;
nominal development may permit improved estimates of the time scales of
motion of some of the larger bed-form features (see the section on fluid/sediment
interactions, later in this chapter). Clearly, improved modeling capability verified
by observations would provide the best means for simulating the effects of bed-
form changes in the near future.
Measurement Needs
The major needs for quantifying low-frequency motions in the nearshore and
backshore regions are adequate coverage and strategic placement of sensing
devices for water level, waves, and currents during normal tidal regimes and
during storm- or earthquake-induced anomalous events. "Strategic placement"
means that which will allow inferences to be drawn in terms of such phenomena
as wave setup,

sea-level differentials across inland flooded areas containing extensive and

variable vegetation, and volume flow into or out of harbors or estuaries.
Acquisition of such data during event-related phenomena such as storms and
tsunamis requires real-time capability, including the possibility of placement of
portable sensing equipment. The development needs are for suitably rugged yet
reliable sensing devices for currents and waves under storm conditions. Table 3-3
summarizes these needs.
FLUID/SEDIMENT INTERACTIONS
One of the ultimate goals of coastal engineering research is to understand
and to predict shoreline stability and morphological changes in response to the
variety of processes that occur in the coastal environment. The engineer must
understand the processes to be able to undertake projects that address such
concerns as beach nourishment, sedimentation associated with coastal structures,
erosion-accretion patterns along exposed coasts or in the vicinity of inlets or
navigational channels, and sediment response associated with dredging activities.
The coastal engineering data needs listed in Table 3-1 reflect the breadth of
problems in which sedimentation plays an important role.
From a physical point of view, sedimentary processes are the result of fluid/
sediment interactions, or more specifically, the response of sediment particles to
the forces produced by shoaling waves, tides, coastal currents, and winds.
Sedimentary processes are among the most important but least understood
aspects of the coastal environment. In studying sediment transport phenomena,
quantifying the total sediment movement under a variety of conditions is the
ultimate goal. A distinction is often made between bed-load transport—those
grains sliding, rolling, or moving within several grain diameters of the seabed—
and suspended-load transport, those grains suspended by fluid turbulence. In
extremely high-transport situations, grain-to-grain collisions, rather than fluid
turbulence, become the dominant suspending mechanism, and a grain-dispersed
layer is maintained within 10 to 15 cm of the seabed. For this document, the
distinctions between these transport modes are not critical, and distinction is
made only between suspended and near-bed transport.
Nearshore sedimentation research generally has been limited by technology
and the inability to monitor sediment transport on time

and space scales commensurate with the physical causes. As a result, progress in
sedimentology has lagged behind advances in our understanding of the other
physical mechanisms operating in the nearshore environment. At the same time,
as conceptual and theoretical modeling of nearshore sediment response has
continued to evolve, the need for appropriate field measurements has continued to
grow.
Field investigations of various aspects of fluid/sediment interactions
encompass a wide range of efforts. Thus, a broad demand is placed on
instrumentation and sensor capabilities. A review of recent literature (e.g.,
Greenwood and Davis, 1984; Edge, 1985; Kraus, 1987) suggests that, within the
classifications shown earlier in Figure 2-1, sediment-related field studies fall into
three broad categories: regional, site-specific , and process-oriented.
The regional category of field investigation includes broad-scale or
reconnaissance-level investigations that, for example, require information on (1)
regional patterns of circulation, suspended sediment, bed morphology, and
longshore bar geometry; and (2) noncorrelated parameters such as wave
climatology, sediment accumulation volumes, and shoreline changes. Because of
the large area involved, remote-sensing devices would be appropriate to these
investigations. Typical examples include use of time-lapse photography to map
spatial and temporal changes in longshore bar morphology relative to wave
conditions (Holman and Lippman, 1987); correlation of Land-Sat images for
detecting the nearshore surficial suspended-sediment concentration field with
various physical processes thought to cause resuspension (Fedosh, 1987); and
comparison of historical changes in beach profile with storm wave predictions
(e.g., Dick and Dalrymple, 1984; Brampton and Bevan, 1987).
The site- or project-specific category of field investigation includes studies
designed to (1) obtain empirical information on local processes, (2) test or use
hypotheses to explain local beach changes, or (3) investigate gross cause-and-
effect relationships between fluid motions and sediment response at a location of
interest. Excellent examples of site-specific studies relate to human intervention
with the nearshore, e.g., the shoreline effects of reduced flooding in the Nile
River (Inman and Jenkins, 1985), studies of massive sediment injections at San
Onofre, California (Grove et al., 1987), and sediment infilling at dredged
channels, as is observed in many harbors.
The process-oriented category of field investigation relates to fundamental
sediment-transport research. Specific theoretical relationships are investigated at
the sediment-particle scale of inquiry,

and the goals may have longer-term implications related to sediment-transport

theory and future applications. Studies of this nature may or may not have
immediate application to coastal engineering problems but represent potential
advances to the field. Historically, experimental research has been carried out in
wave tanks or flumes; however, field experiments are beginning to be used to test
specific hypotheses, to support improved numerical modeling efforts (e.g., Mason
et al., 1987), and to carry out fundamental fluid/sediment research in the
nearshore zone (e.g., Seymour, 1987; Hanes and Huntley, 1986; Beach and
Sternberg, 1988).
Instrumentation requirements are substantially different for these three
categories of study. The first category, regional-scale investigation, requires less
precise quantitative information covering broader geographical areas. In contrast,
process-oriented sediment-transport research requires a wide variety and large
number of instruments deployed in precise arrays to document detailed
relationships. Study areas are selected on the basis of research interest and place
great demand on collection of field data. Site- or project-specific studies fall
between the other two categories in requirements for instruments and data
collection and may rely, for example, on selected point measurements or long-
term measurements of bathymetry.
Measurement Requirements and Capabilities

The measurements required to fulfill coastal engineering needs are extremely
varied. This variety can be illustrated by reviewing the major engineering
problems defined earlier in Figure 2-1 and Table 3-1 and considering the primary
measurements needed to address fluid/sediment interactions (summarized in
Table 3-4). The measurement requirements listed under backshore protection (in
Table 3-1) emphasize spatial-scale (wide area) monitoring rather than local
sensing. Inlet stabilization requires measurements to be made within entrance
channels and includes estimates of sediment transport and flux, especially in
relation to infilling channel entrances. Transport of cohesive sediment (clays and
muds) in nearshore regions was not considered in this report, and readers are
directed to the report on Sedimentation Control to Reduce Maintenance Dredging
of Navigational Facilities in Estuaries (NRC, 1987) for a review of cohesive
sediment transport. Harbor protection refers to measurements designed to
investigate sedimentation associated with major protective structures and the
adjacent seabed.

The various measurement requirements tabulated in Table 3-1 have been

grouped by category in Table 3-4, which emphasizes the variety of measurements
used to address coastal engineering sedimentation problems. Included with each
measurement requirement is a suggested measurement performance (resolution
or range), a commonly used measurement technique, a designation of present
instrument capability, the related development need, and selected references for
the sediment and seabed morphology categories.
From Table 3-4 it is seen that, generally, methods for measuring waves and
currents are operational and are capable of measuring over the full range of
environmental conditions (capability I, II). In contrast, methods for measuring
various aspects of sediment characteristics and coastal morphology are in various
developmental stages and their full potential has not been realized (capability III,
IV). In some cases, measurements are only possible under low-wave conditions
(e.g., diver-operated samplers), while in other cases, measurement techniques are
lacking (e.g., fast response near-bed sediment-transport sensor). As a result,
sediment transport in the nearshore zone is inferred from other measurements
(e.g., currents, waves), rather than measured directly.
Measurement Needs
The measurement capability ratings shown in Table 3-4 indicate that many
of the sediment and bed-morphology-related measurement techniques and some
flow and wave measurements related to fluid/sediment interaction are limited in
their present capabilities. The present major measurement deficiencies in fluid/
sediment interaction studies include the following.
Near-Bed Sediment Transport

While recent advances have been made on rugged solid-state optical sensors
capable of measuring suspended sediment concentrations in the surf zone (e.g.,
Downing et al., 1981; Huntley, 1982), a technology does not presently exist to
measure sediment concentrations or change occurring in the near-bed region
(within several centimeters of the seabed). Sediment concentration increases
toward the seabed; measurements in this area are fundamental to our
understanding of total sediment transport. Although nearshore sediment-transport
studies using sand tracers and traps have been

used, the long time-response of the measurement (minutes) does not match the
wave-forcing period. Prototype acoustic devices that record grain impacts in the
near-bed region (Downing, 1981; Salkield et al., 1981) have been constructed and
deployed. However, an operational solid-state device that can monitor bed-load
transport in the near-bed zone is not presently available.
Acoustic devices for detecting suspended sediment concentration profiles
are presently being developed and operated in a variety of laboratories. Although
there are some basic problems with the operation of these sensors in the coastal
zone (e.g., strong response to bubbles, limited response to fine sediment), they are
perceived to have significant potential. Acoustic backscatter devices are being
developed to provide high-resolution profiles of suspended sediment, either
looking downward to the seabed, upward into the lower water column (Lynch et
al., 1987), or throughout the water column (see summary in Kraus, 1987).
Acoustic-Doppler devices have been proposed for monitoring fluid sediment
flows within centimeters of the seabed (Lowe, 1987), thus suggesting a means to
estimate bed-load transport. Multifrequency acoustic devices have the potential
of resolving grain size characteristics of suspended load. These devices are
evolving rapidly, and they show high potential. Their adaptability to the high
sediment concentration and entrained air bubbles common to the nearshore
environment, however, is yet to be established.
Fluid Turbulence
Turbulent velocity fluctuations and the related transfer of momentum are the
actual mechanisms that maintain sediment suspension within the surf zone.
Turbulent fluctuations occur from fluid shear and from breaking waves. Classical
sediment-transport theory is based on boundary shear-generated turbulence. Some
present sediment-transport models used in the surf zone consider only forced
turbulence from boundary shear, while others consider turbulence from breaking
waves to be more important. In all cases, knowledge of turbulent characteristics
in the surf zone is almost totally lacking, and existing means to quantify fluid
turbulence are inadequate.
Methods for measuring turbulence in other fluid environments (including
areas of the continental shelf outside the surf zone) have been developed. These
include hot film anemometers (e.g., Gust and Weatherly, 1985), acoustic travel-
time current sensors (e.g., Williams and Tochko, 1977), and laser-Doppler
velocimeters (e.g., Agrawal et

al., 1988). Thus, some forms of technology exist that have potential application.
Preliminary measurements of turbulence in the surf zone have been made using
hot film probes (George and Flick, 1987).
Bathymetry
Requirements for measuring bathymetry exist on several scales. On a large
scale, the ability to monitor beach profile changes quickly with 10-15 cm
accuracy over the range of fair weather and storm conditions is necessary to
understand a wide variety of nearshore problems. These include problems related
to beach nourishment, long- and short-term beach erosion/accretion, longshore
trapping efficiencies, channel sedimentation rates, and total sediment budgets. On
a smaller scale, methods are required to monitor changes in seabed elevation
caused by scour and erosion at a given point on millimeter-to-centimeter scales.
Measurements of this accuracy are necessary for sediment-transport research
directed toward predicting seabed stability and determining the relationships
between sediment transport and changes in beach morphology.
Present methods for measuring beach profiles include wading survey
techniques (Aubrey and Seymour, 1987), tractor- and sled-mounted transducers,
and the motor-driven CRAB device operated by the Corps of Engineers at the
Duck, North Carolina, Field Research Facility. These techniques provide
approximately similar resolution (10-15 cm) but are limited in operation to low-
wave conditions, such as wading survey techniques, or are large devices that
cannot be easily moved from site to site, such as CRAB. Instruments for
measuring small-scale bathymetric changes at a point are presently under
development (Sallenger, 1989; personal communication). These instruments use
miniature, high-frequency echo sounders that are mounted within the water
column and ''look'' downward toward the seabed. The signals are noisy because
of bubbles and high sediment concentrations, but these difficulties are being
considered and development is proceeding.
Directional-Wave Characteristics
The partitioning of total sediment flux into cross-shore and longshore
components is dependent on the direction of wave propagation in shallow water.
Since waves generally break at low angles to the beach, a difference of 1° to 2° in
the estimated wave direction

can significantly change the computed longshore sediment flux rate.

Consequently, improved wave directional resolution is required in measurement
systems for sedimentation assessment and forecasting. This measurement
requirement is also important for other aspects of coastal engineering, as
discussed earlier in this chapter.
Spatial-Scale Observations
Several nearshore engineering functions, such as beach protection and beach
nourishment planning and engineering, require data from simultaneous
observations over large sections of the nearshore or coastal zone with methods
that may be less accurate or precise than the site-specific requirements discussed
in the preceding sections.
Remote-sensing techniques have been developed, over the past decade, that
may provide significant potential for application in the surf zone. These
techniques rely on satellite, airborne, and ground-based sensors that can rapidly
scan or observe a variety of parameters. Examples showing some limited
application of these remote-sensing methods include determination of nearshore
bathymetry from airborne systems and the use of satellite imagery detecting
nearshore turbidity to map coastal circulation patterns. Generally, remote-sensing
technology has been developed for use in other fields; however, many of the
specific methods have potential for coastal engineering applications. Some
examples are briefly summarized in Table 3-5, which also includes some of the
in-water acoustic and photographic methods discussed in the foregoing sections.
Large-scale spatial averaging may limit the usefulness of some of these
technologies in the surf zone.
Since no agency or institution exists that coordinates or systematically funds
instrument development, the needs of the coastal engineering community have
been addressed historically on an individual basis as dictated by funding for field
research. Most of the major cooperative field studies—e.g., NSTS, C2S2, Duck
'85, SUPERDUCK, etc.—(Kraus, 1987) have been responsible for coordinating
moderate development efforts carried out by individual participants. This ad hoc
approach has been effective in the sense that instrument development is closely
tied to scientific needs. It may not, however, provide adequate or long-term
funding and facilities for developing some of the major instrument systems listed
in the foregoing discussions.

TABLE 3-5 Remote-Sensing Instruments, Techniques, and Potential Application in

Surf Zone
Instruments Potential Application
Deployment: SATELLITE/AIRCRAFT
Altimeter Geostrophic currents, wave and storm
surge characteristics
Scatterometer Sea state
SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) Sea state, wave spectrum, wave direction
Radiometer (microwave) Color scanner Suspended sediment distribution
Deployment: AIRCRAFT
SCR (Surface Contour Radar) Sea surface
ROWS (Radar Ocean-Wave Spectrometer Directional wave spectrum
AOL (Airborne Oceanographic Lidar) Surface waves
and bottom topography
SLAR (Side-Looking Airborne Radar) Mapping
ALM (Airborne Electromagnetic Method) Coastal bathymetry
Deployment: GROUND-BASED
CODAR (OSCR) Coastal circulation
SLR (Side-Looking Radar)
Cameras: time lapse and time exposure; Wave runup, breaker conditions, low-
(photographic and video imaging) frequency wave characteristics, bar
morphology
Techniques
Deployment: IN WATER
Acoustic backscatter Suspended sediment concentration, flux,
bed-load transport characteristics, local
scour and deposition, turbulent and
suspended sediment field.
Laser Doppler
Acoustic Doppler
Acoustic tomography
FLUID/STRUCTURE INTERACTIONS
Structure Types and Measurement Requirements

Coastal structures can be divided into the following categories:
• Breakwaters
• Elevated platforms, on piles or cylinders

• Seawalls and bulkheads

• Jetties and groins
• Dredged entrance channels into harbors
• Navigation aids
• Artificial islands.
Design of each of these types of structures requires knowledge of

environmental forces sufficient to establish criteria for location, materials that
should be used, and dimensions. These criteria may come from physical models,
or, if the physics and mathematics are understood well enough, from numerical
models.
Breakwaters
The purpose of a breakwater may be different in one location than in another
location because of different reasons for reducing wave energy. Some of these
purposes are to:
• provide quieter water in an entrance channel for safe navigation,

• provide a calm harbor for loading and unloading cargo or passengers
from ships,
• protect the shore from wave damage during storms, and
• reduce beach erosion or accumulate sand.
Breakwaters can be properly designed only with site-specific data about the
wave spectrum—both for significant and maximum waves—and wave grouping,
information on runup and overtopping, shock pressures exerted by breaking
waves, the effect of the breakwater on currents, the intensity of air bubbles during
storms, and the engineering characteristics of bottom sediments at the seabed and
for some depth below.
Breakwaters are of various types. The most common is the rubble mound,
faced with large stone or concrete units of different shapes. Caisson breakwaters,
made of rows of hollow boxes (of concrete, usually) reflect wave energy, since
long-period narrow-spectrum waves can cause significant scour. Design of these
breakwaters requires specific knowledge of the erodibility characteristics of the
local seabed.
Composite breakwaters, partly caissons and partly rubble, have been built in
many configurations, most notably in Japan. These structures are characterized by
a vertical wall near the top so that impact forces are usually a critical design
consideration.

Another variety of breakwater is that composed of a line or lines of

sheeting, sheetpiling, or connected cylinders, forming a vertical wall. This design
also requires detailed information about the foundation materials below the
seabed and also about scour resistance in front of the structure.
Any of the foregoing types of breakwaters may be built with different top
elevations, depending on the need to prevent, or to allow, overtopping during
storms that are so violent that vessels would not be entering. Still lower top
elevations may be built as submerged breakwaters designed to reduce the height
of waves, but not to absorb or reflect all wave energy.
A special class of structures is floating breakwaters. Their effectiveness
depends on their width as compared with the wave length of incoming waves.
Consequently, they are mainly suitable for relatively short waves, such as those
usually occur in marinas and other small-boat harbors. They offer advantages,
compared to bottom-mounted breakwaters, in sheltered deep water or in regions
of unusually high tide ranges. A literature search by the Corps of Engineers
Waterways Experiment Station (WES) shows a wide variety of designs for
floating breakwaters, including arrays of tires, boxes, baffles, and diaphragms
(COE, 1982).
A working group of PIANC (Permanent International Association of
Navigation Congresses) has been established to analyze 163 breakwaters from
many parts of the world in efforts to find common factors among breakwaters
that have contributed to their success or failure, consider model tests, evaluate
safety factors, and propose ways to respond to engineering and construction
problems. This assessment is still underway, but it is clear from such reviews, as
well as from experience in the analysis of several failures, that more information
is needed about the progress of shock pressure waves through the armor and core
materials.
Elevated Platforms
Elevated platforms supported by piles or cylinders embedded in the sea
bottom have been extensively used and researched. Wave forces on the cylinders
have been measured, and the body of data is sufficient for design, except for the
magnitude of shock pressures for breaking waves. Better knowledge is needed
about the effect of groups of piles on the scouring of the seabed. Examples of this
lack of understanding are demonstrated by the effect of pilings used in

construction of several research piers over the past decade (for example, at the
Corps of Engineers facility, Duck, North Carolina, and Scripps Institution of
Oceanography) that have caused unexpected deepening near the pier. In addition,
predictions of scour depth as a function of wave climate and the engineering
properties of the beach soils and subsoils are not possible with any great accuracy
at this time.
The measurement of the height of storm wave crests is a critical requirement
for safe design. Many tests and observations of behavior of oil industry platforms
have shown the need to maintain the elevation of the underside of the deck above
the crests of the highest waves, to avoid excessive impacts.
Seawalls
The design of seawalls and bulkheads along the shore requires the same
kinds of measurements of wind and wave forces as breakwaters, with added
emphasis on wave overtopping and the effects of impounded rainwater on the
landward side.
Jetties and Groins

Jetties and groins are physically similar to breakwaters but are built
perpendicular to the shoreline. In the United States, jetties are structures
protecting and stabilizing the entrances to harbors, although the term "jetty" is
used more broadly elsewhere. Groins, by interfering with the transport of sand
along the shore, are used to attempt to stabilize the shoreline position. Design
problems for these structures are similar to the design problems for breakwaters.
Entrance Channels
Dredged entrance channels into harbors may be considered coastal structures
with negative elevation. In designing entrance channels, information is required
about the source and movement of sediments that tend to fill up these channels
and impede shipping. In addition, entrance channels may cause adverse
environmental effects in the form of downdrift erosion when sediment supplies
are cut off. The relations between current velocity, wave climate, grain size,
distribution of sediments, and turbulence are not clearly understood.

Navigation Aids
Navigation aids to guide ships and boats are a broad class of coastal
structures. They may be fixed or floating and consist of buoys, lights, ranges,
markers, and communications stations (acoustical, visual, radar, or radio).
Measurements of environmental forces such as those developed by wind, current,
and ice are important to the effective design of navigation aids and their
supporting structures.
Artificial Islands
The creation of land in the ocean for terminals, airports, and other activities
has been advanced, particularly by the Japanese, during the past two decades. The
fill is typically contained within a conventional breakwater structure so it presents
no unique design problems.
To measure the dynamics of wave/structure interactions, a variety of
instrumentation may be required, including the following:
• Fast response pressure sensors

• Strain gauges
• Tensiometers
• Accelerometers
• Anemometers
• Water-level gauges
• Current meters
• Bathymetric and topographic measurement systems
• Optical motion indicators, remote sensing.
Measurement requirements, capabilities, and needs have been summarized in

Tables 3-6 and 3-7 for application to structures of two general types: fixed
position (rubble mounds, solid blocks, or vertical-walled caissons) and floating
breakwaters. These structures may be located on shorelines, harbor entrances, or
channels. In situ instruments, imbedded in rubble-mound structures, can present
data-logging problems because of the susceptibility of cables to damage.

TABLE 3-6 Assessment of Needs for Measurements of Fluid/Structure Interaction

(Fixed-Position Structures)
Measurement Accuracy Measurement Measurement Operational
Objective Requirements Technique Capability Need
Profile 10 cm Survey III
movement:
external 10 cm Survey + II 5, 6
strain gauge
internal 5 cm Inertial IV 1
Water level
Wave 10 cm Pressure + I 3, 6
characteristics wave riders
Wave 5° Slope arrays III 2
direction + photos
Wave runup Photos II 5
Wave Photos II 2, 6
reflection
Wave Photos II 6
transmission
Wave Photos, II 5
overtopping Acoustic
Pore pressures Pressure III 1
gauge
Currents
Toe of 10 cm/s Acoustic II 4
structure
Inside 10 cm/s Acoustic II 5, 6
structure
Forces
Mooring ± 10% Strain gauges I 5, 6
Torsional ±10% Strain gauges I 5, 6
Seismic ±10% Strain gauges I 5, 6
LEGENDS:
Capability: Need:
I Very good 1 Major development
II Adequate 2 Improve information detail
III Not adequate 3 Improve reliability
IV None 4 Improve durability
5 Improve installation and use
6 More sensors or lower data cost
Measurement Requirements
Erosion at the Base of Rubble-Mound Structures

If the foundation soils are eroded by storm waves, causing the sediments to
move seaward, the undermining will cause raveling of the slope and loss of
material. To counteract this effect, the base
areas are often reinforced with a berm or placed in a previously excavated trench
to prevent scour. However, the effectiveness of these erosion-prevention
techniques so far has not been accurately measured. Physical models do not
adequately reflect the scale relationship between foundation sediments and rubble
or armor materials. Prototype measurements of waves and currents, scour, and
transport
TABLE 3-7 Assessment of Needs for Measurements of Fluid/Structure Interaction
(Floating Breakwaters)
Measurement Measurement Capability Measurement Needs
Requirement
Wave data
Currents, instantaneous Sensors, Adequate; at toe, At toe; installation
none
Time series, in storms Adequate Improved reliability
Stochastic Adequate Improved reliability
Heights Adequate; at toe, none At toe; installation
Directions Inadequate Better resolution
Pore pressures, core and Sensors, Adequate Durable installation
foundation in storms
Velocity in interstices None Installation, none
Development and
installation
Rate of overtopping None Development
Transmission through Adequate Better spatial coverage
reflection, in 3
dimensions
Partial Development
Runup None Development
Air content of breaking None Development
waves
Ice forces None Development
Storm currents, toe Sensors, Adequate; Installation
Installation, none
Seismic forces Adequate Improvement
Structure data
Cross section, as built Poor, especially Development
for rubble
Movement of units Poor Development
Internal strain Adequate, outside Improvement
Floating structures
Mooring forces Adequate
Torsional stresses Adequate Improvement
Ice forces Adequate Improvement

are required; numerical and physical models need to be developed on the basis of
these measurements.
Shock Pressure Implosion

When a wave breaks directly against a rubble slope, or against a concrete
wall embedded within it, the shock pressure rapidly penetrates the interstices.
These shock pressures are suspected of being involved in rearrangement of the
structure and breaking of concrete units. Measurements are needed of the
pressure gradients that exist at the peak of such implosions, and of the movement
of individual elements of concrete, stone, gravel, and sand as they are jostled by
the impacts.
Storm Surge
During the height of a storm, mean sea level may rise considerably as a
result of the combined effects of wind setup, reduction in barometric pressure,
and tides or seiches. This brings the zone of maximum wave action nearer to the
top of the structure, where the structure is often the most vulnerable. There are
few reliable measurements available at this time of the structural impact or the
structural response, so that models are of questionable value.
Loss of Fine Particles

Under the cyclic action of waves, fine particles in the breakwater may work
their way through the gaps in the armor (these channels are called piping), or
subarmor, and escape. Progressive piping may then cause cavities within the
breakwater and loss of support for materials above, leading to eventual reduction
of the crown elevation and allowing detrimental overtopping. At present, there is
no technique for detecting and locating internal cavities and piping; such
information could affect design and material selection criteria.
Overtopping
If sufficient "green water" crosses the top of the rubble mound, the crests can
attack the structure and flood the interstices at the roadway or crown. Both tests
and prototype experience show that flows that overtop are more likely to cause
damage. In fact, breakwater "roundheads," or ends, are known to be most
vulnerable and are

often designed with heavier units or flatter slopes, or both. Repeated overtopping
is thought by some to be a dominant factor in structural failure. Better
measurements of wave/structure interaction are needed.
Armor Decomposition
Wave attack, sun and salt, heat and cold (and perhaps ice), and the impact of
smaller stones—and movement of units themselves—all cause gradual
deterioration of stone or concrete. The rounded corners of old armor units attest to
this effect. As the units become more spherical they become less stable and shift
position. Efforts have been made to build scale models with units of softer
material, to reproduce this effect, but these efforts have not been wholly
satisfactory. A long-term monitoring program of armor decomposition would
provide needed information.
Multidirectional Waves
When waves from different directions approach a breakwater, convergence
of crests can produce a local breaking wave far larger and steeper than the
average conditions. There is a need for more directional wave measurements in
the vicinity of breakwaters.
Breakwater Stability
Impact of concentrated wave energy against any structure at the top of a
rubble mound can precipitate a loss of slope stability. A rubble-mound slope has
been characterized as an incline close to the failure point. For reasons of
economy, slopes are often made as steep as is believed to be practical; there is a
lower factor of safety common to the design criteria for rubble-mound structures
than for steel and stone structures. There is a need for more measurements of
rubble-mound breakwater—on prototype and model rubble-mounded structures
—in order to improve understanding of stability coefficients.
Summary
Instruments are available to measure many parameters related to interaction
between water and structures. Some parameters cannot be measured, largely
because the sensors and data links have not

been successfully deployed in the harsh environment of a stormy sea.

Measurements that are needed but cannot yet be measured adequately on fixed
structures are
• the types and directions of breaking waves attacking structures,

• the nature of movement of different structural components during storm
conditions,
• pore pressure within the interstices and in the foundation,
• wave transmission and reflection,
• torsional stresses in floating structures,
• scour depths as they progress during storms,
• the air content of water at contact points,
• the velocity of wave crests,
• the amount and nature of overtopping, and
• the amount of wave runup.
The priority research areas are those that will lead to more rational design of
coastal structures. This research focuses on measurement of the pressures and
forces, not only external but also internal, from storm waves at the instant of
breaking on structures, so that the behavior observed can be understood and
predicted. To undertake much of this research it will be necessary to develop
installation methods for mounting instrumentation on or in structures and to
recover the data.

MODELING COASTAL SYSTEMS 66
4
Modeling Coastal Systems
Modeling coastal processes can be a subject worthy of extensive discussion,

and it is certainly a topic of rapidly growing interest—for both researchers and
engineers. This chapter, however, addresses only the relation between modeling
and coastal measurement and is therefore limited in scope.
Mathematical models are useful, if not indispensable, tools in the analysis,
synthesis, and interpretation of field or laboratory measurements in the coastal
environment. Models are often a useful tool for identifying significant gaps in
data as well as for completing missing data in a data series. A model may be
based on purely statistical considerations, on purely physical principles, or both,
and generally involves a finite number of parameters whose values must either be
stipulated or inferred from the measurements. Models used in the analysis of data
are usually, but not exclusively, diagnostic models (see the following section),
while models used in estimating future changes are usually some form of
predictive model. Engineering requirements dictate what one wishes to predict,
whether it be changes in beach bathymetry or in hydrodynamic forces on a
structure under given design storm conditions. Measurements are clearly
indispensable information for verification of models, but at the same time models
can be extremely useful in identifying the appropriate type of data that ought to
be obtained.
Modeling and measurements should work hand in hand. A model

allows one to assess the sensitivity of some result to changes in certain input
data. For example, a study of the sensitivity of coastal flooding models was made
by Jennings (NRC, 1983). As expected, the parameterization of the storm was the
most critical factor. However, a number of other inputs were listed. Among
these, doubling the bottom friction factor caused errors of greater than ±3 feet in
the scale flood elevation, while increases of 1 foot in all land elevators resulted in
peak flood elevation changes of only 0.3 feet.
A model may also indicate that measurements ought to be made at a certain
minimal spatial or temporal scale. An example of the latter exists in the Coastal
Upwelling Experiment (CUE), sponsored by NSF during the mid-1970s, which
involved field measurements of currents and water density along the continental
slope region of Oregon and Northern California. The initial data were taken at
rather coarse spatial resolution, with no unusual results. Numerical model
experiments by Wang and Mooers (1976) predicted that a narrow subsurface jet
flowing counter to the surface currents could exist. Subsequent field
measurements at much closer spacing disclosed that a subsurface narrow
countercurrent jet indeed existed. The lesson to be learned is that data gatherers
and modelers must coordinate their efforts to achieve the most meaningful
results. If some natural scales in space and/or time exist related to the physical
phenomena under study, then sampling must take such scales into account to
avoid biasing or misinterpreting the measurements.
When one makes measurements, either in the laboratory or in the field, the
strategy is nearly always based on some preconceived notion of a process (i.e., a
model), whether it be purely conceptual or highly quantitative. Physical models
as discussed in the following section should be understood to be quantitative
mathematical relationships among several variables and involving one or more
parameters that characterize some physical, chemical, or biological process. In
contrast, laboratory physical models are scaled-down versions of a prototype
system in which one employs some scaling considerations. Both field
measurements and laboratory measurements are essential means of verifying,
based on physical principles, a mathematical model or of providing the essential
parameters that are not known a priori.
In this section a general discussion is given of the relevance of models to the
requirements for making or improving coastal measurements. This is done in the
context of recognized limitations that

exist in both models and measurements. Mathematical models require input data
to drive them, and their predictions relate, with varying degrees of sensitivity, to
such input data. Information about model sensitivity can be useful in determining
the accuracy or resolution needs for basic measurements. By making models an
integral part of the measurement system, the strengths of measurements and of
models can offset the limitations of each. Mathematical models are limited in
accuracy by:
• the completeness and accuracy of rendition of the physical processes

that are included in the model,
• the accuracy and resolution of the required data (e.g., initial conditions,
forcing data, morphological data, physical parameters), and
• the spatial and temporal resolution of the model.
Field and laboratory measurements are limited by:
• the accuracy of sensing devices and recording systems,

• the accuracy of location of sensors,
• the influence of the presence of some instruments on the process they are
intended to measure,
• the spatial and temporal resolution of the measurements, and
• the completeness of the measurements in terms of the physical process
being studied (i.e., have all the pertinent variables been observed to
characterize and interpret the process adequately?).
The second limitation listed under ''mathematical models'' is very dependent

on the measurements. The third limitation is primarily related to the first. A
model can usually be made to a finer grid scale than the measurements and can
sometimes indicate where measurement locations are most effective. Where the
model grid size is a concern is in the ability of the model to deal properly with
physical processes that are important at scales too small for this grid size. Such
subgrid scale processes must be represented in some ad hoc manner in the model.
The classical example is the effect of those turbulent processes that are too small
in scale for the adopted average grid scale of the model. One must always adopt
some form of closure hypothesis for the subgrid-scale turbulent stresses and
mixing processes. The adequacy of the ad hoc closure hypothesis must rely on
comparison of model results with measurements from specially designed
experiments. This is where laboratory-scale physical modeling methodology is of
paramount importance.

The real strength of the measurements, aside from inherent observational

errors and limited ability to handle small-scale features, lies in the simple fact
that the measurements contain all of the physics. The strength of the model, when
properly tuned, is that it can be used as a diagnostic tool to help interpret the
discrete measurements. This is particularly true of dynamic systems with many
variables. For example, not only does the model provide a rational interpolator, it
also provides the means to compute quantities usually not measured directly, like
stresses, transport rates, energy fluxes, and energy density.
PHYSICAL MODELS
Physical models, including hydraulic models, are generally used when flow
conditions of a prototype system are not amenable to mathematical analysis. The
inability to mathematically model a prototype system may be due to (1) the
nonlinear character of the equations of motion, (2) an inability to characterize
turbulence or dissipation, (3) complex geometries or interconnected flow
passages, or (4) hydraulic elements that are not susceptible to physical
description. Physical models are applied for prediction of prototype behavior or
for studying details of a system that are not easily observed in nature.
Two major problems encountered in physical modeling are (1) maintaining
equivalence between model and prototype and (2) making proper interpretation
of model data. These two problems are inherently linked because both geometric
and dynamic similarity must be achieved before model data can be considered
quantitatively valid. Obtaining geometric similarity (all dimensions scaled
proportionally) does not guarantee dynamic similarity. Therefore, the assumption
that a physical model that looks like a small-scale version of the prototype does in
fact respond in a dynamically correct sense is unsound. In many cases, scaling
one of the dimensions (say the vertical dimension) differently from the others
will actually improve the model's performance.
An additional problem in physical modeling is the limited representation of
the forcing function. In many cases, the directional spread of waves is omitted or
no wind is included.
Once similarity is established in a model, the model must then be calibrated.
Calibration is the procedure of adjusting model parameters until the model can
satisfactorily reproduce measured prototype

behavior. Model calibration is, therefore, directly dependent on the type and
quality of measured prototype field data. Furthermore, model verification
requires a suitable quantity and range of prototype data so that the model can be
checked against data not used for calibration.
Initial construction of a physical model to achieve geometric similarity is
highly dependent on the density and resolution of bathymetric data available.
Usually physical models are constructed with horizontal dimensions constrained
by the space available for the model. In an undistorted model, this constraint
usually results in small model depths, especially at the coast and in harbors.
Unless the bathymetric data from the prototype had a high vertical resolution,
calibration of the model may be impossible. If a distorted model is constructed
where vertical exaggeration is imposed with respect to prototype dimensions, the
necessary resolution of prototype bathymetry may be relaxed somewhat.
However, the lack of rapid high-resolution bathymetric measurement systems
usually results in physical models being poorly calibrated—or, if calibrated, they
are seldom verified owing to the low number of detailed surveys.
Calibration and verification of similarity between model and prototype
requires detailed field measurements of the spatial and temporal distribution and
variability of velocity fields. Present technology such as acoustic-Doppler current
meters may be able to acquire the necessary prototype data at a point, but large
numbers of these sensors are required to verify model similarity.
In most models pressure and average velocity are in similitude (Froude
similitude). The problem is in achieving similitude of forced turbulence and
boundary layers, which affect quantification of sediment transport; at present,
providing similitude of suspension is not possible. Lacking the ability to use
similitude models, the sediment transport must be empirically estimated though
calibration of the model by comparison with observed full-scale results in nature
that are obtained through improved field measurement systems.
MATHEMATICAL MODELS
Long-Period Waves and Currents

With the possible exception of tsunamis, all models of waves having periods
in excess of five minutes neglect effects of vertical acceleration of the fluid,
although allowing for slow rise or fall of

water level. The Coriolis force associated with the earth's rotation is also
important for periods greater than a few hours. Tides and storm surges differ
primarily in the nature of the forcing; both are adequately modeled using the
averaged-over-depth equations of motion with appropriate incorporation of
bottom stress. Some models of tides or storm surges allow for vertical variation
of velocity in a parametric manner; others are full three-dimensional models.
Models of storm surges and of slowly evolving circulation on the
continental shelf or in estuaries demand adequate information on the spatial
distribution of wind stress and on barometric pressure versus time in order to
drive them. The modeling of hurricane-induced storm surges generally employs
an auxiliary storm model for the inclusion of the wind stress and pressure fields
associated with such storms (NRC, 1983). The main difference between the storm
surge and wind-driven circulation models is that the latter generally allows for
effects of water density stratification. For shelf waters or estuaries with both
horizontal and vertical variations of density, proper rendition of currents demands
a full three-dimensional model in which density, as well as the current structure,
are dependent variables.
Aside from the foregoing differences in physics, the various models of low-
frequency hydrodynamics differ mainly in domain (area of effective coverage),
resolution, optimization, and numerical implementation. With the exception of
global tide models and ocean-scale circulation models (excluded from
consideration here), the model domain is generally of limited area with open
lateral boundaries, at which appropriate forcing and/or radiation of energy can be
allowed. One of the troublesome aspects of model domains with open boundaries
is in making sure the boundary conditions employed at the open boundaries are
compatible with physical processes being simulated within the interior of the
model domain.
The state of the art in modeling of tides and storm surges for limited
domains is generally adequate. The needs are primarily in the adequacy of data
for verification and in fine tuning of such models. Some deficiencies of course do
exist; these were alluded to in Chapter 3 in connection with storm surges. One is
the need for proper modeling of wave setup with attendant need for data to verify
this component of water-level anomaly. Another is the need to properly address
the coupling of short- and long-wave dynamics (wave/current interaction), which
is important in nearshore circulation and in the quantification of bottom stress.

Modeling of circulation at estuarine or shelf scale is still a developing field

of research. Here the requirement for adequate measurements of currents in three
dimensions, for verification and tuning of such models, is vastly more demanding
on available resources. The problem is compounded by joint forcing due to
winds, tide/current interaction, and effects of density stratification as controlled
by river input and seaward boundary conditions.
Of all the phenomena that fall in the low-frequency category, tsunamis are
unique in the sense that the forcing is unknown for most events. While the
epicenter of a given event is known, the spatial configuration and amplitude of
the ground motion at the seabed is generally not known. The modeling techniques
are fairly well advanced, including allowance for weak dispersion effects that are
important in long-range propagation from the source to distant coastlines. In
principle, one could use measured response at tide stations to "back out" what the
unknown source characteristics are; this is similar to what geophysicists do in
estimating the structure of the earth's interior from seismic data. Such inverse
methods for recovery of cause from effect demand receiver data that have
minimal contamination by local effects. Unfortunately, nearly all tide station data
(with the exception of benthic pressure gauges) are heavily contaminated
(distorted) by local resonant effects that render inverse methods virtually
meaningless because the available models cannot be that site-specific.
Table 4-1 summarizes the types and objectives of models pertinent to low-
frequency motions, the existing techniques, needs, and example references.
Waves and Wave-Induced Flows

Estimation of nearshore waves is the design information most often needed
for addressing coastal engineering problems. Waves are a primary consideration
for measuring design forces on ocean structures; waves are also the most
important agent for littoral sediment transport and are responsible for driving the
currents in the nearshore. The primary requirement for accurate prediction of
littoral transport and nearshore currents is high-resolution directional wave
information. Adequate input is obtained by directly measuring radiation stress in
shallow areas using a slope array.
The drawback of this approach is that its measurement location is site-
specific, making it costly to obtain information over a


large section of shoreline. As pointed out in Chapter 3, an alternative

approach is to measure or hindcast waves in deep water and to refract the wave
information to shallow-water locations. This approach requires highly accurate
deep-water wave directional information (which we are not presently capable of
measuring or hind-casting) and refraction of the waves to shallow waters using
models that have not been adequately verified. Another approach is to use inverse
techniques of refracting a number of shallow-water wave measurements (not
necessarily with high directional resolution) back out to deep water to determine
the deep-water wave directional spectrum. The distributed shallow-water wave
sensors act as a wave antenna. The completeness of directional information in
deep water increases with the number of shallow-water wave locations. Again,
the inverse technique requires an accurate refraction model. Therefore, to predict
nearshore waves and wave-driven currents, models are required for wave
forecasting and wave refraction and diffraction and for nearshore dynamical
models, as described in the following discussion.
There has been considerable renewed interest in wave forecasting in the last
decade. This interest primarily stems from the requirement for improved
forecasting for offshore oil facilities. Wind/wave prediction was recently
reviewed by Sobey (1986) and an intercomparison of various models was
accomplished by the Sea Wave Modeling Project (SWAMP) (Sea Wave
Modeling Project Group, 1985).
Wave-forecasting models can be divided into three categories: (1) the older
empirical approach (based on dimensional analysis), (2) the modern numerical
discrete spectra, and (3) parametric approaches (both based on the radiative
transfer equation). The numerical models can be further categorized in terms of
how the nonlinear wave/wave interactions are treated. The first-generation
numberical models, evolved in the early 1960s, decouple the wind/sea generation
and propagation of the directional wave spectrum. They do not redistribute
energy nonlinearly within the spectrum. These models are still in use today for
global wave prediction (e.g., the U.S. Navy) because of computational efficiency.
Extensive field measurement of wave growth under carefully selected
uniform fetch-limited wave conditions became available in the late 1960s and
early 1970s (Mitsuyasu, 1969; Hasselman et al., 1973). The analysis of these data
showed the importance of the nonlinear wave/wave interaction to feed energy into
the low-frequency end of the spectrum, rather than direct wind forcing. The
second generation

models evolved to include the nonlinear coupling. The newer generation models
either parametrically redistribute the wind/sea spectral energy and use a discrete
spectral representation for swell components or use a discrete representation for
both the swell and wind/sea. The models were tested for various wind conditions
by SWAMP (1985). It was concluded that the first- and second-generation
models gave significantly different answers in the development of the wind/sea
variances for fetch and duration cases and in the shape of the spectrum.
Deficiencies existed in establishing the nonlinear energy transfer parameters that
largely control the shape and the growth of the wind/sea spectrum. The
deficiencies were particularly evident for extreme conditions of rapidly changing
winds. Under these conditions, the present parameterization contained
insufficient information to describe the wide variety of spectral distributions that
arose (SWAMP, 1985).
A group of international scientists formed the Wave Model Development
and Implementation Group (WAMDI) in response to the SWAMP
recommendations. A third-generation model resulted that integrates the basic
transport equation describing the evolution of the two-dimensional ocean wave
spectrum without additional ad hoc assumptions regarding the spectral shape. The
source functions describing the wind input, nonlinear transfer, and white-capping
dissipation are prescribed explicitly. The only tuning was two parameters in the
dissipation functions set to reproduce the observed fetch-limited growth of the
fully devolved Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum (a spectrum widely employed in
deep-water wave analysis). Improved agreement over the earlier models was
obtained comparing the model output to a variety of North Atlantic and North Sea
storms and Gulf of Mexico hurricanes (WAMDI, 1988).
Shallow-water wave modeling has not received the same attention as deep-
water forecasts but appears to give comparable results. The greatest deficiencies
appear to be in the transition between deep and shallow water, where generation
and refractive effects on the propagation and wave damping are important. A
spectrum (referred to as the TMA Spectrum) has been developed by Bouws et al.
(1985) for this purpose and requires further testing.
Wave Refraction and Diffraction Modeling

As a train of swell waves is propagated into shallow water, the wave speed
changes with varying water depth. Along the crest of a

wave, the part of the wave in deeper water moves faster than the part in shallower
water. As a result, the wave bends to align with the contours, and wave refraction
occurs. Refraction and shoaling due to depth are important for determining the
distribution of wave energy along a coast. Observations indicate that refraction
has significant influence on the erosion and deposition of beach sediments. Wave
trains can also be refracted by ocean currents.
The refraction problem has been modeled using several approaches. Based
on the theoretical formulation, the four commonly used methods are (1) Snell's
law, (2) ray theory, (3) mild-slope elliptic equation, and (4) parabolic equation
approximation.
Snell's law modeling employs classical optical refraction principles and
generally is applied to simple geometries (straight and parallel bottom contours).
Ray theory follows a certain element of the incident wave field (a section of wave
crest for regular waves) as it approaches the shore along a "ray," which is its
trajectory. This method determines the wave height and direction of wave
propagation along the ray in an efficient manner. The drawback in ray models is
their inability to incorporate the diffraction process. The ray models may cross
and cause locally large (infinite) wave heights which are not realistically
attainable. The mild-slope equation is a 2-D approximation to the equation of
motion that can be solved for combined refraction and diffraction. The forward
parabolic approximation method is a fast wave model limited to forward-
propagating waves and does not account for reflection. For steep slopes, an
iterative scheme must be used to solve the parabolic equation. Recently, practical
alternatives for linear wave propagation problems have been developed and
applied to solve the mild-slope equation (Ebersole, 1985; Kirby and Dalrymple,
1983; Liu and Tsay, 1983; Ito and Tanimoto, 1972).
If combined refraction/diffraction is the dominant physical process of wave
propagation and wave transformation, the foregoing mathematical models may
give adequate results for different engineering purposes. Due to the respective
applicability of the models, a series of model verification tests is needed. A
practical problem is specifying the grid spacing in the models. The determination
of appropriate grid scale for bathymetry in refraction models is unsolved and can
be critical to the results.
For simple bathymetries, the wave refraction models have been verified
using detailed laboratory data (Whalin, 1972; Tsay and Liu, 1982). On the other
hand, there has not been an adequate model

verification of wave propagation using field data to date. Given the importance of
wave refraction analysis to coastal engineering projects, this is a major
deficiency.
Breaking Waves
Dynamical wave forcing occurs when there is a change in momentum, which
is primarily due to wave breaking. Wave breaking is identified by foam and
overturning of the wave face. Nearshore breaking is a transient process associated
with shoaling of the waves that results in a steepening and eventual instability of
the wave. Breaking waves are a principal mechanism for the redistribution of
mass and momentum over both the vertical and the horizontal. The kinematics
and dynamics of breaking waves are highly complex and are only crudely
modeled. The exact criteria for the onset of breaking are not understood.
Kinematic instability occurs when the water particle velocities near the crest
exceed the speed of the crest and the wave is observed to break. The influence of
infragravity wave velocities and wave reflection on wave breaking is unknown.
Wave breaking is one of the least understood phenomena (Thornton and Guza,
1986) and is critical to the various dynamical models and wave-force problem.
While substantial progress has been made in understanding the mechanisms that
cause breaking in deep water (Tanaka, 1985; Longuet-Higgins, 1984, 1985), the
theoretical basis for analysis of shallow-water breaking is not well understood.
Wave-breaking processes need to be studied both in the field and laboratory, and
theoretically. In particular, understanding of the processes has been slowed by the
lack of quantitative measurements, particularly in the field.
Wave-Induced Nearshore Currents

Under the action of waves, nearshore currents, including longshore currents,
mass transport, undertow, and rip currents, are formed. These currents are
responsible for the direction and magnitude of the net coastal sediment transport.
As waves refract and shoal and eventually break, there is a change in wave-
induced momentum that must be balanced by a slope in the mean water level or
an increase in the bottom shear stress and concomitant nearshore currents. The
wave-induced momentum is commonly referred to as radiation stress (Longuet-
Higgins and Stewart, 1962); recent advances in

nearshore dynamics are based on this concept. Analytic solutions for longshore
current (Bowen, 1969; Thornton, 1970; Longuet-Higgins, 1970) have established
that the driving force for the longshore current is a component of the radiation
stress tensor, Sxy. On the other hand, rip currents can be produced by longshore
variation in wave setup (owing to variable wave height and resulting normal
radiation stress terms). These earlier nearshore current models were for
monochromatic incident waves over simple topographies.
The nearshore environment is complex. Waves are random and the beach
topography is three-dimensional; a numerical model is necessary for predicting
two-dimensional or three-dimensional nearshore dynamics. Using a finite
difference scheme, Noda (1974) and others developed steady linear nearshore
current models. Including the nonlinear inertial terms and the turbulent mixing
terms, successful modeling results were obtained (Ebersole and Dalrymple, 1979;
Wu and Liu, 1985). The latter model was verified with field data (Wu et al.,
1985) for waves with a narrow spectrum on a beach with nearly parallel bottom
contours. A random wave description using a probabilistic wave height
distribution was used in a longshore current model by Thornton and Guza
(1986), which agreed well with field measurements. All these modeling and
experimental results are for the two-dimensional case, and the secondary
currents, due to the vertical nonuniformity of the wave-induced velocities as
observed in the surf zone and near breaking, are not considered. Due to
imbalances in the momentum fluxes in the vertical and nonuniform flow, a strong
seaward flow (undertow) is generated above the bottom boundary layer. This
undertow appears to exist between the shoreline and the breaker line.
In a recent study on the interaction of the undertow and the boundary layer
flow, Svendsen et al. (1987) proposed a two-layer model in a surf zone. It was
found that field measurements were needed to supply information about the
breaker heights and the empirical parameters for the solution. It appears that
further progress depends on measurements to obtain a better understanding of the
vertical structure of waves and turbulence.
Infragravity Waves
As waves traverse the surf zone, the frequency of the peak shifts to lower
frequency. As the sea-swell waves dissipate due to breaking, the low-frequency
infragravity waves (see Figure 3-1) are amplified.

The infragravity waves are identified as either reflected long waves (surf
beat) or edge waves propagating alongshore. The infragravity waves are
omnipresent. They have been shown to be important for nearshore processes
because of potentially large velocities in the swash area (Guza and Thornton,
1982) and have been hypothesized as the cause of morphological changes
alongshore and of cross-shore bars (e.g., Carter et al., 1973; Holman and Bowen,
1982).
Generation mechanisms proposed could be the result of preferential forcing
offshore by nonlinear wave/wave interaction (Gallagher, 1971), surf-beat forcing
(Longuet-Higgins and Stewart, 1962), generation by time-varying break-point
(Symonds et al., 1982), or through resonant tuning by the bar from a broad-
spectrum offshore forcing (Symonds and Bowen, 1984). Existing models for
infragravity wave generation in the surf zone are not well verified and need to be
developed to incorporate better physics for infragravity wave dissipation. The
interaction of sea-swell waves with infragravity waves in the nearshore needs to
be investigated. Although some generation mechanisms have been proposed and
utilized in initial models, the level of understanding is not well developed and
field measurements are required for model development and verification.
Measurement of longshore variation in setup, radiation stress, and related
morphology is necessary for further development of these models.
Swash Zone
A highly dynamic area is the swash zone, the area where the water edge runs
up and down the beach face. Here the amplitude of the infragravity waves is at a
maximum, the waves finally dissipate, and the bottom is highly variable due to
the energetics of the fluid motion. To model the swash properly, the moving edge
of the water surface running up and down a sloping bottom needs to be included.
Permeability, the internal pressure, and the flow field within the sandy bottom of
the swash zone influence the swash dynamics and are important to the sediment
movement.
Sediment Transport
Mathematical modeling of sediment transport has progressed significantly
over the past decade, but basic theoretical and modeling questions still remain.
Predictive mathematical models for sediment transport are in routine operational
use; however, lack of

verification over a broad range of conditions makes their predictions

questionable. Coastal engineers need improved models of nearshore sediment
transport to perform engineering tasks effectively and to bring this aspect of their
discipline up to the level attained by our understanding of other processes
(surface gravity waves, infragravity waves).
Major field experiments have been directed at improvement of our
knowledge of sediment transport (NSTS*, C2S2**, for instance), yet we still are
not able to predict this transport with sufficient accuracy to meet many
engineering needs. This difficulty arises from the interaction of the driving forces
(waves, currents) with the sediment that they are moving. Once the sediment
moves and achieves a new form (profile, roughness), this affects the driving
forces, changing their characteristics and thus changing the equilibrium form of
the sediment. This feedback makes modeling difficult. Further complications
arise because of the nonlinear terms in the sediment and fluid flow equations. For
instance, in shallow water, bottom friction plays an important role in the
momentum balance. The form of the bottom friction term is nonlinear; that is,
friction is not linearly related to velocity. In addition to velocity, bottom friction
is related to the grain size of the bed, to the roughness of the bed, to the
interaction of steady or quasi-steady currents with waves, and to their relative
directions. Although models have been developed to account for some of these
nonlinear effects (e.g., Smith, 1977; Grant and Madsen, 1979, 1982), these
models assume the nonlinear interaction of a linear wave and a current. In shallow
water, waves themselves become nonlinear, creating a nonlinear interaction
between a nonlinear wave and a current. No adequate models for these effects
have yet been developed. In summary, the prediction of sediment transport in
shallow water is complicated by
• interaction of the sediment with the driving forces,

• the mobility of the bed (it is not stationary),
• the nonlinear character of waves in shallow water,
• lack of understanding of turbulent momentum balances in shallow
water, and
• lack of incorporation of cohesion or biological binding effects.
* National Sediment Transport Study.

** Canadian Coastal Sediment Study.
In spite of these limitations, progress has been made in modeling sediment

transport in the nearshore zone. Some of these models are described below.
Sediment Entrainment
Sediment resting on the bed must be entrained by the fluid before being
transported. The entrainment potential can be represented as a critical shear stress
at the bed required before the sediment leaves the bed. Alternatively, this
entrainment quantity can be nondimensionalized as a critical criterion for the
threshold of initiating transport. The threshold function depends on grain size,
grain size distribution (whether unimodal or multimodal), biological activity
(organisms can be either stabilizing or destabilizing), and cohesion (both
mineralogical and other chemical effects).
Previous work on sediment entrainment has been mostly empirical (e.g.,
Madsen and Grant, 1976; Komar and Miller, 1975, 1973; and Inman et al.,
1976). The latter investigators all assumed sediment of uniform grain size,
although some discussion of mixtures of grain sizes has been included in the
literature (e.g., Kamphuis, 1975; Madsen and Grant, 1975, 1976). Little
comprehensive treatment of nonuniform grain sizes has been available for
oscillatory flows. Finally, some recent work has expanded on the role of
biological effects and cohesion on sediment entrainment (Jumars and Nowell,
1984; Nowell et al., 1981).
Near-Bed Sediment Transport

Near-bed (or bed-load) transport occurs near the bottom and incorporates as a
dynamically important element grain-to-grain contact and collisions for its
sustenance. Since the precise definition of bed-load transport has been debated,
we refer instead to near-bed transport where grain-to-grain interactions are
important dynamically. Available models for near-bed transport take many
forms. Although it is not possible to review all models of transport, some are
summarized briefly here. These models all suffer from lack of inclusion of
adequate physics of near-bed turbulence, the interaction of waves and currents,
and field verification. Major steps forward in this modeling require improved
understanding of momentum exchanges within the thin (order of 10 cm) wave
boundary layer (the layer

closest to the bottom, which is stationary at the bed and moving at approximately
the wave-driven flow at the top).
Near-bed transport equations come in many different forms. Near-bed
transport integrated in the cross-shore direction is exemplified by the commonly
used equations to predict total longshore sediment transport under wave-induced
currents. Here, quasi-empirical and often dimensionally incorrect equations are
derived to represent the integrated transport across the surf zone. The most
commonly used of these is the CERC longshore transport equation (COE, 1984),
as well as those of Komar and Inman (1971) and others. These integrated forms
rely heavily on field observations to set one or more coefficients. In practice, the
U.S. Army Corps Districts modify these coefficients, which are intended to be
universal, to match some subjective input, such as position of a nodal point in
longshore transport or total transport trapped in a tidal inlet.
A second popular approach to sediment transport has been the energetics
approach (Bagnold, 1963; Inman and Bagnold, 1963; Bailard, 1981). These
models assume that a fraction of the dissipated wave energy is available to move
sediment. By setting the fraction of dissipated energy involved in sediment
transport, one can calculate the total transport. As shown by Aubrey (1978) and
others, incorporation of a nonlinear wave or a steady current can result in net
sediment transport (instead of just oscillatory, zero-net transport under a linear
wave).
A third type of approach to sediment transport has been to relate various
sediment parameters to the driving forces, using empirical relationships. Popular
are those relating transport rate to the threshold parameter (Meyer-Peter and
Muller, 1948; Ackers and White, 1973). These methods have been tested in a
variety of field settings, against themselves and against other transport
formulations. Although the authors commonly reach conclusions about the
advantages of one particular method, field data generally are inadequate to draw
true conclusions. CERC uses the Ackers and White formulation for much of their
sediment transport calculations (e.g., Vermulakonda et al., 1985), in spite of lack
of good field or laboratory evidence supporting its use in oscillatory flow.
A fourth method used to calculate near-bed transport is the probabilistic
method derived by Brown (1950) and Einstein (1972) for steady flows. Madsen
and Grant (1976) expanded this work to include oscillatory flow. Although just as
well tested perhaps as other

methods, few models use the probabilistic approach of Einstein and Brown.
Suspended Sediment Transport

The debate about the relative importance of near-bed versus suspended-load
transport in the nearshore zone continues unabated. Field data are only now
beginning to quantify the importance of suspended-load transport, although lack
of concurrent measurements of near-bed transport make it difficult to examine
relative quantities of near-bed versus suspended load. As with all sediment-
transport models, various approaches have been applied to examine suspended-
load transport. The basic concept behind much of the modeling is that fluid
turbulence is required to keep sediment in suspension; the primary force acting to
remove sediment from suspension is gravity. Whereas in near-bed transport
grain-to-grain interactions are important, for suspended load, fluid/grain
interactions predominate. Models differ in how they represent mathematically the
turbulence or maintenance forces.
A heuristic model of suspended-load transport was derived by Dean (1973)
to examine suspended sediments in the surf zone. More complicated models
involving turbulence explicitly have been proposed by a large number of
investigators (Beach and Sternberg, 1988; Grant and Madsen, 1979; Glenn, 1983;
Smith, 1977; Soulsby, 1988). These models use eddy diffusion to represent the
turbulence that maintains the sediment in suspension. More complicated models
incorporate different representations of turbulence. Prime among these are the
so-called higher-order closure models, where turbulence production is calculated
(e.g., Mellor and Yamada, 1974; Adams and Weatherly, 1981; Sheng, 1982).
Computational complexity increases with the higher order closure models. So
far, too little data have been collected to evaluate these models adequately,
particularly for shallow-water, nonlinear wave conditions. Most application and
evaluation has taken place on midcontinental shelf areas or in estuaries.
Another common method for modeling suspended-sediment transport is
based on observations. Some representation of the driving force is related
empirically to observed sediment concentrations. These measurements are always
time-integrated, because of the difficulty some researchers have in sampling
rapidly enough. Examples of these methods include Inman et al. (1980) and
Kraus et al. (1988).

Beach Morphology
Prediction of the morphology of a beach under given conditions, and of
changes in that morphology as driving forces change, has been a major activity of
nearshore researchers because of its importance to coastal engineering. For
designing structures in the nearshore, evaluating potential for amphibious
landings, or designing beach restoration projects, the behavior of the beach
profile is critical. This long history of interest has resulted in a variety of
approaches to profile prediction, some of which are well-tested under limited
conditions.
The initial work on beach morphology was empirical (Bascom, 1951;
Aubrey, 1978, 1979; Birkemeier, 1985), relating changes in profiles to some
aspect of the driving force. Wright et al. (1985) describes the changes in the
general shape of a beach in response to the driving force. Closely related to this
empirical modeling is inferential modeling, where hydrodynamic patterns are
related loosely to possible profile configurations. An example of inferential
modeling is an article by Holman and Bowen (1982) that relates theoretical
interference patterns of surface gravity and infragravity waves to possible
shoreline configurations.
Energetics models of beach configuration have been developed based on the
initial work of Bagnold and coworkers (Bagnold, 1963; Inman and Bagnold,
1963). These later models (e.g., Aubrey, 1978; Bowen, 1980; Bailard, 1981)
relate the equilibrium slope to a potential transport of sediment related to the
driving forces by an energetics argument
Other models of beach planform change have incorporated a variety of
assumptions. Early analytical models were derived by Pelnard-Considere (1956)
and later discussed for more general situations by Larson et al. (1987). Dean
(1977) has derived a model that has been expanded (Perlin and Dean, 1983) to
enable prediction of shoreline changes out to various depths, based on an
equilibrium profile concept. Swart (1974, 1977) has derived extensive models for
profile response under varying wave conditions based on observations in the
North Sea. CERC recently has implemented its own shoreline response model
based on a number of these previous studies (e.g., Perlin and Dean, 1983).
Sunamura and Horikawa (1974), Watanabe (1982), Kraus and Harikai (1983),
and Nishimura and Sunamura (1987) propose different models of beach
morphology change.

Bed Forms
Bed forms are responsible for much of the transport of sediment in the inner
continental shelf-nearshore zone, and as such might be incorporated in the earlier
section on near-bed transport. However, bed forms are important contributors to
the momentum balance of nearshore circulation, so they deserve an independent
mention. Bed forms are the response of a deformable sand bed to hydrodynamic
shear stresses applied at the surface of that bed. Rarely is a bed perfectly flat;
instead it will have some scale of structure superimposed on it. Prediction of
these bed forms, and how they respond to different wave and current forcing, is
essential for predicting circulation and sediment transport in the nearshore zone.
Bed-form prediction schemes are largely empirical in nature and have
addressed both steady and oscillatory flows. Early work includes that of Southard
(1971), Clifton (1976), Komar (1974), and Rubin and McCulloch (1979). Later
work used a threshold-of-transport representation to examine stable conditions
for the existence of bed forms. Included in this work is that of and Miller and
Komar (1980), Greenwood and Sherman (1984), and Dingler and Inman (1976).
Finally, dimensional analysis has been applied to bed-form prediction to obtain
stability criteria. Included in this aspect is work by Dingler and Inman (1976) and
Yalin (1977), among others. Dynamical models for bed forms are sorely lacking.
Existing bed-form models are useful for limited scales of bed forms (ripples,
dunes, and sand waves). Some of the largest-scale bed forms are poorly predicted
(large sand waves or sandbanks, submarine bars), leaving a large gap in the
ability of coastal engineers to make accurate calculations in certain
environments.
Bed-form prediction ability also is weak in combined steady and oscillatory
flows. The effects of combined waves and currents of various relative magnitudes
and directions on bed forms have yet to be modeled theoretically or observed
adequately in the field.
MODELING FORCES ON STRUCTURES

The state of the art in modeling of wave forces on offshore commercial
platforms is a highly developed technology. A review of the literature with
respect to wave forces on fixed tubular members and submerged tanks of
dimensions comparable to the wave length is given by Dean and Dalrymple
(1984). Both deterministic

and stochastic spectral methodologies exist for estimation of wave loading. The
newer technology addresses nonlinear coupled models of wave/structure
interaction for compliant structures in deep water and floating tethered structures
(e.g., Crandall, 1985; Jeffreys and Patel, 1982; Basu, 1983; Niedzwecki and
Sandt, 1986).
In striking contrast, the design of breakwaters, jetties, and groins is based
largely on highly empirical methods and past experience (CERC, 1984). The
internal fluid/solid and solid/solid dynamic stresses created by large waves
striking and possibly overtopping such structures is poorly understood. At
present there is no capability for measuring and modeling the internal dynamics
of rubble-mound structures.

DATA 87
5
Data
Any measurement program produces data. However, several important

aspects of collection are necessary to make such data useful. These include
calibration and standards, quality control, data processing, analysis, and
archiving. In some cases there are quite formal programs for these procedures—
for example, routine weather observations and ocean hydrographic data. These
data, in most cases, are handled in a prescribed manner from the time they are
collected until they are archived. The sensors must meet some established
calibration and standard; quality control procedures are specified; the data are
transmitted to the operational centers in a prescribed format, and finally they are
archived in a specific way. Those who need the information can usually obtain it
in a standard format. This is not the case for coastal engineering data.
The data requirements for coastal engineering research and design efforts are
diverse. A partial list of quantities of interest is shown in Table 5-1.
A variety of sensors and instrumentation is required to make these
measurements. Some are relatively standardized, such as a tide gauge, for which
there are formal calibration procedures and standards, and the data are handed to
the archiving center in a prescribed way. However, for other measurements, there
are a variety of competing sensors and virtually no calibration or standards;
quality control is highly variable. In many cases, the data are collected

DATA 88
and analyzed by an investigator or agency and the only place the data may be
seen, before they are archived in a file cabinet, is in a publication. This lack of
standards for archived data has an impact on the usefulness and validity of
coastal engineering data, which are typically expensive to obtain.
TABLE 5-1 Quantities of Interest in Coastal Engineering
Measurement Units
Deep-water wave height and direction m, degrees
Shallow-water wave height and direction m, degrees
Current speed and direction cm/sec, degrees
Bottom friction dynes/cm2
Wave forces dynes
Beach profiles m
Suspended sediments gm/cm3
Sediment transport gm/sec
Bed-load transport gm/sec
Sea level m
Wind speed and direction m/sec, degrees
Water temperature and salinity T°C, S ppt
Breaker zone and type no units
QUALITY CONTROL
Quality control is fundamental to good science and engineering. Poor data
can lead to wrong conclusions and bad designs. If the data are to be used in a
model simulation, poor quality data may lead to bad model output. However,
quality control is particularly difficult with some of the measurements needed by
coastal engineers. First, there may be no accepted calibration procedures or
standards. In many cases, the instrument is a one-of-a-kind creation; in other
cases, there are no calibration facilities where the conditions of the coastal zone
can be simulated. For example, it is well established that impeller current meters
provide different readings in oscillating flows than in steady flows. In a wave
field such as the surf zone,

DATA 89
impeller current meters would not be a good choice for measuring currents.
However, even if a suitable impeller meter were found, it would be difficult to
establish calibration standards and facilities. Even the electromagnetic current
meter, which is commonly used for nearshore measurements in wave fields for
many applications, is only calibrated routinely for zero velocity by placing it in a
container of still water.
All observations contain errors. These can usually be attributed to one or
more of several factors, e.g., sensor response or calibration, telemetry, recording,
processing, or archiving. For a discussion of quality control, the data can be
divided into two categories, (1) operational data and (2) research data.
Operational data are collected on a routine and continuing basis by engineers
to meet their requirements. Examples are winds, waves, and water level at a
particular location to support the design requirements for a structure. These data
are normally collected with standard off-the-shelf instrumentation that has been
designed specifically for that application, such as cup anemometers, pressure
wave gauges, and float tide gauges. The operating principles, calibration,
standards, and data from these instruments are quite well understood.
Government agencies use these instruments routinely to meet their responsibility
for environmental monitoring.
Research data, on the other hand, are collected on a very different basis. In
this case, the instruments are frequently one-of-a-kind, or, at most, a small
production run designed for a special purpose. A hypothetical example would be
an instrument designed to measure the boundary friction at a particular site for a
short period of time. Normally, only the investigator who owns, and may have
built, the instrument is experienced in its use.
No widely accepted standards or calibration facilities exist for such
instruments, and the data are frequently unique and require special processing and
archiving. These data are generally considered to belong to the investigator who
collected the data until such time as the results of the investigation are published.
Quite different quality control is exercised on these two classes of data. For
operational data, there are standardized procedures from the time the data are
collected until they are archived. For research data there may be no standard
quality control procedure and the data may never be formally archived.
The committee has concluded that there is an urgent need to

DATA 90
introduce quality control in coastal engineering measurements, but how this can
be accomplished is not clear.
Capabilities for Quality Control

Quality control requires good instrumentation, careful calibration of all
components of the system from sensor to recorder, careful data handling, and
finally, archiving. Quality control is a procedure that is exercised at each step
along the way to include experimental design, sensor selection, sensor
calibration, telemetry, recording, processing, and archiving.
The evolution of digital electronics, sensor technology, telemetry, and
recording systems has enhanced our capability to exercise quality control, in
some cases in a highly automated fashion. At the same time, these and other
recent technical advances generate data at a much greater volume, making the
quality control problem comparably larger. Unfortunately, in coastal engineering
the measurement requirements are so diverse and difficult that formalized
quality-control procedures are not prevalent. The ultimate use of much data is as
an input to a model. As computer technology has progressed the models have
become more and more demanding of data, not only in quality but also in
quantity. In many cases model requirements for quality-controlled data cannot be
satisfied.
In general, the techniques are available to provide the necessary quality
control, but this capability is not being used with respect to coastal engineering
data. Part of the reason for this is that the data are often collected by individuals
who have only a limited objective in mind for the data. Additionally, the
measurement environment is detrimental to instruments, and maintenance is
difficult and costly, particularly for long-term measurements. Coastal engineering
measurements are often site-specific, and their application to other problems is
limited. Finally, the lack of a comprehensive archiving procedure for coastal
engineering places no pressure on the investigators to exercise strong quality
control measures.
Quality Control Needs

There is a need to establish formal quality control procedures for many
coastal engineering measurements. This will require agreement on the
measurements, calibration and standards, recording, processing, and data
archiving. This has not been done in the past

DATA 91
for a variety of reasons. The Corps of Engineers has recently begun to develop
procedures for their coastal wave measurement program. However, there are
many other types of coastal engineering data for which no quality control
procedures have been established.
The following needs are identified:
• Comprehensive data bases are required to solve many coastal

engineering problems. They may be comprehensive in that a variety of
measurements is collected simultaneously, or in that the measurements
are collected over a wide geographical region continuously. There is a
need to develop a comprehensive historical quality-controlled data base
to support engineering design and modeling.
• There is a need to improve real-time acquisition and quality control of
coastal engineering data.
• Quality, quantity, and timeliness of the data entering the data base should
be improved.
• Support is needed for development of quality-control procedures and the
necessary tools and procedures to deal with coastal engineering data as
part of coordinated long-term research planning.
• Calibration standards and methods should be established for as many
coastal engineering measurements as possible; wave data should be
given first priority.
• Provisions should be made for real-time access to coastal engineering
data by a variety of users.
• Procedures should be developed for identifying coastal engineering
data appropriate for archiving and for entering new data into the system
conveniently. Appropriate quality control must be applied to both of
these functions.
• Efforts should be made to acquire good data bases from other countries.
STANDARDS AND CALIBRATION

Standards and calibration are fundamental to scientific data collection.
Unfortunately, in the high-energy, shallow-water coastal zone, there are often no
suitable standards or calibration facilities for a particular sensor. Tide gauges,
pressure sensors, current meters, and temperature and salinity instruments are
examples where standards and calibration facilities exist. However, for many
other quantities such as sediment concentration, turbulence, radiation stress, and
bed load, none exist. In these cases, the only ''standard'' may

DATA 92
be that the measurements are taken by other systems, or that they satisfy theory,
or are repeatable.
Unfortunately, in many cases, little or no thought is given to standards and
calibration of coastal engineering measurements. To be sure, it is a difficult
problem, but unless it is addressed, the risk of costly mistakes will remain high.
DATA ASSIMILATION AND SYNTHESIS

As emphasized at the beginning of this section, the product of a
measurement system should be (1) a set of data, along with an assessment of its
accuracy; (2) controls for the quality of data; and (3) the data-base management
for their and use in engineering applications. The initial motivation for collecting
some of the data may be for special engineering or research goals; other data may
be part of an ongoing program for acquisition of certain standard measurements
to build knowledge of the coastal oceanic and atmospheric climate. The types of
data and their accuracy can vary greatly. Much data will be from direct in situ
measurements in the water column; some may be indirect measurements made by
remote techniques. This report has identified a number of such indirect
measurements made by remote techniques, including those using acoustics (e.g.,
Doppler and tomographic methods) and electromagnetic sensing via satellites or
aircraft (e.g., laser, infrared imagery, drogue tracking, or radio altimetry). The
kinds of information inferred from these remote-sensing systems include
elevation of the sea surface or seabed relative to the sensor, sea surface
temperature, and currents.
The in situ direct measurements from fixed sensors can give added
information on currents, pressure, and other properties within the water column,
at sampling rates that are limited only by the inherent time constant of the sensor
and of the recording and/or telemetry system. When recorded at suitable sampling
rates at a single location, pressure or sea surface elevation data can quantify
surface waves (but not their direction), tsunamis, tides, and storm surges.
Similarly, the sensing of fluid velocity at given rates, and with given spatial
resolution, determines its usefulness to studies of circulation, wave kinematics, or
turbulence.
It should be noted that there are a number of data types for quantifying
waves and currents over a wide spectrum of frequencies and for inferring
information about sediment transport, erosion, and

DATA 93
deposition in the coastal zone. Each type of measurement has inherent error
bounds that depend on sensor type, the energy level of a given event, and the
frequency spectrum of the event. A great range exists in the spatial and temporal
resolution of measurements and, in many cases, there is a trade-off between
accuracy and resolution (either spatial or temporal).
Faced with this variety of measurement data, which portrays different
things, at different times, in different places, and with different accuracy and
resolution, how can one synthesize at least portions of this data base so as to give a
description of coastal zone dynamics more meaningful than that derived from any
individual set of measurements? One answer is to use models that relate the
different variables in a physically acceptable manner. For data that are not
synoptic, and especially for data taken to quantify small-scale and/or high-
frequency processes like turbulence, the synthesis is largely a matter of the
contribution by these data to the proper representation of processes that cannot be
resolved adequately in predictive models, such as bed stress and sediment
dynamics. The committee sees this approach as an iterative tuning process
between model adequacy and data adequacy.
The foregoing interactive synthesis for model development was discussed
throughout Chapters 3 and 4. The kind of data synthesis that was not highlighted
in those chapters relates to the problem of combining different types of data in a
more direct diagnostic manner, so as to give a description of a synoptic field.
Examples include synthesis of wind field or water circulation in the nearshore
zone, thereby providing better spatial resolution and suppressing individual
measurement errors. An example of this synthetic approach was pointed out to
the committee by Richard Seymour (personal communication). His example
pertains to the problem of estimating wind fields in the nearshore zone where data
are not generally available from the National Weather Service (NWS) of NOAA.
Such information can be important in nearshore generation of surface waves and
surges. Basically, the methodology is the following:
Suppose some auxiliary measurements of wind velocity are made in the

nearshore zone to supplement those made at land stations and those from
offshore meteorological buoys and ships at sea. It is well known that wind
velocity and sea-level atmospheric pressure gradients are related in a
deterministic manner and hence, the assimilation of the additional nearshore
wind velocity measurements with the barometric pressure and wind information
available from NWS can

DATA 94
yield a blended description of the wind field in the nearshore zone, which is an
improvement on that deduced from the NWS data alone.
Another example is related to nearshore circulation (low-frequency

horizontal flow of water, but outside of the zone where rip currents are active). If
one adopts the hypothesis that the flow is quasi-steady, then the circulation field
can be represented in terms of a stream function (the analog of pressure in the
case of the wind field). It is then possible to combine all the data on low-
frequency horizontal current measurements (for a reasonably synoptic period) to
estimate the stream-function and therefore the circulation. The data may include
direct in situ measurements from fixed current meters at a few locations,
Lagrangian drifted data, and sea-level and satellite-derived imagery of surface
temperatures—all of which are related to the stream-function. The methodology,
when carried out objectively, requires representation of the unknown stream-
function. Specific examples of the technique as applied to oceanographic
measoscale eddies are given in Vastano and Reid (1985) and McWilliams et al.
(1986).
Other examples could be given that involve more complex techniques of
information theory and objective analysis, which are beyond the scope of this
report. It suffices to conclude this section by citing the principle that the whole
can often be better than the sum of the parts, provided that the parts are
compatible with an appropriate diagnostic or prognostic model. Thus we return to
a theme inherent in the text of this report: Both models and data are essential
elements of a coastal engineering measurement system.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 95
6
Conclusions and Recommendations
The Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems conducted

this study with three objectives in mind: (1) to assess the needs for coastal data,
(2) to determine the availability and suitability of instrumentation to meet these
needs, and (3) to provide recommendations regarding specific development of
coastal instruments and measurement systems. Because the modeling function
has a fundamental role in analyzing and forecasting coastal changes, the
committee was requested also to assess how the capability and practice of
modeling of processes in the high-energy coastal waters influence the
development of measurement systems. The committee was also responsible for
providing guidance on measurement development priorities.
The committee agreed that there is a pressing need for development of
instruments and measurement systems. There is a need for a commitment at the
national level to stimulate and coordinate development of measurement systems
and techniques. Presently, those who use instrumentation and measurement
systems—both scientists and engineers—are few in number and operate at such
limited funding that industry interest in developmental technology is also slight.
Yet the benefits that might accrue from more timely and accurate data can be of
major value to national, state, and local coastal management interests. These
interests are just beginning to be influenced by recent changes in public law that
place major responsibility

on local government to finance coastal works, which put increasing emphasis on

the validity of the environmental impact estimates for coastal development and
have extended the federal government's economic involvement in coastal
erosion.
A federal laboratory with extramural funding capability could serve the
purpose of coordination and support for a national program. The committee
recognized that, at present, development of instruments and measurement
systems is carried out on a small scale and is usually driven by individual
research needs. Therefore, availability and suitability of existing systems is often
unknown to much of the potential user community. Thus, a need exists for a forum
to provide information, collaboration, interaction, and coordination on
measurement systems development.
The committee agreed to 19 recommendations regarding specific
development of coastal instruments and measurement systems. The committee
used the procedure schematically represented in Figure 6-1, and
recommendations were derived from a conclusion reached by a consensus of its
members. Each committee member ranked these recommendations and prioritized
them as high, medium, and low, based upon their perception of the need and
expected benefits to be gained in solving coastal engineering challenges from a
national perspective. These individual priorities were integrated to arrive at a
consensus prioritization, accepted by the entire committee.
Of the 19 committee recommendations, 4 were ranked as having high
priority. Of the remaining 15 recommendations, 5 were ranked high-to-medium, 9
were ranked medium, and 1 was ranked medium-to-low priority. It is the
committee's feeling that the 4 high-priority recommendations need to be
supported at the national level in the immediate future. The 5 recommendations
ranked high-to-medium are also regarded as essential to coastal engineering
advancement for the rest of this century. The remaining recommendation,
categorized as being medium-to-low priority, is important but applies to more
limited areas of the coast.
The four sections that follow present the prioritized recommendations of the
committee. Each recommendation is preceded by the specific related conclusion
reached by the committee.
HIGH-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION: Wave direction measurement techniques, either for

Figure 6-1
Analytical process for development of conclusions and recommendations.


About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original
typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained,
deep or shallow water, do not provide the necessary resolution for accurate
prediction of littoral processes.
and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that both in situ and remote-sensing

systems, including radar and acoustic techniques, be explored and developed.
CONCLUSION: There is a need for a U.S. coastal observation data base on

height, period, and direction of ocean waves.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that a permanent national system be

established for the measurement and timely dissemination of nearshore wave data
to include height, period, and direction.
CONCLUSION: Sediment-transport modeling (conceptual and

mathematical) in the nearshore zone is largely empirical and poorly verified.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that programmatic emphasis be

placed on theoretical improvement and rigorous field testing (in an interactive
fashion) of existing sediment-transport models, while more physically based
models are derived and field-tested.
CONCLUSION: There is no existing capability to reliably measure high-

concentration sediment motions, especially within the region immediately above
the mobile bed.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that high-resolution sediment

transport measurement systems be developed for use in high-energy wave
environments such as the surf zone and tidal inlets.
HIGH-TO-MEDIUM-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION: There is a need for the development of both measurement
and modeling capability for understanding the internal dynamics of rubble-mound
structures.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that mathematical modeling efforts be

undertaken in combination with in situ measurements on the dynamics of rubble-
mound structures.


CONCLUSION: Mechanics of breakwater failures are poorly understood

because of the unknown nature of the deformations and displacements of pieces
of material in rubble-mound structures.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that simultaneous measurements of

pore pressures in breakwater cross-sections be recorded during storms.
Pressure-measuring devices of adequate sensitivity are available, but means of
deployment, protection, and transportation of data to safe off-site observation
stations need development.
CONCLUSION: More and better data are needed on wave setup during
storm events.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that measurements of wave forcing

and sea-level response be made during storm events to quantify wave setup.
CONCLUSION: Improved understanding and prediction of fluid turbulence

is essential to improve prediction of coastal flows and sediment transport.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that significant effort be directed

toward developing instrumentation for measuring turbulence in the demanding
nearshore environment. Concurrently, turbulence modeling must be extended to
enhance prediction of turbulence under conditions of waves, currents, and a
movable bed.
CONCLUSION: Adequate current data are needed for verification and

further development of two-dimensional and three-dimensional limited-area
circulation models.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that development of low-cost current

meters and associated telemetry or recording systems be undertaken to provide a
feasible means of obtaining data vital to the verification and further development
of two- and three-dimensional hydrodynamic models in the coastal region.
MEDIUM-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION: There is a need for improved three-dimensional models of
nearshore currents.


RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that an improved three-dimensional

nearshore current model, including improved description of breaking waves and
swash, be developed for complex bathymetry, and that the necessary three-
dimensional field data be acquired to verify the model.
CONCLUSION: Quantification of tide and storm-surge phenomena requires

measurement of currents in tidal inlets to supplement information on water
levels.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that efforts be made to develop

reliable current meters, which can be deployed during either normal or storm
events, for measuring low-frequency currents in tidal inlets. The use of acoustic-
Doppler profilers, tomography, or electromagnetic methods for monitoring
volume transport in channels and inlets needs to be explored.
CONCLUSION: Existing storm-surge models that allow for overland

flooding of tidal flats and upland vegetated areas are based on ad hoc
methodology. Adequate field data do not exist to calibrate storm surge models.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that further development of storm-

surge models be directed at improving the physical basis and numerical
implementation for overland flooding. A program of field measurement should be
conducted to provide data sets for calibration and verification.
CONCLUSION: There is currently no well-tested proven capability to

measure, or to estimate accurately, boundary shear stress beneath combined
waves and currents in shallow water.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that acoustic travel time, acoustic-

Doppler velocimeter, or laser-Doppler velocimeter techniques be improved so
that adequate velocity profiles can be obtained in energetic rapidly varying flow
fields. Alternative technology (optical methods, hot-film), which may provide
estimates of boundary shear stress under a broader spectrum of environmental
conditions, should be pursued.
CONCLUSION: Measurement of small-scale (centimeter to decimeter)

changes in bed topography are needed for understanding local scour around
structures and bottom roughness.


RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that nonintrusive (remote) techniques

be developed to measure local scour and bed forms under a variety of wave
conditions, including storm events. Higher resolution side-scan sonars, buried

differential pressure sensors, and other acoustic, optical, and laser techniques
should be explored for this application.
CONCLUSION: There is currently a capability to measure bathymetry

across the coast under low-to-moderate wave conditions. Present techniques for
measuring bathymetry across the coast cannot be used under high storm-wave
conditions.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that technologies for measuring

nearshore bathymetry be improved to allow measurements under higher wave
conditions. Development efforts should evaluate both remote-sensing methods
and in situ optical and acoustic technologies for estimating beach profile changes
over a full range of oceanic conditions.
CONCLUSION: There is a need for development and field verification of an

improved operational model for refraction/diffraction.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that an efficient, computationally fast,

operational numerical model for refraction/diffraction be developed for the
general case of complex bathymetry.
CONCLUSION: Specially dense measurement of wave-radiation stress

(wave momentum) is needed in shallow coastal water to provide long-term,
reliable, accurate data for predicting littoral processes.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that slope arrays be improved to

lower costs, by making them more compact or by utilizing self-recording or
telemetry to eliminate shore cables. Other techniques should also be pursued,
such as combined pressure sensor and velocity meters (PUV) and shore-based
radars.
CONCLUSION: Coupled short-wave/long-wave models are needed to

increase predictability of complex nearshore flow fields, particularly around tidal
inlets. Improvement must be made in the physical understanding of nonlinear
wave/current interaction and wave interaction with the bottom. Detailed velocity
measurements in the field are required to provide data sets to validate these
models.


RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that existing short-wave/long-wave

coupled models incorporate more complete physics. Particular emphasis should
be placed on modeling complex fluid/bottom interactions near tidal inlets.

Measurement programs should be initiated to provide wave height and
measurements in sufficient detail to test these models.
MEDIUM-TO-LOW-PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION: Quantification of tsunami models, coastal tide models, and
shelf circulation models requires deep water pressure gauge measurements at
Pacific locations, seaward of the continental slope.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the benthic pressure

measurement program be expanded to include a West Coast array.
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
In the previous sections of this report we have identified several unsolved
problems in coastal engineering. These problems exist due in part to our limited
understanding of some of the processes important in coastal engineering. Our
understanding is limited in some cases because of the measurement difficulties
that are encountered in the coastal zone. This is indeed a difficult measurement
environment, with a wide range of space and time scales to be resolved. High
data rates are needed to resolve the short-period processes, and long recording
times are needed to resolve the long-period processes. Since many of the
processes of interest are two- or three-dimensional, the simultaneous operation of
several sensors is also necessary.
Often, measurements are needed in remote locations where instrumentation
systems must operate in an automatic mode. Until recently data had to be
telemetered from a sensor to a recording site via cable through the surf zone. It
was difficult to get long-term measurements because of cable failures, even
though experience with West Coast wave measurements has shown that properly
designed cables can survive many years. Recent advances in telemetry and data
acquisition systems have overcome some of these problems.
Measurements are most needed under high-energy conditions and close to
the interfaces (sea surface, bottom, and structure). Remote-sensing techniques
using radar and acoustic techniques may

provide some means to improve such measurements. Many of the processes of

interest are subject to numerical modeling, but in many cases the data needed to
specify initial and forcing conditions have been lacking. Many of the processes of
interest are nonlinear and interactive and require relatively complex physics in
simulation models. Advances in computer technology and modeling make it
feasible to model some of these processes if the data requirements for the models
can be satisfied.
In summary, recent developments in sensor technology, data telemetry,
recording systems, and computers offer promise of significant advances in the
resolution of coastal engineering problems in the next decade.


APPENDIX: SURVEY FINDINGS 3

Appendix: Survey Findings

The following findings stated below summarize the responses received from
a survey of 24 scientists and engineers in the United States, Canada, and Europe
who are engaged in activities covering all aspects of coastal measurements
discussed in this report.
1. Coastal Engineers need to improve the spatial and temporal

characteristics of their measurement programs. This should include,
but not be limited to, better area coverage and longer term
monitoring programs, as well as measurements under specific
conditions. These efforts are inhibited by:
• the high cost of equipment and logistics,

• the reliability of available equipment, and
• the available technology.
2. Remote sensing from land-based, airborne, and satellite systems

holds promise for meeting certain coastal engineering requirements.
However, there is no concerted effort to apply this technology to
coastal engineering problems.
3. Coastal engineers have a better understanding of noncohesive
sediment processes than cohesive sediment processes. Additional
research needs to be directed toward cohesive sediment processes.

APPENDIX: SURVEY FINDINGS 106
4. Longshore and cross-shore sediment-transport processes are poorly

understood. Direct rather than indirect measurement techniques are
needed. Acoustic and laser technologies appear to hold promise, but
need further development, testing, and evaluation.
5. High-resolution, deep-water, directional wave spectra measurements
are required to support a number of coastal engineering
requirements. These are not possible on a routine basis with available
technology. Technological development is needed.
6. Coastal engineers have almost no measurements of important
processes in the surf zone under storm conditions. This is an
essential requirement that demands significant research and
development.
7. Coastal engineers can predict the environmental impact of coastal
structures only under a few conditions. Beach replenishment and
restoration are poorly understood. Little hard data are available, and
recordkeeping is poor.
8. In recent years process-oriented experiments have improved our
knowledge of important coastal processes (C2S2, NSTS, DUCK,
SUPERDUCK). More emphasis needs to be placed on process-
oriented experiments in various locations under various conditions.
9. More measurements of these coastal processes are needed:
• mean currents under wave conditions,

• wave-induced apparent stress,
• turbulent stress,
• wave trough vs. wave crest, and
• longer term series.
10. Several other countries are active in coastal engineering research.

Some are actively considering the issues of coastal engineering
measurement requirements (Canada and the United Kingdom).
Efforts should be increased to foster the exchange of information.
11. Many coastal processes are poorly understood. Engineers and
scientists need to work together to resolve important needs.

REFERENCES 107
References
Ackers, P., and W.R. White, 1973. Sediment transport: new approach and analysis. Proc. Am. Soc.
Civil Eng., J. Hydraul. Div., v. 99, p. 2041-2060.
Adams, C.E., Jr., and G.L. Weatherly, 1981. Suspended sediment transport and benthos boundary-
layer dynamics. In: C.A. Nittrouer, ed., Developments in Sedimentology, v. 32, pp. 1-18.
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Agrawal, Y., F. Diaz, and D.G. Aubrey, 1988. Use of laser anemometry in shallow coastal systems.
Proc. Conf. Uses of Laser Anemometry, Lisbon, Portugal, June 1988.
Anonymous, 1978. Sediment Density Gauge, Model 3563: Manual. Troxler Electronic Laboratories,
Inc., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Aubrey, D.G., 1978. Statistical and dynamical prediction of changes in natural sand beaches. Ph.D.
thesis, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, p. 194.
Aubrey, D.G., 1979. Seasonal patterns of on/offshore sediment movement. J. Geophys. Res., v. 84,
pp. 6347-6354.
Aubrey, D.G., and R.J. Seymour, 1987. Methods of position control and beach face profiling, Part A,
Chapt. 3, Measuring the nearshore morphology. In: R.J. Seymour, ed., Nearshore Sediment
Transport. Plenum Press, New York.
Aubrey, D.G., and J.H. Trowbridge, 1988. Reply. J. Geophys. Res., v. 93, pp. 1344-1346.
Aubrey, D.G., and R.J. Trowbridge, 1985a. Kinematic and dynamic estimates from electromagnetic
current meter data. J. Geophys. Res., v. 90, pp. 9137-9146.
Aubrey, D.G., and R.J. Trowbridge, 1985b. Reply to comment on: Kinematic and dynamic estimates
from electromagnetic current meter data. J. Geophys. Res., v. 93, pp. 1344-1346.

REFERENCES 108
Bagnold, R.A., 1946. Motion of waves in shallow water—interaction between waves and sand
bottoms. Proc. R. Soc., London, Ser. A., v. 187, pp. 1-15.
Bagnold, R.A., 1963. Mechanics of marine sedimentation. In: M.N. Hill, ed., The Sea, v. 3, pp.
507-528. Interscience, New York.
Bailard, J.A., 1981. An energetics total load sediment model for a plane sloping beach . J. Geophys.
Res., v. 86, pp. 1938-1954.
Barrick, D.E., 1982. Status of HF radars for wave-height directional spectral measurements. In:
Measuring Ocean Waves. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Bartz, R., J.R.V. Zaneveld, and H. Pak, 1978. A transmissometer for profiling and moored
observations in water. Soc. Photo-Optical Instrumentation Eng., Ocean Optics V, pp.
102-108.
Bascom, W.N., 1951. The relationship between sand size and beach force slope. Trans. Am.
Geophys. Union, v. 32, pp. 866-874.
Basu, A.K., 1983. Response of guyed tower to wave loading. Proc. 2d Int. Offshore Mech. Arctic
Eng. Symp., Houston.
Battjes, J.A., and J.P.F.M. Janssen, 1978. Energy loss and set-up due to breaking of random waves.
Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., pp. 569-587. American Society of Civil Engineers, New
York.
Beach, R.A., and R.W. Sternberg, 1988. Wave-current interactions in the inner surf zone and their
influence on suspended sediment transport. Proc. IAHR Symp. Mathematical Modelling of
Sediment Transport in the Coastal Zone, pp. 156-165.
Beach, R.A., J.R.V. Zaneveld, and H. Pak, 1978. A transmissometer for profiling and moored
observations in water. Soc. Photo-Optical Instrumentation Eng., Ocean Optics V., pp.
102-108.
Beal, R.C., D.G. Tilley, D.E. Irvine, E.J. Walsh, F.C. Jackson, D.W. Hancock III, D.E. Hines, R.N.
Swift, F.I. Gonzalez, D.R. Lyzenga, and L.F. Zambresky, 1986. A comparison of SIR-B
directional ocean wave spectra with aircraft scanning radar spectra. Science, v. 232, pp.
1531-1535.
Birkemeier, W.A., 1985. Time scales of nearshore profile changes. Proc. 19th Int. Conf. Coastal
Eng., pp. 1507-1526. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Blumberg, A.F., 1975. A numerical investigation into the dynamics of estuarine circulation,
Chesapeake Bay Institute Report No. 91, Baltimore, Maryland.
Bodge, K.R., and R.G. Dean, 1984. Wave measurement with differential pressure gauges, Proc. 19th
Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., pp. 755-769. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Bouws, E., and J.A. Battjes, 1982. A Monte Carlo approach to the computation of refraction of water
waves. J. Geophys. Res., v. 87(C8), pp. 5718-5722.
Bouws, E., H. Gunther, W. Rosenthal, and C.L. Vincent, 1985. Similarity of the wind wave spectrum
in finite depth water, 1. Spectral form. J. Geophys. Res., v. 90(C1), pp. 975-986.
Bowen, A.J., 1969. The generation of longshore currents on a plane beach. J. Mar. Res., v. 27, pp.
206-215.
Bowen, A.J., 1980. Simple models of nearshore sedimentation: Beach profiles and longshore bars. In:
S.B. McCann, ed., The Coastline of Canada, Paper 80-10. Geological Survey of Canada,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

REFERENCES 109
Brainard, E.C., II, and D.L. Gardner, 1982. Wave track and waverider heavy buoy intercomparison at
the entrance to the Columbia River. In: Oceans '82 Conference Record. Industry,
Government, Education—Partners in Progress, pp. 861-866. Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Brampton, A.H., and S.M. Beven, 1987. Beach changes along the coast of Lincolnshire, U.K.
(1959-1985). In: Proc. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 539-554.
American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Brampton, A.H., and R.W. Sternberg, 1988. Suspended sediment transport in the surf zone: response
to cross-shore infragravity motion . Mar. Geol., v. 80, pp. 61-79.
Brink, K.H., and D.C. Chapman, 1985. Programs for computing properties of coastal trapped waves
and wind-driven motion over continental shelf and slope. Tech. Rep. WHOI-85-17, p. 99.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
Brink, K.H., D.C. Chapman, and G.R. Halliwell, 1987. A stochastic model for wind-driven currents
over the continental shelf. J. Geophys. Res., v. 92, pp. 1783-1797.
Brown, C.B., 1950. Sediment transportation. In: H. Rouse, ed., Engineering Hydraulics, p. 1039.
Wiley, New York.
Butler, H.L., 1980. Evolution of a numerical model for simulating long period wave behavior in
ocean-estuarine systems. In: Estuarine and Wetland Processes with Emphasis on Modeling,
Marine Science Series, v. 11. Plenum Press, New York.
Camfield, F.E., 1977. Wind-Wave Propagations Over Flooded, Vegetated Land. Tech paper no.
77-12. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
Carter, W.E., and D.S. Robertson, 1986. The application of geodetic radio interfermetric surveying to
the monitoring of sea level . Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., v. 87, pp. 3-13.
Carter, T.G., P.L. Liu, and C.C. Mei, 1973. Mass transport by waves and offshore sand bedforms. J.
Waterways, Harbors, Coastal Eng. Div. Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng., v. 2, pp. 165-184.
Clausner, J.E., W.A. Birkemeier, and G.R. Clark, 1986. Field Comparison of Four Nearshore Survey
Systems. Miscellaneous paper no. CERC-86-6. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Clifton, 1976. Wave-generated structures—a conceptual model. In: R.A. Davis and R.L. Ethington,
eds., Beach and Nearshore Processes. Special Publication 24, pp. 126-148. Soc. Econ.
Paleontal. Mineral.
Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1984. Shore Protection
Manual. CERC Report MR-83-10. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Collins, M.B., and C.B. Pattiaratchi, 1984. Identification of suspended sediment in coastal waters
using airborne thematic mapper data. Int. J. Remote Sensing, v. 5, p. 635.
Copeland, G.J.M., 1985. A practical alternative to the mild-slope wave equation. Coastal Eng., v. 9,
pp. 125-149.
Crandall, S.H., 1985. Non-Gaussian closure techniques for stationary random vibration. Int. J. Non-
Linear Mech., v. 20.

REFERENCES 110
Dally, W., R.G. Dean, and R.A. Dalrymple, 1985. Wave height variation across beaches of arbitrary
profile. J. Geophys. Res., v. 90(6).
Dean, R.G., 1973. Heuristic models of sand transport in the surf zone. Proc. Conf. Eng. Dynamics in
the Surf Zone, pp. 208-214. Institution of Engineers, Sydney, Australia.
Dean, R.G., 1977. Equilibrium beach profiles: U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Tech. Rep. No. 12.
University of Delaware, Newark.
Dean, R.G., and R.A. Dalrymple, 1984. Water Wave Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists, p. 353.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Dick, J.E., and R.A. Dalrymple, 1984. Coastal changes at Bethany Beach, Delaware, Proc. 19th Int.
Conf. Coastal Eng., Houston, pp. 1650-1667. American Society of Civil Engineers, New
York.
Dingler, J.R., and D.L. Inman, 1976. Wave formed ripples in nearshore sands , Proc. 15th Int. Conf.
Coastal Eng., Honolulu, pp. 2109-2126. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Doering, J.C., and A.J. Bowen, 1987. Skewness in the nearshore: a comparison of estimates from
Marsh-McBirney current meters and colocated pressure sensors. J. Geophys. Res., v. 92.
Downing, J.P., 1981. Particle counter for sediment transport studies. J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civil
Eng., v. 107, pp. 1455-1465.
Downing, J.P., R.W. Sternberg, and C.R.B. Lister, 1981. New instrumentation for the investigation of
suspended sediment processes in the shallow marine environment, Mar. Geol., v. 42, pp.
19-34.
Drapeau, G., and B. Long, 1985. Measurements of bedload transport in the nearshore zone using
radioisotopic sand tracers. Proc. 19th Conf. Coastal Eng., Houston, pp. 1252-1265.
Ebersole, B.A., 1985. Refraction-diffraction model for linear water waves. J. Waterway, Port,
Coastal, and Ocean Engineering. v. 111. no. 6., pp. 939-953. American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York.
Ebersole, B.A., and R.A. Dalrymple, 1979. A Numerical Model for Nearshore Circulation Including
Convective Acceleration and Lateral Mixing. Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Delaware, Newark.
Eble, M.C., F.I. Gonzalez, and E.N. Bernard, 1988. Deep ocean observations of three recent tsunamis
in the Gulf of Alaska. Abstract; EOS, 69: 44, November, 1988, p. 1245.
Edge, B.L., ed. 1985. Proc. 19th Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., Houston, p. 3282. American Society of Civil
Einstein, H.A., 1950. The bed-load function for sediment transport in open channel floor. Tech. Bull.
1026, p. 78. SCS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Einstein, H.A., 1972. A basic description of sediment transport on beaches. In: R.E. Meyer, ed.,
Waves on Beaches and Resulting Sediment Transport, p. 462. Academic Press, New York.
Elgar, S., R.T. Guza, and S.J. Seymour, 1985. Wave group statistics from numerical simulations of a
random sea. Appl. Ocean Res., v. 7, pp. 93-96.
Fedosh, M.S., 1987. Segregating sediment resuspension processes with averaged Landsat data. Proc.
Conf. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, pp. 98-112. American Society of Civil
Forristall, G.Z., 1974. Three-dimesional structure of storm generated currents. J. Geophys. Res., v.
79, pp. 2721-2729.

REFERENCES 111
Forristall, G.Z., 1980. A two layer model for hurricane-driven currents on an irregular grid. J. Phys.
Oceanogr., v. 10, pp. 1417-1438.
Forristall, G.Z., 1982. Subsurface wave-measuring systems. Measuring ocean waves. Proceedings of a
Symposium and Workshop on Wave-Measurement Technology. National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C.
Forristall, G.Z., R.C. Hamilton, and V.J. Cardone, 1977. Continental shelf currents in tropical storm
Delia: observations and theory. J. Phys. Oceanogr., v. 7, pp. 532-546.
Fraser, D.C., 1985. Airborne electromagnetic bathymetric survey and data analysis, Cape God,
Massachusetts, area. Contract No. N6230684-C-0013. NORDA.
Freilich, M.H., and R.T. Guza, 1984. Nonlinear effects on shoaling surface gravity waves. Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, v. 311, pp. 1-41.
Gable, C.G. (ed). 1981. Report on data from the Nearshore Sediment Transport Study experiment at
Lendbetter Beach, Santa Barbara, California, January-February 1980. University of
California Institute of Marine Resources. Ref. No. 80-5. Scripps Institute of Oceanography,
La Jolla, California. 314 pp.
Gallagher, B., 1971. Generation of surf beat by non-linear wave interaction. J. Fluid Mech., v. 49(1),
pp. 1-20.
Garratt, J.R., 1977. Review of drag coefficients over oceans and continents. Monthly Weather Rev.,
v. 105, pp. 915-929.
George, R.A., and R.E. Flick, 1987. Nearshore Turbulence: Velocity measurements in unsteady two-
phase flows. EOS, v. 69: 44, p. 1248. Trans. American Geophysical Union.
Glenn, S.M., 1983. A continental shelf bottom boundary layer model: The effects of waves, currents
and a movable bed. Ph.D. thesis, WH oq-83-6, p. 336. Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
Gonzalez, F.I., E.N. Bernard, and H.B. Milburn, 1987. A program to acquire deep ocean tsunami
measurements in the North Pacific. Conference. Coastal Zone '87, May 26-29, 1987, pp.
3373-3381. Waterways Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Seattle,
Washington.
Graham, H.E., and D.E. Nunn, 1959. Meterological considerations pertinent to standard project
hurricane, Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States. National Hurricane Research
Project Report No. 33. U.S. Department of Commerce , Washington, D.C.
Grant, W.D., and O.S. Madsen, 1979. Combined wave and current interaction with a rough bottom. J.
Geophys. Res., v. 84, pp. 1797-1808.
Grant, W.D., and O.S. Madsen, 1982. Moveable bed roughness in unsteady oscillatory flow. J.
Geophys. Res., v. 87, pp. 469-481.
Greenwood, B., and R.A. Davis, Jr., eds., 1984. Hydrodynamics and Sedimentation in Wave-
Dominated Coastal Environments. Mar. Geol., 60(1/4), p. 473.
Greenwood, B., and D.J. Sherman, 1984. Waves, currents, sediment flux, and morphological response
in a barred nearshore system. In: B. Greenwood and R.A. Davis, Jr., eds., Hydrodynamics
and Sedimentation in Wave-Dominated Coastal Environments. Mar. Geol., v. 60, pp. 31-61.
Grosskopf, G., D.G. Aubrey, M.G. Matti, and M. Mathieson, 1983. Field intercomparison of
nearshore directional wave sensors. J. Ocean Eng., IEEE, Vol. OE-8, No. 4, pp. 227-271.

REFERENCES 112
Grove, R.S., C.J. Sonu, and D.H. Dykstra, 1987. Fate of massive sediment injection on a smooth
shoreline at San Onofre, California. Proc. Conf. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, pp.
531-538. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Gust, G., and G.L. Weatherly, 1985. Velocities, turbulence, and skin friction in a deep-sea logarithmic
layer. J. Geophys. Res., v. 90 (C3), pp. 4779-4792.
Guza, R.T., 1988. Comment on: Kinematic and dynamic estimates from electromagnetic current
meter data. J. Geophys. Res., v. 93, pp. 1341-1344.
Guza, R.T., and E.B. Thornton, 1982. Swash oscillations on a natural beach. J. Geophys. Res., v. 87,
pp. 483-491.
Hamblin, F.F., Y.M.R. Marmoush, F.M. Byoce, and A.A. Smith, 1987. Field evaluation of an
electromagnetic current meter based vertical profiler. J. Geophys. Res., v. 92, C11, 11, pp.
876-872.
Hanes, D.M., and D.A. Huntley, 1986. Continuous measurements of suspended sand concentration in a
wave dominated nearshore environment. Cont. Shelf Res., v. 6(4), pp. 585-596.
Harger, R.D., 1986. The SAR image short gravity waves on a long gravity wave . In: D.M. Phillips
and K. Hasselman, eds., Wave Dynamics and Radio Probing of the Ocean Surface. Plenum
Press, New York.
Hasselman, K., T.P. Barnett, E. Bouws, H. Carlson, D.E. Cartwright, K. Enke, J.A. Ewing, H.
Gienapp, D.E. Hasselman, P. Kruseman, A. Meerburg, P. Miller, D.J. Olbers, K. Richter,
W. Sell, and H. Walden, 1973. Measurements of wind-wave growth and swell decay during
the Joint North Sea Wave Project (JONSWAP). Dtsh. Hydrogr. Z., A 8(12).
Heaps, N.S., 1974. Development of a three-dimensional model of the Irish Sea. Rapp. P.-V. Reun.,
Cons. Int. Explor. Mer., pp. 147-162.
Hendershott, M.C., 1977. Numerical models of ocean tides. In: The Sea, v. 6, pp. 47-95. Interscience,
New York.
Higgins, A.L., R.J. Seymour, and S.S. Pawka, 1981. A compact representation of ocean wave
directionality. Appl. Ocean Res., v. 3(3), pp. 105-112.
Holman, R.A., and A.J. Bowen, 1982. Bars, bumps, and holes: Models for the generation of complex
beach topograhy. J. Geophys. Res., v. 87, pp. 457-468.
Holman, R.A., and T.C. Lippman, 1987. Remote sensing of nearshore bar systems: making
morphology visible. Proc. Conf. Coastal Sediments '87 , New Orleans, pp. 929-944.
Horikawa, K., ed., 1988. Nearshore Dynamics and Coastal Processes. University of Tokyo Press.
Tokyo. 522 pages.
Houston, J.R., 1978. Interaction of tsunamis with the Hawaiian Islands calculated by a finite-element
numerical model. J. Phys. Oceanogr., v. 8, pp. 93-102.
Huang, N.E., 1982. Survey of remote sensing techniques for wave measurement. In: Measuring Ocean
Waves. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Huang, N.E., L.F. Bliven, S.R. Long, and P.S. DeLe, 1986. A study of the relationship among wind
speed, sea state, and the drag coefficient for a developing wave field. J. Geophys. Res., v.
91, pp. 7733-7742.
Huntley, D.A., 1982. In situ sediment monitoring techniques, a survey of the state of the art in U.S.A.
Report No. C2S2-1, p 35. Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University , Halifax,
Nova Scotia, Canada.

REFERENCES 113
Hwang, L.S., and D.J. Divosky, 1972. Tsunami generation. J. Geophys. Res., v. 75, pp. 6802-6817.
Inman, D.L., and R.A. Bagnold, 1963. Littoral processes. In: M.N. Hill, ed., The Sea, v. 3, pp.
529-553. Interscience, New York.
Inman, D.L., and S.A. Jenkins, 1985. The Nile littoral cell and man's impact on the coastal zone of the
southeastern Mediterranean. Proc. 19th Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., Houston, pp. 1600-1617.
Inman, D.L., C.E. Nordstrom, and R.E. Flich, 1976. Currents in submarine canyons: An air-sea-land
interaction. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., v. 8, pp. 275-310.
Inman, D.L., et al., 1980. Field measurements of sand motion in the surf zone. Proc. 17th Int. Conf.
Coastal Eng., Sydney, Australia, pp. 1215-1234. American Society of Civil Engineers, New
York.
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), 1982. Proc. IEEE 2d Working Conf. Current
Measurement. Tech. Report 82 CH 1704-6. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers,
New York, New York.
Ito, Y., and K. Tanimoto, 1972. A method of numerical analysis of wave propagation: application to
wave diffraction and refraction. Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., pp. 503-522. American
Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Jeffreys, E.R., and M.H. Patel, 1982. Dynamic analysis models of tension leg platforms. J. Energy
Resources Tech., v. 104.
Jelesnianski, C.P., 1972. SPLASH: special program to list amplitudes of surges from hurricanes. 1.
Landfall storms. NOAA Tech. Memo. NWS, TDL-46. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C.
Jelesnianski, C.P., and J. Chen, 1981. SLOSH: sea, lake and overland surges from hurricanes.
Techniques Development Laboratory, National Weather Service, National Oceanographic
and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Jumars, P.A., and A.R.M. Nowell, 1984. Effects of benthos on sediment transport: problems with
functional grouping. Cont. Shelf Res., v. 3, pp. 115-130.
Kamphuis, J.W., 1975. Friction factor under oscillatory waves. Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng., J.
Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Div., v. 101, pp. 135-144.
Kim, K.Y, R.O. Reid, and R.E. Whitaker, 1987. On an open radiational boundary condition for
weakly dispersive tsunami waves. J. Comp. Phys.
Kinsman, B., 1965. Wind, Waves, Their Generation and Propagation on the Ocean Surface. The
Johns Hopkins University. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Kirby, J.T., and R.A. Dalrymple, 1984. A parabolic equation for the combined refraction-diffraction
of stokes waves by mildly varying topography. J. Fluid Mech., v. 136.
Kirby, J.T., and R.A. Dalrymple, 1984. Verification of a parabolic equation for propagation of
weakly-nonlinear waves. Coastal Eng., v. 8.
Komar, P.D., 1974. Oscillatory ripple marks and the evaluation of ancient wave conditions and
environments. J. Sed. Petrol., v. 44, pp. 169-180.
Komar, P.D., and D.L. Inman, 1971. Longshore sand transport on beaches. J. Geophys. Res., v. 75,
pp. 5914-5927.

REFERENCES 114
Komar, P.D., and M.C. Miller, 1973. The threshold of sediment movement under oscillatory waves.
J. Sed. Petrol., v. 43, pp. 1101-1110.
Komar, P.D., and M.C. Miller, 1975. Reply: on the comparison between the threshold of sediment
motion under waves and uni-directional currents with a discussion of the fractional
evaluation of the threshold. J. Sed. Petrol.
Kraus, N.C., ed., 1987. Proc. Conf. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, p. 2177. American Society
of Civil Engineers, New York.
Kraus, N.C., and Harikai, 1983. Numerical model of shoreline change at Oarai Beach. Coastal Eng.,
v. 7, pp. 1-28.
Kraus, N.C., K.J. Gingerich, and J.D. Rosati, 1988. Toward an improved empirical formula for
longshore sand transport. Proc. Int. Conf. 21st Coastal Eng. American Society of Civil
Larson, M., H. Hanson, and N.C. Kraus, 1987. Analytical models of the one-line model of shoreline
change. Tech. Rep. 72 CERC-87-15. U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Coastal
Engineering Research Center, 72 pp. + appendices.
Leendertse, J.J., 1984. Verification of a model of the eastern scheldt. Rand Report R-3108-NETH.
The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California. 127 pp.
Leendertse, J.J., and S.K. Liu, 1975. A three-dimensional model for estuaries and coastal seas. II:
Aspects of computation. Rand Report R-1764-OWRT. The Rand Corporation, Santa
Monica, California.
Lhermitte, R.M., 1981. Observations of water flow with high resolution doppler snow . Geophys.
Res. Letter, v. 8, no. 2.
Liu, P.L.-F., and T.K. Tsay, 1983. On weak reflection of water waves. J. Fluid Mech., v. 131, pp.
59-71.
Liu, S.K., and J.J. Leendertse, 1987. Modeling the Alaskan continental shelf waters. Rand Report
R-3567-NOAA/RC. The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California. 136 pp.
Longuet-Higgins, M.S., 1970. Longshore currents generated by obliquely incident sea waves. J.
Geophys. Res., v. 75, pp. 6778-6801.
Longuet-Higgins, M.S., 1984. On the stability of steep gravity waves. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A,
v. 396, pp. 269-280.
Longuet-Higgins, M.S., 1985. Bifurcation in gravity waves. J. Fluid Mech., v. 151, pp. 457-475.
Longuet-Higgins, M.S., and R.W. Stewart, 1962. Radiation stresses and mass transport in gravity
waves, with application to 'surf beat.' J. Fluid Mech., v. 13, pp. 481-504.
Lowe, R.L., 1987. Measuring sediment dynamics: continuous bedload sampling, Chapt. 58. In: R.J.
Seymour, ed., Nearshore Sediment Transport. Plenum Press, New York.
Lynch, J.F., T.F. Gross, C. Libicki, and K. Bedford, 1987. Deepwater sediment concentration
profiling in Hebbel using a one megahertz acoustic backscatter system. Proc. Conf. Coastal
Sediments '87, New Orleans, pp. 818-833. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Mader, C.L., 1984. A landslide source for the 1975 Hawaii tsunami. Int. J. Tsunami Soc., v. 2, pp.
71-78.
Madsen, O.S., and W.D. Grant, 1975. The threshold of sediment movement under oscillatory waves: a
discussion. J. Sed. Petrol., v. 45, pp. 360-361.

REFERENCES 115
Madsen, O.S., and W.D. Grant, 1976. Sediment transport in the coastal environment. Report No. 209,
p. 105. Ralph M. Parsons laboratory for water resources, Mass. Institute of Technology,
Cambridge.
Mason, C., W.A. Birkemeier, and P.A. Howd, 1987. Overview of DUCK85 nearshore processes
experiment. Proc. Conf. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, pp. 818-833. American
Society of Civil Engineers, New York .
McCullough, J.R., 1978. Near-surface ocean current sensors: problems and performance. Proc.
Working Conf. Current Measurements. Tech. Rep. DEL-SG-3-78, pp. 9-34. College of
Marine Studies, University of Delaware, Newark.
McWilliams, J.C., W.B. Owens, and B.L. Hua, 1986. An objective analysis of the POLYMODE local
dynamics experiment. Part I. General formalism and statistical model selection. J. Phys.
Oceanogr., v. 16, pp. 483-504.
Mellor, G.L., and T. Yamada, 1974. A hierarchy of turbulence closure models for planetary boundary
layers. J. Atmos. Sci., v. 31, pp. 1791-1806.
Meyer-Peter, E., and R. Muller, 1948. Formulas for bedload transport. Int. Assoc. Hydraulic
Structures Res., pp. 39-64.
Miller, M.C., and P.D. Komar, 1980. A field investigation of the relationship between oscillation
ripple spacing and the near bottom water orbital motions. J. Sed. Petrol., v. 50, pp. 183-191.
Mitsuyasu, H., 1969. On the growth of the spectrum of wind-generated waves. 2. Rep. Res. Inst.
Appl. Mech., Kyushu University. v. 17. pp. 235-243.
Nath, J.H., and R.G. Dean, eds., 1984. National Hazards and Research Needs in Coastal and Ocean
Engineering. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council (NRC), 1977. Building Research Advisory Board. Panel on Methodology
for Calculating Wave Action Effects Associated with Storm Surges. Prepared by the
Engineering Program on the Prevention and Mitigation of Flood Losses, Commission on
Socio-Technical Systems, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1982. Measuring ocean waves. Proceedings of a Symposium and
Workshop on Wave-Measurement Technology. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1983. Evaluation of FEMA Model for Estimating Potential Coastal
Flooding from Hurricanes and Its Application to Lee County, Florida. Committee on
Coastal Flooding from Hurricanes. Advisory Board on the Built Environment. CETS.
Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1987. Responding to Changes in Sea Level, Engineering Applications.
Committee on Engineering Implications of Changes in Relative Mean Sea Level. National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1987. Responding to Changes in Sea Level, Engineering Applications.
Committee on Engineering Implications of Changes in Relative Mean Sea Level. National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1987. Sedimentation Control to Reduce Maintenance Dredging of
Navigational Facilities in Estuaries, Report and Symposium Proceedings, pp. 342. Marine
Board. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

REFERENCES 116
National Research Council of Canada, 1986. Canadian Coastal Sediment Study. Final report of
steering committee: A.J. Bowen, D.M. Chartrand, T.E. Daniel, C.W. Glodowski, D.J.W.
Piper, J.S. Readshaw, J. Thibault, and T.H. willis, ed. Hydraulics Laboratory Technical
Report No. TR-HY-013. Division of Mechanical Engineering, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 96
pp.
Niedzwecki, J.M., and E.W. Sandt, 1986. Non-linear wave load effects on the stochastic behavior of
fixed offshore platforms. 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference. OTC, Report
5139.
Nielsen, P., 1984. Field measurements of time-averaged suspended sediment concentrations under
waves. Coastal Eng., v. 8, pp. 51-72.
Nishimura, H., and T. Sunamura, 1987. Numerical simulation of beach profile changes. Proc. 20th
Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., pp. 1444-1455. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Noda, E.K., 1974. Wave-induced nearshore circulation. J. Geophys. Res., v. 79, pp. 4097-4106.
Nowell, A.R.M., P.A. Jumars, and J.E. Eckman, 1981. Effects of biological activity on the
entrainment of marine sediments . In: C.A. Nittrouer, ed., Developments in Sedimentology,
v. 32, pp. 133-153. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Office of Chief of Engineers, 1986. Manual-Engineering and Design: Storm Surge Analysis and
Design Water Level Determinations. Engineer Manual No. 1110-2-1412. U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Washington, D.C.
Pelnard-Considere, R., 1956. Essai de theorie de l'evolution des formes de vivage en plages de sable
et de galets. IVeme Journees de l'Hydraulique, Les Energies de la Mer, Rapport no. 1, pp.
289-298.
Perlin, M., and R.G. Dean, 1983. A numerical model to simulate transport in the vicinity of coastal
structures. Report MR-83-10, Waterways Experiment Station Coastal Engineering Research
Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Pinkel, R., and J.A. Smith, 1987. Open ocean surface wave measurement using Doppler sonar. J.
Geophys. Res., v. 92, pp. 12, 967-973.
Reid, R.O., and R.E. Whitaker, 1976. Wind-driven flow of water influenced by a canopy. J.
Waterways, Harbors, and Coastal Eng. Div. Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng., pp. 63-77.
Rubin, D.M., and D.S. McCulloch, 1979. The movement and equilibration of bedforms in central San
Francisco Bay. In: T.J. Conamos, ed., San Francisco Bay, the Urbanized Estuary. Pacific
Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science , 58th Annual Meeting,
San Francisco, California, pp. 97-113.
Salkield, A.P., G.P. LeGood, and R.L. Soulsby, 1981. An impact sensor for measuring suspended
sand concentration. Proc. Conf. Electronics for Ocean Tech., pp. 37-47. IERE, London.
Sallenger, A.J., B.E. Jaffe, and T.L. Kelley, 1986. Sonar for measurement of bottom changes in the
high energy surf zone. Abstract in Fall Meeting, December, 8-10, 1986, San Francisco,
California. American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.
Schuman, R.A., and D.K. Rea, 1981. Determination of beach sand parameters using remotely sensed
aircraft reflectance data. Remote Sensing Environ., v. 11, p. 295.
Schwerdt, R.W., F.P. Ho, and R.R. Watkins, 1979. Meteorological criteria for standard project
hurricane and probable maximum hurricane windfields, gulf and east coasts of the United
States. NOAA Tech. Rep. NWS 23. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.

REFERENCES 117
Schwiderski, E.W., 1980. On charting global tides. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys., v. 18(1), pp.
243-266.
Sea Wave Modeling Project Group (SWAMP), 1985. Ocean Wave Modeling, p. 256. Plenum Press,
New York.
Seymour, R.J., 1987. An assessment of NSTS. Proc. Conf. Coastal Sediments '87, New Orleans, pp.
642-651. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Seymour, R.J., ed., 1989. Nearshore Sediment Transport. Plenum, New York.
Seymour, R.J., A.L. Higgins, and D.P. Bothman, 1979. Tracked vehicle for continuous nearshore
profiles, Proc. 16th Conf. on Coastal Eng., Hamburg, West Germany, pp. 1542-1554.
Sheng, Y.P., 1983. Mathematical modeling of three-dimensional coastal currents and sediment
dispersion: model development and application. Tech. Report CERC-83-2. U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 288 pp.
Sheng, Y.P., 1982. Hydraulic applications of a second-order closure model of turbulent transport. In:
P. Smith, ed., Applying Research to Hydraulic Practice, pp. 106-119. American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York.
Smith, J.D., 1977. Modeling of sediment transport on continental shelves. The Sea, v. 6, pp. 539-577.
Interscience, New York.
Sobey, R.J., 1986. Wind-Wave Prediction. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., v. 18, pp. 149-172.
Soulsby, R.L., 1988. The structure of suspended sediment transport formulae for uni-directional and
wave-plus-current flows. IAHR Symposium on Mathematical Modelling of Sediment
Transport in the Coastal Zone, pp. 68-78.
Southard, J.B., 1971. Representation of bed configurations in depth-velocity size diagrams. J. Sed.
Petrol., v. 41, pp. 903-915.
Sunamura, T., and K. Horikawa, 1974. Two-dimensional beach transformation due to waves. Proc.
14th Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., pp. 920-938. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Svendsen, I.A., H.A. Schaffer, and J.B. Hansen, 1987. The interaction between the undertow and the
boundary layer flow on a beach. J. Geophys. Res., 92, pp. 11845-11856.
Swart, D.H., 1974. Offshore sediment transport and equilibrium beach profiles. Publication No. 131.
Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, Delft, The Netherlands.
Swart, D.H., 1977. Predictive equations regarding coastal transport. Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Coastal
Symonds, G., and A.J. Bowen, 1984. Interactions of nearshore bars with incoming wave groups. J.
Geophys. Res., v. 87, pp. 9499-9508.
Symonds, G., D.A. Huntley, and A.J. Bowen, 1982. Two-dimensional surf beat: Long wave
generation by time-varying breakpoint. J. Geophys. Res., v. 87, pp. 492-498.
Tanaka, M., 1985. The stability of steep gravity waves, part 2. J. Fluid Mech., v. 156, pp. 281-289.
Tetra Tech., Inc., 1981. Coastal Flooding Storm Surge Model. Part 1, Methodology; Part 2, User's
Guide; Part 3, Codes. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

REFERENCES 118
Thomas, I.L., 1980. Suspended sediment dynamics from repetitive LANDSAT data. Int. J. Remote
Sensing, v. 1, p. 285.
Thornton, E.B., 1970. Variation of longshore current across the surf zone. Proc. 12th Int. Conf.
Coastal Eng., pp. 291-308. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Thornton, E.B., and R.T. Guza, 1986. Surf zone longshore currents and random waves: field data and
models. J. Phys. Oceanogr., v. 16, pp. 1165-1178.
Tsay, T.K., and P.L.-F. Liu, 1982. Numerical solution of water-wave refraction and diffraction
problems in the parabolic approximation. J. Geophys. Res., v. 87(C10), pp. 7932-7940.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1982. Field Experience with Floating Breakwaters on the Eastern
United States. Report MR 82-4. Coastal Engineering Research Center, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1984. Shore Protection Manual, Vols. 1 and 2. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1989. Impact of the January 1988 Storm. Quarterly Bulletin of the
Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los
Angeles District, Coastal Resources Branch, Los Angeles, California.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC), 1984. Remote Sensing
in Coastal Engineering. CERC Bull. (v) CERC-84-3. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1957. Density measurement of saturated
submersed sediment by gamma ray scattering. Div. of Eng. Labs., Chem. Eng. Lab. Rept.
No. SI-11, March 25, 1957. Washington, D.C.
Van Dorn, W.G., 1984. Source tsunami characteristics deducible from tide records. J. Phys.
Oceanogr., v. 13, pp. 353-363.
Vastano, A.C., and R.O. Reid, 1970. Tsunami response at Wake Island: comparison of hydraulic and
numerical approaches. J. Mar. Res., v. 28, pp. 345-356.
Vastano, A.C., and R.O. Reid, 1985. Sea surface topography estimation with infrared satellite
imagery. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., v. 2, pp. 393-400.
Vermulakonda, S.R., A. Swain, J.R. Houston, P.D. Farrar, L.W. Chou, and B.A. Ebersole, 1985.
Coastal and inlet processes, numerical modeling system for Oregon Inlet, North Carolina.
Report CERC 85-6, p. 93. Waterways Experiment Station, Coastal Engineering Research
Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Vesecky, J.F., R.H. Stewart, R.A. Shuchman, H.M. Assal, E.S. Kasischke, and J.D. Lydent, 1986. On
the ability of synthetic aperture radar to measure ocean waves. In: D.M Phillips and K.
Hasselman, eds., Wave Dynamics and Radio Probing of the Ocean Surface. Plenum Press,
New York.
Vincent, C.L., and D.E. Lichy, 1982. Wave measurements in ARSLOE, Paper presented at the
Conference of Directional Wave Spectra Applications. American Society of Civil
Engineers, San Francisco, California.
Walsh, E.J., D.W. Hancock III, D.E. Hines, and J.E. Kenney, 1986. Remote sensing of directional
wave spectra using the surface contour radar. In: D.M Phillips and K. Hasselman, eds.,
Wave Dynamics and Radio Probing of the Ocean Surface. Plenum Press, New York.
WAMDI Group, 1988. The WAM model—A third generation ocean wave prediction model. J. Phys.
Oceanog., v. 18, pp. 1775-1810.

REFERENCES 119
Wang, D.P., and C.N.K. Mooers, 1976. Coastal trapped waves in a continuously stratified ocean. J.
Phys. Oceanogr., v. 6, pp. 853-863.
Wang, S., and E. Noble, 1982. Columbia River Entrance Channel Ship Motion Study. J. Waterways,
Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng., v. 108, WW3. New York: American Society of Civil
Engineers.
Watanabe, A., 1982. Numerical models of nearshore currents and beach deformation. Coastal Engr. in
Japan, v. 25, pp. 147-161.
Whalin, R.W., 1972. Wave refraction theory in a convergence zone. Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Coastal
White, T.E., and D.L. Inman, 1987. Measuring longshore transport with tracers, Chapter 13. In: R.J.
Seymour ed., Nearshore Sediment Transport. Plenum Press, New York.
Williams, A.J., III, and J.S. Tochko, 1977. An acoustic sensor of velocity for benthic boundary layer
studies. In: J.C.J. Nihoul, ed., Bottom Turbulence, pp. 33-97. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Wright, L.D., A.D. Short, and M.O. Green, 1985. Short-term changes in the morpho-dynamic states
of beaches and surf zones: an empirical predictive model. Mar. Geol., v. 62, pp. 339-364.
Wu, C.-S., and P.L.-F. Liu, 1985. Finite element of modeling of nonlinear coastal currents. J.
Waterways, Port, Coastal Ocean Eng., Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng., v. 111(2), pp. 417-432.
Wu, C.-S., E.B. Thornton, and R.T. Guza, 1985. Waves and longshore currents: Comparison of a
numerical model with field data. J. Geophys. Res., v. 90, pp. 4951-4958.
Wu, Jin, 1985. Parameterization of wind-stress coefficients over water surfaces. J. Geophys. Res., v.
90, pp. 9069-9072.
Yalin, M.S., 1977. Mechanics of sediment transport, 2d ed. Pergamon Press, Oxford.

The National Academies Press: Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The National Academies Press: Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The National Academies Press: Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/1445 SHARE

Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes (1989)

130 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK

FIND RELATED TITLES

National Research Council 1989. Measuring and Understanding Coastal Processes.

– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientiﬁc reports

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Committee on Coastal Engineering Measurement Systems

WARREN W. DENNER, Chairman, Science Applications International

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

SIDNEY WALLACE, Chairman, Hill, Betts & Nash, Washington, D.C.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

inaccuracies in planning, often stemming from inaccurate measurement and poor

Two questions asked of the committee were fundamental to the conduct of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

the measurement of noncohesive sediment in this report, but chose to exclude

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

2 Coastal Engineering Applications 19

3 Processes and Measurement Requirements 26

4 Modeling Coastal Systems 66

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

6 Conclusions and Recommendations 95

Appendix: Survey Findings 105

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

• research into the fundamental processes,

Some coastal engineering problems will present increasingly difficult

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

The committee attempted to be as realistic as possible in preparing its

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

relate the measurement needs to realistic coastal engineering problems. In most

• kinematics and hydrodynamics of high-frequency flows, including wave

In each general process category, the requirements, present capabilities, and

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

coastal instruments and measurement systems, each recommendation derived

1. Directional wave energy spectra and their rapid dissemination to

Sediment transport processes and their measurement:

3. High-resolution measurement of concentrated sediment motions near

1. The internal dynamics of rubble-mound structures are not well

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

1. Improve and verify, through field measurements, a 3-D current

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

A medium-to-low–priority recommendation identified the extension to deep

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

being focused on its coasts. In a presentation made in 1976 at the Specialty

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

engineers require better and more complete data on coastal processes.

Clearly instrumentation and measurement systems are required to provide

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

PREVIOUS RELEVANT REPORTS AND STUDIES

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

identified needs in eight primary areas of research in coastal engineering.

diffusion and mixing

The Shallow-Water Ocean Engineering Research workshop group also