Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

Chapter 8: Dynamic Stability

on

  • 838 views

8. Dynamic Stability

8. Dynamic Stability

Statistics

Views

Total Views
838
Views on SlideShare
825
Embed Views
13

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
36
Comments
0

1 Embed 13

http://ocw.tudelft.nl 13

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Chapter 8: Dynamic Stability Chapter 8: Dynamic Stability Presentation Transcript

  • Chapter 8: Dynamic Stabilityct5308 Breakwaters and Closure DamsH.J. VerhagenFebruary 1, 2012 1Faculty of Civil Engineering and GeosciencesVermelding onderdeel organisatieSection Hydraulic Engineering
  • What is dynamic stability ?• Do not design on “damage”• Try to make the breakwater in such a way that it gets a “stable” form• Extra material is needed• “Natural” dynamically stable breakwaters seem to exist on Iceland• However, these breakwaters are not permeableFebruary 1, 2012 2
  • Types of berm breakwaters• Statically stable non-reshaping structures In this condition only some few stones are allowed to move similar to a conventional rubble mound breakwater• Statically stable reshaped structures In this condition the profile is allowed to reshape into a profile, which is stable and where the individual stones are also stable• Dynamically stable reshaped structures In this condition the profile is reshaped into a stable profile, but the individual stones may move up and down the slopeFebruary 1, 2012 3
  • Selection process for rubble mounds• Is it economical to design an conventional rubble mound ? Can all quarried material be used ?• If not all material can be used, and Hs < 2, use stable non-reshaping berm breakwater. If 2 < Hs < 3 m this might be a good option in case of dedicated quarry.• If the stones are too small, use statically reshaped type• If this also is not possible, use more stone and make dynamically stable berm breakwaterFebruary 1, 2012 4
  • Types of berm breakwatersDynamically stable Statically stable reshaped BB non-reshaping BB• Two stone classes • Several stone classes• Homogeneous berm • Berm of size-graded layers• Wide stone gradation • Narrow stone gradation• Low permeability • High permeability• Reshaping structures • Non-reshaping structures• Allowed erosion < berm width • Allowed recession < 2*Dn50• More voluminous • Less voluminous• No interlocking • Interlocking prescribedFebruary 1, 2012 5
  • Berm breakwaters in the world Country Number of berm Year first breakwaters breakwater was completed Iceland 27 1984 Canada 5 1984 USA 4 1984 Australia 4 1986 Brazil 2 1990 Norway 4 1991 Denmark (Far Oer) 1 1992 Iran 8 1996 Portugal (Madeira) 1 1996 China (Hong Kong) 1 1999 Total 57 Data from Pianc report on berm breakwaters 2003February 1, 2012 6
  • schematised profile for sand andgravel beaches lc  0.041H sTm g Dn50 ls  lr 1.8lcFebruary 1, 2012 7
  • Influence of wave climate on a bermbreakwater profileFebruary 1, 2012 8
  • Berm breakwater Berlevåg (Norway)February 1, 2012 Figure from Jacobsen et al, PIANC congress 9 2002
  • Reshaped profile of BerlevågbreakwaterFebruary 1, 2012 10 Figure from Jacobsen et al, PIANC congress 2002
  • Reshaping calculations• Van der Meer (1988 - 1990 Breakwat• Van Gent (1995) Odiflocs• Archetti and Lamberti (1996) (See Copedec Cape Town)• new research by Tørum (1998, 2001)February 1, 2012 11
  • Recession according to Tørum (1)Special parameter for recession: H0T0 Hs Ho  Dn 50 g T0  Tz Dn 50 Tz is mean periodFebruary 1, 2012 12
  • Recession according to Tørum (2)Rec  A( H 0T0 )3  B( H 0T0 ) 2  C ( H 0T0 )  (9.9 f g2  23.9 f g  10.5)  f hd n 50A  2.7 106B  9 106C  0.11 gradation factor f g  dn85 / dn15 1.3  f g  1.8  h  depth factor f h   0.1   3.2  d n50  February 1, 2012 13
  • Recession according to Tørum (3) Place of the intersection of profiles: hf h h  0.2  0.5 for 12.5   25 d50 d50 d n50February 1, 2012 14
  • Longshore transport of stone• apply same type of formula as longshore sand transport• to prevent excessive transport, apply Hs  4.5 Dn50• for heads use a value of 3• Curve fitted transport formula:  Hs g 2 S ( x)  0.00005  Tp  105   D Dn50   n50 February 1, 2012 15
  • cross section of the Sirevåg breakwater Stone class Wmin-Wmax (tonnes) I 20-30 II 10-20 III 4-10 IV 1-4 € 20.000/m (2000/2001) February 1, 2012 16
  • Design conditions• 100 years return period Hs = 7.0 m, Tp=14.2 s (based on hindcast + refraction study)• Storm of December 1998: Hs=7.0 m, Tp=14 s• Storm of February 1999: Hs=6.7 m, Tp=15 s• Storm of January 2002: Hs=9.3 m at deep water (450 m offshore) Hs=7.9, Tp=10 s •Damage to breakwater: 8 stones removed, 6 stones movedFebruary 1, 2012 17
  • Prototype and modelFebruary 1, 2012 18
  • Stone classes and Quarry yieldSirevåg Stone Wmin-Wmax Wmean Wmax/Wmin dmx/dmin Expected Class quarry yield I 20-30 23.3 1.5 1.114 5.6% II 10-20 13.3 2.0 1.26 9.9% III 4-10 6.0 2.5 1.36 13.7% IV 1-4 2.0 4.0 1.59 19.3%February 1, 2012 19
  • Sirevåg yield cureFebruary 1, 2012 20
  • Sirevåg breakwaterFebruary 1, 2012 21
  • Sirevåg breakwaterFebruary 1, 2012 22
  • Sirevåg breakwaterFebruary 1, 2012 23