Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 26

2-17-00, Breakwaters and Rubble Mound Structure Design

Ref:

Shore Protection Manual, USACE, 1984


Basic Coastal Engineering, R.M. Sorensen, 1997
Coastal Engineering Handbook, J.B. Herbich, 1991
EM 1110-2-2904, Design of Breakwaters and Jetties, USACE, 1986
Breakwaters, Jetties, Bulkheads and Seawalls, Pile Buck, 1992
Coastal, Estuarial and Harbour Engineers' Reference Book, M.B. Abbot and W.A. Price,
1994, (Chapter 29)

Topics
Definitions/ Descriptions of Various Coastal Structures
Types of Breakwaters
Rubble Mound Breakwater Design
Layout Options for Rubble Mound Breakwaters and Jetties
General Description
Design Wave
Water Levels and Datums
Design Parameters
Design Concept/ Procedure
Structure Elevation, Run-up and Overtopping
Crest/Crown Width
Armor Unit Size and Stability
Underlayer Design
Bedding and Filter Design
Toe Structures
Low Crested Breakwaters
Slope and Foundation stability
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Definitions/ Descriptions of Various Coastal Structures
Breakwater - a structure that protects the area in its lee from wave attack. Breakwaters
can be connected to the shoreline (attached breakwater) or completely isolated
from the shore (detached breakwater). (rubble mound structure or composite)
Bulkhead, seawall, revetment - structures built to separate the land from the water to
prevent erosion and other damage primarily due to wave action.

Bulkheads are typically smaller structures designed to retain shore material


under less severe wave conditions than seawalls.
Revetments are designed to protect shorelines and waterways from erosion by
currents and small waves. (generally a rubble mound structure built on sloping
bank)
Seawalls are typically large and designed to withstand the full force of storm
waves.

Groin - shore perpendicular structure, installed singly or as a field of groins, designed to


trap sand from the littoral drift system or to hold sand in place. (rubble mound
structure)
Jetty - a shore perpendicular structure located near an inlet or harbor entrance to reduce
in-filling of the inlet or channel, protect the entrance and provide vessel sheltering
from waves. (rubble mound structure)
Dolphin - a marine structure (usually a cluster of piles) for mooring vessels; (1) a
mooring dolphin is designed only as a mooring structure and cannot support an
impact force, (2) a breasting dolphin is designed to support the impact of a ship
when mooring
Wharf or Quay - a dock consisting of a reinforced shore or riverbank where ships are
loaded or unloaded. Generally, vessels may only moor on one side of a wharf, but
on either side of a quay.

Various Rubble Mound Structures - breakwaters, jetties and groins


Relative sizes: breakwater > jetty > groin

Waves

groin

Waves

island
bay

shoreline

jetty

island

detached
breakwater

Waves
Waves
harbor/marina
shoreline

shoreline

attached
breakwater

Types of Breakwaters
Rubble Mound Breakwater (Structure) - consist of interior graded layers of stone and an
outer armor layer. Armor layer may be of stone or specially shaped concrete units.

Adaptable to a wide range of water depths, suitable on nearly all foundations

Layering provides better economy (large stones are more expensive) and the
structure does not typically fail catastrophically (i.e. protection continues to be
provided after damage and repairs may be made after the storm passes).
Readily repaired.

Armor units are large enough to resist wave attack, but allow high wave
energy transmission (hence the layering to reduce transmission). Graded
layers below the armor layer absorb wave energy and prevent the finer soil in
the foundation from being undermined.
Sloped structure produces less reflected wave action than the wall type.

Require larger amounts of material than most other types

Rubble Mound Breakwater

Composite Breakwater
(low mound)

Composite or Wall-Type Breakwaters - typically consist of cassions (a concrete or steel


shell filled with sand or gravel) sitting on a gravel base (also known as vertical
wall breakwater). Exposed faces are vertical or slightly inclined (wall-type)

Sheet-pile walls and sheet-pile cells of various shapes are in common use.

Reflection of energy and scour at the toe of the structure are important
considerations for all vertical structures.
If forces permit and the foundation is suitable, steel-sheet pile structures may
be used in depths up to about 40 feet.
When foundation conditions are suitable, steel sheet piles may be used to form
a cellular, gravity-type structure without penetration of the piles into the
bottom material.

Floating Breakwaters - potential application for boat basin protection, boat ramp
protection, and shoreline erosion control.

Sloped Rubble Mound

Composite

Vertical
Low mound
High mound

Advantages

Disadvantages

1. Suitable for irregular bottom


2. Suitable for weak soil (disbursed
load)
3. Progressive damage
4. Low toe scour
5. Simpler construction
6. Simpler maintenance
1. Material savings (stone required)
2. Easy to maintain (day-to-day)
3. Control water depth clearly defined
1. Suitable for deeper water with less
firm soil
2. More economic/ flexible design
1. Suitable for deeper water with less
firm soil

1. Required material increases rapidly


with increased water depth
2. High maintenance cost
3. Large base cuts into basin size

1.
2.
3.
1.
2.

Requires firm soil


High construction requirements
Repair difficult
Complicated construction
More difficult repair

1. More complicated construction


2. More susceptible to breaking
waves

Rubble Mound Breakwater Design


Layout Options for Rubble Mound Breakwaters and Jetties
1. Attached or Detached.
a. Jetties usually attached to stabilize an inlet or eliminate channel shoaling.
b. Breakwaters attached or detached.
i. If the harbor is on the open coastline, predominant wave crests approach
parallel to the coastline, a detached offshore breakwater might be the best
option.
ii. An attached breakwater extended from a natural headland could be used to
protect a harbor located in a cove.
iii. A system of attached and detached breakwaters may be used.
iv. An advantage of attached breakwaters is ease of access for construction,
operation, and maintenance; however, one disadvantage may be a negative
impact on water quality due to effects on natural circulation.
2. Overtopped or Non-overtopped.
a. Overtopped:
crown elevation allows larger waves to wash across the crest
wave heights on the protected side are larger than for a non-overtopped structure.
b. Non-overtopped: elevation precludes any significant amount of wave energy from
coming across the crest.
c. Non-overtopped breakwaters or jetties
i. Greater degree of wave protection
ii. More costly to build because of the increased volume of materials required.
d. Crest elevation determines the amount of wave overtopping expected
i. Hydraulic model investigation to find the magnitude of transmitted wave
heights
ii. Optimum crest elevation minimum height that provides the needed
protection.

e. Overtopped breakwater
i. Crest elevation may be set by the design wave height that can be expected
during the period the harbor will be used (especially true in colder climates).
ii. Overtopped structures are more difficult to design because their stability
response is strongly affected by small changes in the still water level.
3. Submerged Breakwater
a. Example: A detached breakwater constructed parallel to the coastline and designed to
dissipate sufficient wave energy to eliminate or reduce shoreline erosion.
b. Advantages:
i. Less expensive to build.
ii. May be aesthetically more pleasing (do not encroach on any scenic view)
c. Disadvantages:
i. Significantly less wave protection is provided
ii. Monitoring the structure's condition is more difficult.
iii. Navigation hazards may be created.
4. Single or Double.
a. Jetties: Double parallel jetties will normally be required to direct tidal currents to
keep the channel scoured to a suitable depth. However, there may be instances where
coastline geometry is such that a single updrift jetty will provide a significant amount
of stabilization. One disadvantage of single jetties is the tendency of the channel to
migrate toward the structure.
b. Breakwaters: Choice of single or double breakwaters will depend on such factors as
coastline geometry and predominant wave direction. Typically, a harbor positioned in
a cove will be protected by double breakwaters extended seaward and arced toward
each other with a navigation opening between the breakwater heads. For a harbor
constructed on the open coastline a single offshore breakwater with appropriate
navigation openings might be the more advantageous.
5. Weir Section. Some jetties are constructed with low shoreward ends that act as weirs.
Water and sediment can be transported over this portion of the structure for part or all of a
normal tidal cycle. The weir section, generally less than 500 feet long, acts as a
breakwater and provides a semi-protected area for dredging of the deposition basin when
it has filled. The basin is dredged to store some estimated quantity of sand moving into
the basin during a given time period. A hydraulic dredge working in the semi-protected
waters can bypass sand to the downdrift beach.
6. Deflector Vanes. In many instances where jetties are used to help maintain a navigation
channel, currents will tend to propagate along the ocean-side of the jetty and deposit their
sediment load in the mouth of the channel. Deflector vanes can be incorporated into the
jetty design to aid in turning the currents and thus help to keep the sediments away from
the mouth of the channel. Position, length, and orientation of the vanes can be optimized
in a model investigation.
7. Arrowhead Breakwaters. When a breakwater is constructed parallel to the coastline
navigation conditions at the navigation opening may be enhanced by the addition of
arrowhead breakwaters. Prototype experience with such structures however has shown
them to be of questionable benefit in some cases.

Jetties with Weir section and Deflector Vanes

Arrowhead Breakwaters

General Description
Multi-layer design. Typical design has at least three major layers:
1. Outer layer called the armor layer (largest units, stone or specially shaped
concrete armor units)
2. One or more stone underlayers
3. Core or base layer of quarry-run stone, sand, or slag (bedding or filter layer
below)

Designed for non-breaking or breaking waves, depending on the positioning


of the breakwater and severity of anticipated wave action during life.
Armor layer may need to be specially shaped concrete armor units in order to
provide economic construction of a stable breakwater.

Design Wave
1. Usually H1/3, but may be H1/10 to reduce repair costs (Pacific NW) (USACE
recommends H1/10)
2. The depth limited breaking wave should be calculated and compared with the
unbroken storm wave height, and the lesser of the two chosen as the design
wave. (Breaking occurs in water in front of structure)
3. Use Hb/hb ~ 0.6 to 1.1
4. For variable water depth, design in segments
Breaking Wave Considerations (SPM, Chapter 7)
The design breaker height (Hb) depends on the depth of water some distance
seaward from the structure toe where the wave first begins to break. This depth
varies with tidal stage.
Therefore, the design breaker height depends on the critical design depth at the
structure toe, the slope on which the structure is built, incident wave steepness,
and the distance traveled by the wave during breaking.
Assume that the design wave plunges on the structure
Hb

ds
m p

ds = depth at structure toe


= hb/Hb
m = nearshore slope
p = dimensionless plunge distance,
= breaker travel distance (xp) / breaker height (Hb)
If the maximum design depth at the structure toe and the incident wave period are
known, the design breaker height can be determined from the chart below (Figure
7-4 of the SPM, 1984). Calculate ds/(gT2), locate the nearshore slope and
determine Hb/ds.

Water Levels and Datums. Both maximum and minimum water levels are needed for the
designing of breakwaters and jetties. Water levels can be affected by storm surges,
seiches, river discharges, natural lake fluctuations, reservoir storage limits, and
ocean tides.
High-water levels are used to estimate maximum depth-limited breaking wave
heights and to determine crown elevations.
Low-water levels are generally needed for toe design.
a. Tide Predictions, The National Ocean Service (NOS) publishes tide height
predictions and tide ranges. Figure 2-l shows spring tide ranges for the continental
United States. Published tide predictions are sufficient for most project designs;
however, prototype observations may be required in some instances.
b. Datum Planes. Structural features should be referred to appropriate low-water
datum planes. The relationship of low-water datum to the National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD) will be needed for vertical control of construction. The
low-water datum for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts is being converted to mean
lower low water (MLLW). Until the conversion is complete, the use of mean low
water (MLW) for the Atlantic and Gulf Coast low water datum (GCLWD) is
acceptable. Other low-water datums are as follows:
Pacific Coast: Mean lower low water (MLLW)
Great Lakes: International Great Lakes Datum (IGLD)
Rivers: River, low-water datum planes (local)
Reservoirs: Recreation pool levels

Design Parameters
h
hc
R
ht
B
Bt

b
t
W

water depth of structure relative to design high water (DHW)


breakwater crest relative to DHW
freeboard, peak crown elevation above DHW
depth of structure toe relative to still water level (SWL)
crest width
toe apron width
front slope (seaside)
back slope (lee)
thickness of layers
armor unit weight

DHW varies may be MHHW, storm surge, etc.


SWL may be MSL, MLLW, etc.
Wave setup is generally neglected in determining DHW

crown/cap
crest
armor layer, W
R

DHW

hc

SWL

ht

first underlayer

b
second underlayer

toe

core/base

Bt

bedding and/or filter layer

Design Concept/ Procedure


1. Specify Design Condition design wave (H1/3, Hmax, To, Lo, depth, water
elevation, overtopping, breaking, purpose of structure, etc.)
2. Set breakwater dimensions h, hc, R, ht, B, , b
3. Determine armor unit size/ type and underlayer requirements
4. Develop toe structure and filter or bedding layer
5. Analyze foundation settlement, bearing capacity and stability
6. Adjust parameters and repeat as necessary

Structure Elevation, Run-up and Overtopping


Design elevation (peak crown elevation) = DHW + set-up + run-up + freeboard

If overtopping is allowed, freeboard is equal to zero and allowed


overtopping is subtracted from design elevation.
Generally neglect wave setup for sloped structures

Run-up determined by surf similarity parameter (m) and core permeability


m tan

H s Lm

, where Lm is the wave length for the modal period, Tm


gT 2
Lm m
2
(deep water assumed)
van der Meer (1988)

Ru H S a m

for m < 1.5

Ru H S b

for m > 1.5

c
m

for permeable structures (P > 0.4) run-up is limited to


Ru exceedence
probability (%)
0.1
2
5
10
50

a
1.12
0.96
0.86
0.77
0.47

b
1.34
1.17
1.05
0.94
0.60

c
0.55
0.46
0.44
0.42
0.34

SWL

Ru H S d

d
2.58
1.97
1.68
1.45
0.82

Run-up = Ru
Run-down = Rd

Run-up
SWL
Run-down
SWL

Reduction factors are applied to the Run-up formula to account for roughness,
oblique waters and overtopping
RuR H S Ru H S i
Roughness Reduction Factors are:
Reduction factor ()
Smooth impermeable (including smooth
concrete and asphalt)

1.0

1 layer of stone rubble on impermeable base

0.8

Gravel

0.7

Rock rip-rap with thickness > 2D50

0.5-0.6

Overtopping occurs if water level exceeds the freeboard (R), depends on relative
freeboard, R/Hs, wave period, wave steepness, permeability, porosity, and surface
roughness. Usually overtopping of a rubble structure such as a breakwater or jetty
can be tolerated only if it does not cause damaging waves behind the structure.
Owen (1980, 1982)
H
R sm
Rm*
sm s
H s 2 , where
Lm
mean overtopping discharge ( Q in m3/s/m or ft3/s/ft):
Q gH s Tm a exp b Rm*
use run-up reduction factors, , above
for straight smooth slopes (no berms), non-depth limited waves
Slope
a
b

1:1
0.008
20

1:1.5
0.010
20

1:2
0.013
22

1:3
0.016
32

1:4
0.019
47

determine R based on acceptable Q for the design


Q 0.5 m 3 /s/m
Harbor protection
Vehicles on b.w.

Q 0.01 m 3 /s/m

Pedestrians

Q 0.05 m 3 /s/m

Concrete Caps - considered for strengthening the crest, increasing crest height,
providing access along crest for construction or maintenance. Evaluate by
calculating cost of cap vs. cost of increasing breakwater dimensions to
increase overtopping stability
Crest/ Crown Width (note: crown may extent above the breakwater crest)
Depends on degree of allowed overtopping. Not critical if no overtopping is
allowed. Minimum of 3 armor units or 3 meters for low degree of overtopping.
W
B 3k
a

1/ 3

, where W = median weight of armor unit, a = unit weight


of armor, k = layer thickness coefficient (see Table 2)
Armor Unit Size and Stability
Considerations:
Slope: flatter slope smaller armor unit weight but more material req'd
Seaside Armor Slope - 1:1.15 to 1:2
Harbor-side (leeside) Slope
Minor overtopping/ moderate wave action - 1:1.25 to 1:1.5
Moderate overtopping/ large waves - 1:1.33 to 1:1.5
* harbor-side slopes are steeper, subject to landslide type failure

Trunk vs. head (end of breakwater) head is exposed to more concentrated


wave attack want flatter slopes at head (or larger armor units)
Overtopping less return flow/ action on seaward side but more on leeward
Layer dimensions thicker layers give more reserve stability if damaged
Special placement reduces size req'ts, gen. limited to concrete armor units
Concrete armor units (may be required for more extreme wave conditions)
Advantage - increase stability, allow steeper slopes (less mat'l req'd),
lighter wt.
Disadvantage - breakage results in lost stability and more rapid
deterioration. Hydraulic studies have indicated that up to 15 percent
random breakage of doles armor units may be experienced before stability
is threatened, and up to five broken units in a cluster can be tolerated.
Considerations
1. Availability of casting forms
2. Concrete quality
3. Use of reinforcing (req'd if > 10-20 t)
4. Placement
5. Construction equipment availability
When using shaped concrete armor units, underlayers are sized based on
stone armor unit weight

Hudson, R. Y. (1959) Laboratory Investigations of Rubble-Mound Breakwaters,


Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of

Civil Engineers, Waterways and Harbors Division, Vol. 85, NO. WW3, Paper No.
2171.
W = median weight of armor unit
D = diameter of armor unit
a = unit weight of armor (gen. a = 2.65 for quarry stone, 2.4 for shapes)
H = design wave height (note affect of cubic power on armor wt.)
KD = stability coefficient (Table 1 below, from SPM)
SG = a/w
= slope angle from the horizontal
Rough analysis of forces give formula for a "dimensionless wave height"
or stability number
H
H
Ns

1/ 3
SG 1 D
SG 1 W
a

Experiments related the stability number to the face slope and armor unit
shape
1/ 3
N s K D cot
Combining give Hudson's equation for required armor unit weight
W

aH 3

K D SG 1 cot
3

Restrictions on Hudson equation:


1. KD not to exceed Table 1 (from SPM) values
2. Crest height prevents minor wave overtopping
3. Uniform armor units 0.75W to 1.25W
4. Uniform slope 1:1.5 to 1:3
5. 120 pcf a 180 pcf (1.9 t/m3 a 2.9 t/m3)
Not considered in Hudson equation
incident wave period
type of breaking (spilling, plunging, surging)
allowable damage level (assumes no damage)
duration of storm (i.e. number of waves)
structure permeability

Bottom elevation of Armor Layer (How deep should armor extend?)


Armor units in the cover layer should be extended downslope to an
elevation below minimum still water level equal to 1.5H when the structure is in a
depth greater than 1.5H. If the structure is in a depth of less than 1.5H, armor
units should be extended to the bottom. Toe conditions at the interface of the

breakwater slope and sea bottom are a critical stability area and should be
thoroughly evaluated in the design.
The weight of armor units in the secondary cover layer, between -1.5H
and -2H, should be approximately equal to one-half the weight of armor units in
the primary cover layer (W/2). Below -2H. the weight requirements can be
reduced to approximately W/l5 . When the structure is located in shallow water,
where the waves break, armor units in the primary cover layer should be extended
down the entire slope.
The above-mentioned ratios between the weights of armor units in the
primary and secondary cover layers are applicable only when stone units are used
in the entire cover layer for the same slope. When pre-cast concrete units are used
in the primary cover layer, the weight of stone in the other layers should be based
on the equivalent weight of stone armor.
For example:
tetrapods armor design
conditions: 20 foot non-breaking wave attack on a structure trunk
a = 150 lbf/ft3 for tetrapods SG = 150/64 = 2.34
slope = lV:2H
KD = 8.0 for tetrapod armor
KD = 4.0 for rough angular stone
W
for tetrapod:

aH 3

K D SG 1 cot
3

150 20 3 15.6 tons


8 2.34 1 2

165 203 21 tons


4 2.58 1 2

for stone armor:


The secondary cover layer from -1.5H to the bottom should be as thick as
or thicker than the primary cover layer and sized for W = 21 tons.
Armor layer thickness (t) use to calculate size of layer
W
t nk
a

1/ 3

, where n = number of layers

number of units per surface area A,

Na

P
nk 1

A
100

2/3

Modified Allowable Wave Height Based on Damage (can be used to estimate


maintenance costs)

H/HD=0, where HD=0 is the design wave height corresponding to 0-5 % damage
(no-damage condition)
See Table 3 below for H/HD=0 values

Table 1, Stability Coefficient, KD (breaking occurs before the wave reaches the structure)
Structure Trunk
(b)

KD
Non-breaking
wave

Structure Head
KD
Breaking Non-breaking
Wave
wave

Slope

Armor units

n(a)

Placement

Breaking
Wave

Quarry stone
Smooth rounded
Smooth rounded
Rough angular

2
>3
1

Random
Random
Random (d)

1.2
1.6
(d)

2.4
3.2
2.9

1.2
1.4
(d)

1.9
2.3
2.3

1.5 to 3.0
(c)
(c)

Rough angular

Random

2.0

4.0

1.9
1.6
1.3

3.2
2.8
2.3

1.5
2.0
3.0

Rough angular
Rough angular
Parallelepiped (f)

>3
2
2

Special (e)
Special (e)
Random

2.2
5.8
7.0 - 20.0

4.5
7.0
8.5 - 24.0

2.1
5.3
--

4.2
6.4
--

(c)
(c)
(c)

Tetrapod and
Quadripod

Random

7.0

8.0

5.0
4.5
3.5

6.0
5.5
4.0

1.5
2.0
3.0

Tribar

Random

9.0

10.0

8.3
7.8
6.0

9.0
8.5
6.5

1.5
2.0
3.0

Dolos

Random

15.0 (g)

31.0 (g)

8.0
7.0

16.0
14.0

2.0 (h)
3.0

Modified Cube

Random

6.5

7.5

--

5.0

(c)

Hexapod

Random

8.0

9.5

5.0

7.0

(c)

Toskanes

Random

11.0

22.0

--

--

(c)

Tribar

Uniform

12.0

15.0

7.5

9.5

(c)

Quarrystone (KRR)
Graded angular

--

Random

2.2

2.5

--

--

--

cot

(a)

n is the number of wits comprising the thickness of the armor layer.


Applicable to slopes ranging from 1 on 1.5 to 1 on 5.
(c)
Until more information is available on the variation of KD value with slope, the use of KD should be limited to
slopes ranging from 1 on 1.5 to 1 on 3. Some armor units tested on a structure head indicate a K D slope
dependence.
(d)
The use of a single layer of quarry stone armor units subject to breaking waves is not recommended, and only
under special conditions for non-breaking waves. When it is used, the stone should be carefully placed.
(e)
Special placement with long axis of stone placed perpendicular to structure face.
(f)
Long slab-like stone with the long dimension about three times its shortest dimension.
(g)
Refers to no-damage criteria (~5 percent displacement, rocking, etc.); if no rocking (<2 percent) is desired, reduce
KD 50 percent.
(h)
Stability of dolos on slopes steeper than 1 on 2 should be substantiated by site-specific model tests.
(b)

NOTE : Breaking wave stability coefficients for stone and dolos were developed using a 1V:10H foreslope.

Table 2, Layer Thickness Coefficient and Porosity


Type of
Placing
Armor Unit
n (1)
Technique
Smooth stone
2
Random
Rough stone
2
Random
Tetrapod
2
Random
Quadripod
2
Random
Hexapod
2
Random
Modified Cube
2
Random
Tribar
2
Random
Tribar
1
Uniform
Toskane
2
Random
Dolos
2
Random
(1)
Number of layers of armor units

Layer Thickness
Coefficient, k
1.00
1.00
1.04
0.95
1.15
1.10
1.02
1.13
1.03
0.94

Porosity
Percent
38
37
50
49
47
47
54
47
52
56

Table 3, H/HD=0 as a function of cover layer damage


Damage (D), Percent
Unit
0-5
5 - 10
10 - 15
15 - 20
20 - 30
30 - 40
40 - 50
Quarry stone (smooth)
1.00
1.08
1.14
1.20
1.29
1.41
1.54
Quarry stone (rough)
1.00
1.08
1.19
1.27
1.37
1.47
1.56 (b)
Tetrapods
and
1.00
1.09
1.17 (c)
1.24 (c)
1.32 (c)
1.41 (c)
1.50 (c)
Quadripods
Tribar
1.00
1.11
1.25 (c)
1.36 (c)
1.50 (c)
1.59 (c)
1.64 (c)
(c)
(c)
(c)
(c)
Dolos
1.00
1.10
1.14
1.17
1.20
1.24
1.27 (c)
(a)
Breakwater trunk, n = 2, random-placed armor units, non-breaking waves, and minor overtopping
conditions.
(b)
Values in italics are interpolated or extrapolated.
(c)
CAUTION: Tests did not include possible effects of unit breakage. Waves exceeding the design wave
height conditions by more than 10 percent may result in considerably more damage than the values
tabulated.

Underlayers Design
Armor Layer provides structural stability against external forces (waves)
Underlayers prevent core or base material from escaping.
Requirements:
1. Prevent fine material from leaching out.
2. Allow for sufficient porosity to avoid excessive pore pressure build-up
inside the breakwater that could lead to instability or liquefaction in
extreme cases
Note: requirements are in conflict, Eng. must provide an optimum solution

Armor layer units are large satisfy (2) above readily

Based on spherical shape geometry , core material cannot escape the cover
layer if the diameter ratio of the cover material (D) to the core material (d) is
less than six. (i.e. D/d < 6)

D15
5
d
85
For sorted material (e.g. quarry stones) under static (calm) load :

Under dynamic load (i.e. wave forces), more restrictive rules apply:
D50
W
2.5 to 3
15 to 25
d 50
, which gives wbase
(assumes W D3)

SPM Recommended Sizes (see diagram)


Layer
Primary Armor Layer
First Underlayer
Second Under Layer
Base/ Core Material

Weight Ratio
W/1
W/10
W/200
W/4000

Equivalent Diameter Ratio


1
2.15
2.7
2.7

(Guidance from SPM)


First Underlayer (directly under the armor units)
minimum two stone thick (n = 2)
(1) under layer unit weight = W/10
if cover layer and first underlayer are both stone
if the first underlayer is stone and the cover layer is concrete
armor units with KD 10
(2) under layer unit weight = W/15 when the cover layer is of armor units
with KD > 10
Second Underlayer - n = 2 thick, W/20
Bedding or Filter Layer Design
Layer between structure and foundation or between cover layer and bank
material for revetments.
Purpose is to prevent base material from leaching out, prevent pore pressure
build-up in base material and protect from excessive settlement.

Should be used except when:


1. Depths > 3Hmax, or
2. Anticipated currents are weak (i.e. cannot move average foundation
material), or
3. Hard, durable foundation material (i.e. bedrock)

Cohesive Material: May not need filter layer if foundation is cohesive


material. A layer of quarry stone may be placed as a bedding layer or apron to
reduce settlement or scour.
Coarse Gravel: Foundations of coarse gravel may not require a filter blanket.
Sand: a filter blanket should be provided to prevent waves and currents from
removing sand through the voids of the rubble and thus causing settlement.
When large quarry-stone are placed directly on a sand foundation at depths
where waves and currents act on the bottom (as in the surf zone), the rubble

will settle into the sand until it reaches the depth below which the sand will
not be disturbed by the currents. Large amounts of rubble may be required to
allow for the loss of rubble because of settlement. This, in turn, can provide a
stable foundation.
Criteria for granular filter design:

D15
4 to 5
d
85
To prevent material from leaching out:
d85 = dia. exceeded by the coarsest 15% of the base mat'l
D15 = dia. exceeded by the coarsest 85% of the filter mat'l
(important in breakwater design)
D15
4 to 5
To prevent pore pressure build-up: d15
(important for embankment design)

D60
10
D
10
To maintain filter layer internal stability:
(i.e. well sorted
material is preferred). Poorly sorted material is not suitable for filters
D60
20
D10
(internally unstable too much washes out)

Stability against wave attack of the exposed bedding material has been found to
be analogous to the stability of the armor layer of a rubble mound structure, with
the exceptions that the slope of the seaward face () vanishes from the problem
and the local wavelength (L) is considered. The required median weight (W50) can
be calculated from the following equation:
50 H 3
W50
3
2
1.34 10 5 SG50 1 1 L

General guidelines for stability against wave attack.


Bedding Layer thickness should be:
2-3 times the diameter for large stone
10 cm for coarse sand
20 cm for gravel

For foundation stability Bedding Layer thickness should be at least 2 feet

Bedding Layer should extend 5 feet horizontally beyond the toe cover stone.

Geotextile filter fabric may be used as a substitute for a bedding layer or filter blanket,
especially for bank protection structures.
When a fabric is used, a protective layer of spalls or crushed rock (7-inch
maximum to 4-inch minimum size) having a recommended minimum thickness of

2 feet should be placed between the fabric and adjacent stone to prevent puncture
of the fabric. Filter criteria should be met between the protective layer of spalls
and adjacent stone.
Advantages: uniform properties and quality.
Disadvantage: susceptible to weathering, tearing, clogging and flopping.
Toe Structures
No rigorous criteria. Design is complicated by interactions between main
structure, hydrodynamic forces and foundation soil. Design is often ad hoc or
based on laboratory testing. Toe failure often leads to major structural failure.
Functions of toe structure:
1. support the armor layer and prevent it from sliding (armor layer is
subject to waves and will tend to assume the equilibrium beach profile
shape)
2. protect against scouring at the toe of the structure
3. prevent underlying material from leaching out
4. provide structural stability against circular or slip failure
Toe Structure Functions

EBP

Armor layer support

Protecting against leaching

weak soil

Protect against scour

Prevent circular failure

Toe Structure Stability


For larger ht smaller stone sizes are required (wave action is reduced as
depth increases). From experiments:

ht
H1/ 3
f N s 0.22

h
SG 1 D50

for 50% confidence level

ht
H1/ 3
0.253

h
SG 1 D50

for 90% confidence level

SPM recommends berm width at toe be at least 3 armor stones. Actual


width and height should be checked by circular stability analysis. (see
discussion below on width design for scour considerations)
Scour Consideration
If no Toe Structure is used, armor layer should extend below maximum
scouring depth and the breakwater slope may require adjustment to reduce
scour.

Return flow
and vortex formation
ds

Toe is protected by toe structure


scour hole

Generally:

ds
f 0.5 to 1.0
H
, with 1.0 at ~ 2.7

The following design equations are based on preventing or minimizing scour in front of
vertical structures
Toe Apron Width (Bt) - width should be the maximum of Bt = 2H or Bt = 0.4h
Toe Stone Weight
Wt

aH 3

N s2 SG 1 cot
3

where Ns = stability number is the maximum of

1 K 2 ht
1 K ht
N s 1.3

1
.
8
exp

1
.
5

1/ 3
K 1/ 3 H
K H

or

Ns = 1.8

where K = a parameter associated with the maximum horizontal velocity


at the edge of the toe apron
K

2kht
sin 2 kBt
sinh 2kht

Additional Toe Structure Design References:


Headquarters, Department of the Army. (1985) Design of Coastal Revetments, Seawalls,
and Bulkheads, Engineer Manual 1110-2-1614, Washington, DC, Chapter 2, pp. 1519.

Hudson, R. Y. (1959) Laboratory Investigations of Rubble-Mound Breakwaters,


Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Waterways and Harbors Division, Vol. 85, NO. WW3, Paper No. 2171.
Shore Protection Manual. (1984) 4th cd., 2 Vols., US Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Coastal Engineering Research Center, US Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC, Chapter 7, pp. 242-249.
Tanimoto, K., Yagyu, T., and Goda, Y. (1982) Irregular Wave Tests for Composite
Breakwater Foundations, Proceedings of the 18th Coastal Engineering Conference,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Cape Town, Republic of South Africa, Vol. III,
pp. 2144-2161.

Low Crested Breakwaters


Highest part of breakwater is at or below MSL
1. Stabilize beach/ retain sand after nourishment
2. Protect larger structures
3. Cause large storm waves to break and dissipate energy before reaching
the beach
Traditional high-crested breakwaters with a multi-layered cross section may not
be appropriate for a structure used to protect a beach or shoreline. Adequate wave
protection may be more economically provided by a low-crested or submerged
structure composed of a homogeneous pile of stone.
** Failure occurs by loss of stones from the crest.

N s*
Use a modified stability number

H 2 / 3 L1 / 3
1/ 3

SG 1 W
a

a H L
2

SG 1 3 N s* 3

L is the wave length at the structure depth and is calculated using peak
period (Tp) for random waves.
AS
D502 , where A = area of damage (see
Damage Level (S) is defined as:
s
diagram) and D50 = median stone size of the breakwater
S

Given S, hc, h determine Ns* from

hc
2.1 0.1S exp 0.14 N s*
h

hc = height of the wave crest above the sea floor


h = water depth at the structure

As = area of structure
profile from which stone
has been removed/lost

hc

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi