Wave Load Calculations, Methodology & Results

Navarre Beach Fishing Pier Design

Input Parameters

In order to calculate an appropriate bed elevation for the pier, the pier is divided into eight “load
sections.” These sections are spaced approximately 300 feet apart between the end of the pier
and the shore. At each load section, a bed elevation was determined from the December 2006
beach profile at monument R-210 surveyed by Morgan & Eklund. Based on the maximum
difference between historic beach profiles at the location, a scour value was determined and
subtracted to the December 2006 bed elevation value. To be conservative, areas with less than
five feet of observed scour were given a scour value of five feet.

Load Maximum Bed

December 2006 Bed Scour (ft,
section Location Elevation (ft,
Elevation (ft, NAVD88) R-210)
(ID) NAVD88)
1 15+00 -18.4 6.0 -24.4
2 12+00 -14.4 5.0* -19.4
3 9+00 -15.4 5.0 -20.4
4 6+00 -7.4 5.0 -12.4
5 4+00 4.6 10.0 -5.4
6 2+50 9.6 13.0 -3.4
7 1+00 12.6 7.0 5.6
8 -1+00 7.6 5.0** 2.6

Table 1. Load sections, depths and scour for force calculations.

*observed scour of 3 feet
**observed scour of 0 feet

To calculate the water depth, the storm surge elevation of 7.4 feet (NAVD88) associated with the
20 year wave event (BSRC, Okaloosa West profile) is applied, giving a total water depth. This
depth is used to calculate the height of the depth-limited breaking wave that will be applied to the
pier according to Equation 1,

(1) H b = κhb
where Hb is the breaking wave height, hb is the breaking wave depth, and κ=0.7.

Wave period is determined as the largest period that can propagate into the depth at the load
section, up to twelve seconds. This is explained in more detail in the wave hydrodynamics
section below.

Breaking Wave
Section ID Height (ft) Wave Period (s) Water Depths (ft)
1 22.3 11 31.8
2 18.8 10, 10, 11 26.8
3 19.5 10, 10, 11 27.8
4 13.9 8, 8, 9 19.8
5 9 7, 7, 8 12.8

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 1

 6 7.6 6, 7, 7 10.8
7 1.3 0, 0, 4 1.8
8 3.4 4, 5, 5 4.8

Table 2. Breaking wave heights and total water depths (bed+scour+surge) for each section
during a 20-year storm event.

Wave Hydrodynamics

The wave kinematics for each wave height, depth, and period scenario are calculated using
stream function wave theory, a fully nonlinear theory that is valid from deep water up to near-
breaking waves. The specific code utilized is translated from a Fortran routine written by Dr. John
Chaplin of Southampton University. As seen in Table 2, the wave periods vary with water depth.
In all cases, these periods were the maximum that the program could compute in the associated
water depth. The output of this program is the wave free-surface height, particle velocities and
accelerations, which are used to calculate forces on the pilings. Figure 1 shows an example of
the results obtained using this routine.

Figure 1. Example output of stream function wave program.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 2

Pile Force Calculations

With the wave kinematics determined, the forces on the pile induced by the wave can be
calculated. The pilings in this case are square and 2 feet in diameter. In all cases, the wave is
assumed to be breaking. To find the maximum force, the kinematics at the wave crest will be
used in the calculations.

Morrison’s equation (Equations 2a-2c) is used to calculate the pile forces. It consists of two parts;
a drag force FD and an inertia force FI.

(2a) F = FD + FI

1
(2b) FD = ρC D D u u
2
du
(2c) FI = ρC M D 2
dt
In the above equations, ρ is the density of seawater, CD is the drag coefficient, D is the pile
diameter, u is the water particle velocity, CM is the inertia coefficient, and du/dt is the total water
particle acceleration. Table 4 summarizes the constants in the above equations.

Constant Description Value

ρ Density of seawater 1026 kg/m3

CM Inertia coefficient 2.5
CD Drag coefficient 2 (5*)
D Pile diameter 2 ft / 0.61 m

Table 3. Constants in Morrison’s equation. *The drag coefficient is multiplied by 2.5 above the
still water level, SWL, in the leading side of the wave crest to account for ‘slamming’ forces from
wave breaking.

Morrison’s equation results in a distribution of wave force per unit vertical length of pile from the
sand water interface/mudline to the wave crest. An example of this distribution is shown in Figure
2. The discontinuity at the SWL is the point above which breaking effects are considered and the
drag coefficient is increased.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 3

Figure 2. Force per unit vertical length at location 15+00 for a 20yr storm event and 2ft diameter
pile.

The total resultant force, moment arm, and moment can be calculated from this force distribution
using Equations 3-5.

(3) Ftotal = ∫ Fdz

−h

η
1
(4) l=
Ftotal ∫ zFdz + h
−h

1
(5) M = Ftotal
l
In the above equations, Ftotal is the resultant force, h is the total water depth, η is the free surface
elevation (in this case, the crest elevation), z is the vertical axis, l is the moment arm, and M is the
total moment.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 4

This force can also be calculated in two dimensions along the pier, so that a framework of pilings
can be analyzed. Figure 3 is an example of this presentation at Station 15+00. The diagrams for
Stations 12+00, 9+00, 6+00 and 4+00 are attached.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 5

Figure 3. Force per unit vertical length at location 15+00 for a 20 year storm event and 2ft diameter pile, displayed in 2D along the pier.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 6

Hand-check of Pile Force Calculation

The results of equations 3-5 are used to hand-check the results of using the stream function
method for calculating force against Equation 6.7 on p. 143 found in Basic Coastal Engineering
by R.M. Sorensen, presented here as Equation 6.

π 2 ρ f D 2 HLC M sinh( k (η + h))

F= sin(ωt ) +
4T 2 sinh( kh)
(6)
π 2 ρ f DH 2 LC D 2k (η + h) + sinh( 2k (η + h))
2 2
(cos(ωt )) 2
16T (sinh( kh))

In Equation 6, ρf is the density of seawater, H is the wave height, L is the wavelength, T is the
wave period, k is the wavenumber, and ω is the wave angular frequency. Other variables are the
same as previously described. This equation is based on small-amplitude, linear wave theory
and does not include the effects of wave breaking. Table 4 compares results of Equation 6 with
the results using stream function theory. Breaking is not accounted for in the stream function
model.

Stream function (lb) 41000

Sorensen (lb) 34400

Difference (%) 19

Table 4. Comparison of Stream function method and Sorensen equation at section 1 of pier a
20-year storm.

The force calculated by the stream function method is consistently about 20% higher than that of
Sorensen’s method. This can likely be explained by the fact that nonlinear waves (as calculated
by stream function theory) have higher velocities above the SWL than linear waves. In addition,
Sorensen’s equation assumes a small-amplitude linear wave, which is not applicable with the
large shallow water waves in this case. Hand-checking shows that the stream function
calculations are of the right magnitude and are reliable.

Additional Considerations

Breaking Wave Bores

For the interior piles, it is possible that a bore from a wave that breaks on the outer piles could
have a more powerful effect than the breaking wave associated with that pile. Therefore, an
broken wave decay analysis was conducted to determine if wave bores are a concern and should
be factored into the force calculations. Dally, Dean, and Dalrymple (1985) developed a model of
breaking wave dissipation, which for linear, shallow-water theory reduces to Equations 7a-7c.

1
κ ⎛⎜ 2 2 ⎞
2 2 1 5
d (H d )
(7a) = − ⎜ H d − Γ d ⎟⎟
2 2
for H > Hstable
dx d⎝ ⎠

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 7

 1
2 2
d (H d )
(7b) =0 for H < Hstable
dx

(7c) H stable = Γd
In the above equations, H is the wave height, d is the water depth, x is the axis of wave
propagation, κ is an empirical decay coefficient with a value of approximately 0.15, and Γ is an
empirical coefficient with a value of approximately 0.4. Using this model, it can be determined if a
broken wave bore has a greater height than the depth-limited wave at a section, and its forcing
needs to be determined. Figure 4 shows the result of this model using the 20 year wave breaking
at section 1 and propagating along the pier.

Figure 4. Model result of the 20 year, section 1 wave breaking and propagating along the pier.

Figure 4 shows that the breaking wave height (in blue) is smaller than the depth-limited wave
height (in red). The results are similar for all scenarios; thus, a broken wave bore has a lesser
effect on the pier than the design conditions already investigated, and no further force
calculations are necessary.

Uplift forces on horizontal members

Uplift forces imposed by waves are of great importance to the horizontal members of the pier,
including the pile cap, pier deck, and handrails. Uplift can be described with two components:

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 8

the slowly-varying force and the impact force. Equations 8a and 8b define these two forces in
terms of a pressure.

(8a) p sv = γ (η − hmem )

(8b) pim = 4 p sv
In the above equations, psv is the slowly-varying pressure, pim is the impact pressure, γ is the
specific weight of seawater, η is the wave crest elevation, and hmem is the height of the member
(pile cap, deck, etc). For the cases that the height of the pier member is above the crest height of
the wave, uplift is not a concern. During the 20-year storm, the only section of the pier affected
by wave uplift forces is at section 15+00 where the bottom of the cap receives minimal uplift
forces as shown in Table 5.

Uplift forces (lb/ft^2)

Section Slowly-Varying Impact
1 (15+00) 103 414

Table 5. Calculated uplift forces during a 20-year storm.

July 2007 Coastal and Waterways Division Page 9