The Use of Submerged Narrow-Crested Breakwaters for Shoreline Erosion Control
INTRODUCTION - coas_19_202_684_7220002
Figure 1. (a) Diagram of P.E.P. Reef unit, (b) photo of unit, and (c) placement of units at Vero Beach, FL (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 2. (a) Diagram of Beachsaver Reef unit (after Herrington and Bruno, 1998), (b) photo of unit, and (c) placement of unit at Avalon, New Jersey.
PALM BEACH, FL--DUPONT PROPERTY PROJECT
MIDTOWN PALM BEACH, FL PROJECT
Table 2. Monitoring for P.E.P. Reef at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida.
Figure 7. Comparison of the annual shoreline changes at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996)
Figure 8. Comparison of the annual volumetric changes at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996).
Figure 9. Cumulative change in volume by zone at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996)
Figure 11. Representative profiles from (a) R-94D north control, (b) R-96F P.E.P. Reef, and (c) R-100B south control (from Dean and Chen, 1996).
Figure 12. Average settlement after 33 months for the first 57 units and after 20 months for the remaining 273 units at the P.E.P. Reef installation at Midtown Palm Beach (after Dean and Chen, 1996).
able 3. Monitoring of Beachsaver Reef at Avalon, New Jersey.
Sediment Volume Response - coas_19_202_684_7220014
Figure 14. Representative profile monitoring of the Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 15. Average erosion rates at Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 16. Settlement at Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site (Bruno et al., 1996b).
Figure 17. Location of the Beachsaver Reef installation at Cape May Point, New Jersey.
Figure 18. Representative profile monitoring of the Cape May Point, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 19. Volume change between profiles at Cape May Point, New Jersey (after Herrington et al., 1997).
Figure 20. Settlement at Cape May Point Beachsaver Reef (after Herrington et al., 1997).
Table 5. Monitoring of Beachsaver Reef at Belmar/Spring Lake, New Jersey
igure 22. Representative profile monitoring of the Belmar/Spring Lake, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 23. Location of the P.E.P. Reef installation at Vero Beach, Florida
Monitoring Program
Table 6. Monitoring of P.E.P. Reef at Vero Beach, Florida.
Figure 24. Cumulative shoreline change at Vero Beach P.E.P. Reef installation (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 25. Cumulative volume change at Vero Beach P.E.P. Reef installation (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 26. Representative profile monitoring of the P.E.P. Reef at Vero Beach site.
Figure 27. Average settlement after 14 months of the inner and outer P.E.P. Reef segments relative to initial installation in August 1998 at Vero Beach, Florida
CONCLUSIONS - coas_19_202_684_7220031
Summary of Installations
Performance Parameters
Table 8. Summary of Peformance Parameters of Short-Crested Submerged Prefabricated Concrete Breakwaters
Sediment Volume Response - coas_19_202_684_7220035
Wave Attenuation
Performance Criteria - coas_19_202_684_7220037
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS - coas_19_202_684_7220038
LITERATURE CITED - coas_19_202_684_7220039
coas_19_202_684_722
INTRODUCTION - coas_19_202_684_7220002
Figure 1. (a) Diagram of P.E.P. Reef unit, (b) photo of unit, and (c) placement of units at Vero Beach, FL (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 2. (a) Diagram of Beachsaver Reef unit (after Herrington and Bruno, 1998), (b) photo of unit, and (c) placement of unit at Avalon, New Jersey.
PALM BEACH, FL--DUPONT PROPERTY PROJECT
MIDTOWN PALM BEACH, FL PROJECT
Table 2. Monitoring for P.E.P. Reef at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida.
Figure 7. Comparison of the annual shoreline changes at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996)
Figure 8. Comparison of the annual volumetric changes at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996).
Figure 9. Cumulative change in volume by zone at Midtown Palm Beach, Florida (after Dean and Chen, 1996)
Figure 11. Representative profiles from (a) R-94D north control, (b) R-96F P.E.P. Reef, and (c) R-100B south control (from Dean and Chen, 1996).
Figure 12. Average settlement after 33 months for the first 57 units and after 20 months for the remaining 273 units at the P.E.P. Reef installation at Midtown Palm Beach (after Dean and Chen, 1996).
able 3. Monitoring of Beachsaver Reef at Avalon, New Jersey.
Sediment Volume Response - coas_19_202_684_7220014
Figure 14. Representative profile monitoring of the Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 15. Average erosion rates at Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 16. Settlement at Avalon, New Jersey, Beachsaver site (Bruno et al., 1996b).
Figure 17. Location of the Beachsaver Reef installation at Cape May Point, New Jersey.
Figure 18. Representative profile monitoring of the Cape May Point, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 19. Volume change between profiles at Cape May Point, New Jersey (after Herrington et al., 1997).
Figure 20. Settlement at Cape May Point Beachsaver Reef (after Herrington et al., 1997).
Table 5. Monitoring of Beachsaver Reef at Belmar/Spring Lake, New Jersey
igure 22. Representative profile monitoring of the Belmar/Spring Lake, New Jersey, Beachsaver site.
Figure 23. Location of the P.E.P. Reef installation at Vero Beach, Florida
Monitoring Program
Table 6. Monitoring of P.E.P. Reef at Vero Beach, Florida.
Figure 24. Cumulative shoreline change at Vero Beach P.E.P. Reef installation (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 25. Cumulative volume change at Vero Beach P.E.P. Reef installation (Stauble, 2002).
Figure 26. Representative profile monitoring of the P.E.P. Reef at Vero Beach site.
Figure 27. Average settlement after 14 months of the inner and outer P.E.P. Reef segments relative to initial installation in August 1998 at Vero Beach, Florida
CONCLUSIONS - coas_19_202_684_7220031
Summary of Installations
Performance Parameters
Table 8. Summary of Peformance Parameters of Short-Crested Submerged Prefabricated Concrete Breakwaters
Sediment Volume Response - coas_19_202_684_7220035
Wave Attenuation
Performance Criteria - coas_19_202_684_7220037
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS - coas_19_202_684_7220038
LITERATURE CITED - coas_19_202_684_7220039
coas_19_202_684_722
