DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION OF COASTAL STRUCTURES

A.V. SITARAMA SARMA,

Research Officer
Central Water & Power Research Station, Pune

1. INTRODUCTION

Coastal structures are the marine structure located in coastal waters. Marine
structures can be broadly classified into two types:
a) Offshore Structures and
b) Near-shore Structures

The design of Near-shore structures and offshore structures varies greatly in

terms of environmental factors, depth of water etc. Offshore structures are located
in deepwater and are subjected to forces due to short crested multi-directional
waves, which are predominant, apart from other forces due to wind, ocean
currents etc.

The different types of offshore structure are:-

Gravity Type Structures
Pile Supported Structures
Floating Structures
Submarine Pipelines

The near-shore structures can be grouped into:-

Rigid structure – Sheet piles, Walls
Semi-rigid or Composite structures – Caissons or cells on rubble base
Flexible Structures – Rubblemound breakwaters, Sea walls

Fig 1: Types of Near-shore Structures

Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

Thus these near shore structures are subjected to various marine

environmental forces due to waves, winds and currents. The wave forces are the
dominant forces and are decisive in the design of near shore coastal structures.
Rubblemound structures are the most commonly applied type for breakwater and
seawall. The stability of rubblemound coastal structures depends primarily upon
the stability of individual armour units on its seawards slope. The other
hydrodynamic aspects of the effect of waves on the rubblemound are wave run-up,
rundown, overtopping, reflection and transmission. Design of flexible rubblemound
structures is complex as it involves various aspects such as wave-structure
interaction interlocking, characteristics of armour, friction between armour and
secondary layer etc.

Though various empirical formulae are available, the designers / planners of

rubblemound structure prefer to evolve the conceptual design by empirical
formulae which is confirmed and finalized by hydraulic model tests in wave flumes /
basins.

2. RUBBLEMOUND STRUCTURES

Rubblemound structure in its most simple shape, it is a mound of stones.

However, a homogeneous structure of stones large enough to resist displacements
due to wave forces is very permeable and might cause too much penetration not
only of waves, but also of sediments if present in the area. Moreover, large stones
are expensive because most quarries yield mainly finer material (quarry run) and
only relatively few large stones.

As a consequence, a rubblemound structure is normally composed of a bedding

layer and a core of quarry-run stone covered by one or more layers of larger stone
and an exterior layer or layers of large quarry stone or concrete armour units (Fig.
2 & 3). Concrete armour units are used as armour blocks on the outer slopes of
rubblemound structures in areas with rough wave climates or at sites where a
sufficient amount of large quarry stones is not available.

Figure 2: Typical Cross Section of Rubblemound Breakwater

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 2
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

Sea side Crest Lee side

High Water Level Secondary layer

Armour Core
Filter
Toe

Existing beach Profile

Fig 3: Typical Section of a Seawall

The breakwaters and the seawalls are generally constructed as rubblemound

structures (Photo 1 &2). Breakwaters are the structures constructed to protect the
harbour facilities from the hostile forces of the waves and to provide tranquil
conditions for the berthing of the ships. The seawalls are the coastal structures
constructed along the coastline to protect the eroding shore. Wave is the important
parameter in the design of these structures. Wave structure interaction needs to be
thoroughly understood while designing the rubblemound structures.

To prevent finer material being washed out through the armour layer, filter
layers must be provided. The filter layer just beneath the armour layer is also called
the under layer. Structures consisting of armour layer, filter layer(s), and core are
referred to as multilayer structures.

Photo 1: Typical Breakwater Photo 2 : Typical Seawall

The design of a seawall differs from that of a breakwater mainly in the

following aspects:

o Run-up/overtopping conditions are generally important for seawalls

o Toe erosion of seawall has to be critically examined for stability of seawall as

well as stability of coast along sides of seawall

o Seawalls are constructed parallel to the shoreline along the coast, whereas
breakwaters are normal to the coast, protruding into the sea from the shore
o Construction of a seawall is comparatively simpler than that of the breakwater

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 3
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

3. DESIGN INFORMATION AND CONSIDERATIONS

Following information should be collected before the design of coastal rubblemound

structure:

- Tidal levels
- Character of coastal currents
- Directions and force of prevailing winds
- Probable maximum height, force and intensity of waves
- Nature of seabed or foundation
- Cost and availability of materials of constructions

Following considerations are important in the design of structure:

- The design should be based on the extreme phenomena of the wind and waves,
and not on the mean or the average
-

- The height of breakwater should be decided accordingly by making sufficient

allowance for freeboard
-

- It should be seen that the material in the foundation is not subject to scour

4. WAVE STRUCTURE INTERACTION

A large segment of coastal engineering design requires an analysis of the

functional and structural behaviour of a variety of coastal structures of paramount
importance is the response of these structures to wave attack. Wave structure
interaction can be divided in two parts:

1) Hydraulic Response
2) Wave loadings and related structural response

4.1. Hydraulic Response

Design conditions for coastal structures include acceptable levels of hydraulic
responses in terms of:

4.1.1. Wave Run-up & Run-down : Wave run up level is one of the most
important factors affecting the design of coastal structures, because it determines
the design crest level of the structure in cases where no (or only marginal)
overtopping is acceptable. Examples include dikes, revetments, and breakwaters
with pedestrian traffic.

4.1.2. Wave Overtopping : It occurs when the structure crest height is smaller
than the run up level. Overtopping discharge is an important design parameter
because, it determines the crest level and the design of the upper part of the
structure. Design levels of overtopping discharges frequently vary, from heavy
overtopping of detached breakwaters and outer breakwaters without access roads,

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 4
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

to very limited overtopping in cases where roads, storage areas, and moorings are
close to the front of the structure.

4.1.3. Wave Transmission : Wave action behind a structure can be caused by

wave overtopping and also by wave penetration as the structure is permeable.
Waves generated from overtopping tend to have shorter periods than the incident
waves. Generally the transmitted wave periods are about half that of the incident
waves. Permeable structures like single stone size rubble mounds and slotted
screens allow wave transmission as a result of wave penetration. Design levels of
transmitted waves depend on the use of the protected area.

4.1.4. Wave Reflection : Coastal structures reflect some proportion of the

incident wave energy. If reflection is significant, the interaction of incident and
reflected waves can create an extremely confused sea with very steep waves that
often are breaking. This is a difficult problem for many harbour entrance areas
where steep waves can cause considerable manoeuvring problems for smaller
vessels. Strong reflection also increases the sea bed erosion potential in front of
protective structures. Waves reflected from some coastal structures may contribute
to erosion of adjacent beaches.

4.2. Wave loadings and related structural response

An important part of the design procedure for structures in general is the

determination of the loads and the related stresses, deformations, and stability
conditions of the structural members. In the case of rubblemound structures
exposed to waves, such procedures cannot be followed because the wave loading
on single stones or blocks cannot be determined by theory, by normal scale model
tests, or by prototype recordings. Instead a black box approach is used in which
experiments are used to establish relationships between certain wave
characteristics and the structural response, usually expressed in terms of armour
movements. The related stresses, e.g., in concrete armour blocks, are known only
for a few types of blocks for which special investigations have been performed. For
vertical-front monolithic structures like breakwater caissons and seawalls it is
possible either from theory or experiments to estimate the wave loadings and
subsequently determine stresses, deformations, and stability.

5. DESIGN WAVE CONDITIONS

Wind generated waves produce most powerful forces to which coastal

structure are subjected. Wave characteristics are usually determined for deep
water and then analytically propagated shoreward to the structure. Deep water
wave heights and periods can be determined if wind speed, wind duration and
fetch length data are available. Visual observations of storm waves may provide an
indication of wave height, period, direction, storm duration and frequency of
occurrence. Instruments such as wave rider buoys are available for recording wave
height, period and direction of waves. Reliable deep-water wave data can be
analyzed to perform refraction and shoaling analysis to determine shallow water
wave conditions.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 5
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

The choice of design wave conditions for structural stability as well as

functional performances of a rubblemound structure at any time depends critically
on the water level at the site. Structure may be subjected to radically different type
of wave action as the water level at the site varies. A given structure might be
subjected to non-breaking, breaking and broken waves during different stages of a
tidal cycle. The wave action may also vary along the length of the structure at a
given time. Critical wave conditions that result in maximum forces on the structures
like groins and jetties may occur at a location other than the seaward end of the
structure. This possibility should be considered in choosing design wave and water
level conditions.

Generally, coastal structures are designed for breaking wave conditions,

which exert maximum force on the structures. The breaking wave height (Hb) can
be obtained from the depth of water (ds), at the structure by the following relation.

Hb / ds = 0.78 ………… (1)

If breaking in shallow water does not limit wave height, a non-breaking

condition exists. A significant wave height (Hs) and significant wave period (Tz)
would represent the characteristics of the real sea in the form of monochromatic or
regular waves. To apply the significant wave concept, it is necessary to define the
height and period parameters from wave observations. Munk (1944) defined
significant wave height as the average height of the one-third highest waves
(H1/3 or Hs) and stated that it is about equal to the average height of the wave as
estimated by an experienced observer. An alternative definition of Hs sometimes
applied as 4 times standard deviation (σ) of the sea surface elevation i.e. Hs = σ.

Also, Hs = 1.416 Hrms ………… (2)

Where, Hrms = Root mean square wave height

The selected design wave height depends on whether the structure is

defined rigid, semi-rigid or flexible. As a rule of thumb, the design wave height is
selected as follows:

For a rigid structure like sheet pile wall or concrete caisson, where a high wave
within the wave train might cause failure of the entire structure, the design wave
height is normally Hmax or H1 (H1= 1.67 Hs i.e. average of highest 1 percent of all
waves). For semi-rigid structures, the design wave height is selected from a range
of H1 to H5 (H5 = 1.37 Hs i.e. average of highest five percent of all waves). For
flexible structure such as rubblemound or riprap structure, the design wave height
between Hs and H10 (H10 = 1.27 Hs i.e. average of highest ten percent of all
waves), which are based on the following factors:

- Degree of structural damage tolerable, associated maintenance & repair costs

- Availability of construction material & equipment
- Reliability of data used to estimate wave conditions

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 6
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

6. DESIGN OF RUBBLEMOUND STRUCTURES

Rubblemound structure consisting of graded layers of stone and an armour

cover layer of stone or specially shaped concrete units are employed in the coastal
zone as breakwater, jetties, groins, and seawalls. One advantage of rubblemound
structure is that failure of armour cover layer is not sudden, but gradual, usually
partial in extent, and spread over the duration of the storm. If damage does occur,
the structure continues to function and the damage can be repaired after the storm
abates during a period of lower waves. In some cases, it may be economical to use
smaller size armour units, anticipate a certain degree of damage during a design
storm, and provide provision for subsequent repair of structure.

Armour units must be of sufficient size to resist wave attack. However, if the
entire structure consists of units of this size, the structure would allow extremely
high wave energy transmission and finer material in foundation or embankment
could easily be removed. Thus the structure unit sizes are graded, in layers, from
the large exterior armour units to small quarry-run sizes and finer at the core and
at the interface with the native soil bed.

Other rubblemound structure design consideration includes prevention of

scour at the seaward toe, spreading of structure load, so there is no foundation
failure owing to excessive loads and providing sufficient crest elevation and width
so wave run-up and overtopping do not cause failure of the armour units on the
leeward side of the structure or regeneration of excessive wave action in the lee
side of the structure. The crest width may be governed by minimum roadway width
needed for construction vehicles.

6.1. Factors Affecting Armour Unit Stability

6.1.1. Incident Wave Spectrum : Since failure of rubblemound structures is

gradual, the significant wave height is most commonly used in the design formulas,
although more conservative heights such as H10 have been used. Some
consideration should be given to the expected duration of wave attack. When
selecting a design wave height. It is also important to determine, whether the
design wave will break on or before the structure or the water depth is sufficient
for the wave to reflect without breaking. If breaking on the structure does occur,
armour unit stability is then dependent on the type of breaker, which, in turn,
depends on the wave height and period and the structure slope.

6.1.2. Armour Unit Size, Weight, Shape, Location & Method of Placement:
Armour unit stability formulas give the weight of a unit required for stability. The
resulting size is then depends on the specific weight of rock or concrete. Resistance
to hydrodynamic forces is also developed by unit interlocking, which depends on
the unit shape, gradation and the method by which the units are placed during
construction. One of the goals of design of artificial concrete armour unit is to
develop shapes that exhibit a high degree of interlocking with sufficient porosity
when in place. Armour unit stability also depends on location in the breakwater, as

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 7
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

exposure to wave attack is usually greater at the head of a breakwater than at

some point along the trunk.

6.1.3. Armour Layer Thickness, Porosity & Slope : Two layer of armour units
are usually used to achieve an optimum trade off between initial and reserve
stability, prevention of removal of smaller sizes from the under layer, and structure
costs. Layer porosities usually vary between 35-55 percent, depending on armour
unit shape and placement method. Low porosities increase the level of wave
reflection, an effect that can be undesirable in certain situations. Low porosities
also cause increased wave run-up, as well as internal pressure builds up due to
return flow of wave run-up. Internal pressure build up contributes to armour unit
instability. Breakwater armour units are all of one or a small range of sizes (usually
within ± 25 percent of the average size), but stone riprap revetments often has a
much longer size range. The size range of successive layer breakwater should
increase, to decrease breakwater permeability. Typical seaward of breakwater
and seawall slopes vary from 1 on 1.33 to 1 on 3, whereas revetment slopes as flat
as 1 on 5. A flatter slope increase armour unit stability. It may also increase costs,
since more material is required even though run-up is lower and thus a lower crest
elevation may be used. An economic trade off between unit size (layer thickness)
and slope length can often be made. Depending on the degree of wave
overtopping anticipated, the leeward slope of a breakwater can be steepened to
near the angle of repose of the cover layer units (usually 1 on 1.25 as a limit).

6.1.4. Allowable Damage : The degree of damage is usually defined as the

percent damage based on the volume of armour unit displaced in the zone of wave
attack. A certain amount of initial settling of armour units increases the stability of
the armour layer. Allowance of up to 10 to 20 percent damage for a design wave
will significantly decrease the required armour unit size. However, the damage
should not be allowed to that extent interior layers are exposed to direct wave
attack. The allowable damage should depend on initial costs versus maintenance
costs, as well as on the allowable risk to areas protected by the structure.

6.2. Determination of Armour Unit Stability :

The stability of the rubblemound under ocean wave attack is the most
important aspect in the design of rubblemound breakwaters. The stability of
rubblemound structures depends primarily upon the stability of individual armour
units on its seaward slope. Design of flexible rubblemound structures is complex as
it involves various aspects such as wave-structure interaction, interlocking
characteristics of armour, friction between armour and secondary layer etc. A
major aspect in the design of rubblemound structures is the minimum weight of the
armour units on the seaward slope, required to withstand the design waves. The
resisting action of armour units either stones or concrete blocks, is very complex.
It is not possible theoretically to say when exactly the maximum force is exerted on
the rubblemound to lift the individual armour unit. Many studies were carried out
on the hydraulic stability of individual armour unit on the seaward slope and
several empirical formulae have been derived for the estimation of the minimum
weight and are described below.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 8
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

6.2.1. Iribarren Formula : Until 1930’s, the design of rubblemound structures

was based only on general knowledge and experience of site conditions. A first
design formula to calculate weight of armour unit of rubblemound structure was
developed by Iribarren in 1938. According to Iribaren’s formulae,

K H 3 Sr
W=
( f cos θ − sin θ )3 ( Sr − 1)3 ………… (3)

Where, W = weight of armour unit (kg)

H = wave height breaking on the armour unit (m)
Sr = specific gravity of the armour unit
ө = angle of breakwater slope with the horizontal
K = coefficient (15 for natural stones, 19 for artificial blocks)
f = coefficient of friction of armour units

6.2.2. Hudson Formula : Following the work of Iribarren, comprehensive

investigations were carried out by Hudson at US Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg (USA). Based upon the experimental
results, Hudson suggested the following formula for the armour units:

W r .H 3 ………… (4)
W=
KD ( Sr − 1) cot θ
3

Where, W = weight of armour unit (kg)

Wr = unit weights of armour block (kg/cum)
H = wave height at the location of the proposed structure (m)
Sr = specific gravity of the armour units
ө = angle of breakwater slope measured with the horizontal
KD = stability coefficient which varies with type of armour

Hudson had considered in his experiments wave periods varying from

0.8 sec to 2.65 sec and the armour layer slope from 1/1.25 to1/5. All the
experiments were conducted for non-overtopping and non-breaking
monochromatic waves. Hudson had also established KD values for stones and
artificially cast different types of blocks viz. Tetrapods, Tribars, etc. These values
were worked out for no damage condition (i.e. the damage to the armour units
would be less tan 1%). The Hudson formula is the most popular and has been in
use for the last 50 years for the design of breakwaters, because of the fact that
extensive KD values are available based on the scale model tests.

Most laboratory studies to evaluate KD have used waves of constant period

and height. For irregular waves, it is felt that the significant height is the most
appropriate wave height to use for H in above equation. There have only been a
limited number of evaluations of above equation using irregular waves. More
research with a variety of wave spectra is needed. The only effect of wave period
on above equation is, in its effects on KD through the breaking condition. Note that
the required unit weight is a function of the wave height cubed, so armour unit

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 9
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

weights increase rapidly with increased design wave height. Some values of are
listed in table 1 below, as a function unit shape, location on the structure, and
exposure to breaking or non-breaking waves (SPM 1984). These values are for zero
allowable damage(less than 1%), units randomly placed in layers two units thick
and minor or no wave overtopping.

A Tetrapod consists of four tapered legs extending outward from a common point
at approximately equal angles to each other; a tribar has three parallel circular
cylinders connected by a Y-shape member that connects to the center point of
each cylinder and is normal to axes of the three cylinders; and a dolos is like the
letter H, with the vertical legs rotated 90° to each other. There is a significant
effect of unit shape on the stability coefficient, which is inversely proportional to
the armour unit weight. The stability coefficients given for riprap are for the weight
of the median stone size in a gradation from 0.22W to 3.6W.

Table 1: KD Values for No-Damage Criteria and Minor Overtopping waves

(Refer SPM 1984 before using these values)
Structure Trunk Structure Head Slop
Armor Unit e
n Placement Non- Non-
Breaking Breaking Cot
breaking breaking
Wave Wave θ
Wave Wave
Quarry stones
Smooth
2 Random 1.2 2.4 1.1 1.9
Rounded
1.5
Smooth to
>3 Random 1.6 3.2 1.4 2.3
Rounded 3.5
Rough Angular 1 Random - 2.9 - 2.3
1.9 3.2 1.5
Rough angular 2 Random 2.0 4.0 1.6 2.8 2.0
1.3 2.3 3.0
Rough angular >3 Random 2.2 4.5 21 4.2 5
Rough angular 2 Special 5.8 7.0 5.3 6.4 5

Parallelepiped 2 Special 7 – 20 8.5 – 24 -- -- --

Graded angular --- Random 2.2 2.5 -- -- --

5.0 6.0 1.5
Tetrapod &
2 Random 7.0 8.0 4.5 5.5 2.0
Quadripod
3.5 4.0 3.0
8.3 9.0 1.5
Tribar 2 Random 9.0 10 7.8 8.5 2.0
6.0 6.5 3.0
8.0 16.0 2.0
Dolos 2 Random 15.8 31.8
7.0 14.0 3.0
Modified cube 2 Random 6.5 7.5 -- 5.0 5
Hexapod 2 Random 8.0 9.5 5.0 7.0 5
Toskane 2 Random 11.0 22.0 -- -- 5
Tribar 1 Uniform 12.0 15.0 7.5 9.5 5

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 10
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

Fig 4 : Examples of concrete armour unit

6.2.3. Per Brunn’s Formula : A number of formulae have been evolved by other
investigators from time to time. Most of these formulae take into account the wave
height, density of the armour units and angle of the breakwater slope. However,
in the recent developments in the design of breakwaters, it is observed that weight
of the armour unit is also related to wave period. Per Brunn et. al have analyzed
the flow conditions as a result of wave attack on the rubblemound structures - to
determine the conditions which cause the maximum destructive force on the
breakwater. They have considered the data available for slopes ranging from
1:1.5 to 1:5 from CERC and BEB tests. It has been concluded from their study that
the breakwater slope (θ), the wave height (H) and the wave period (T) are the
main parameters to be considered. A parameter called 'Surf Similarity parameter'
comprising θ, H and T has been evolved as :
tanθ g T
ξ = = (tanθ ) …………(5)
H L0 2π H

This parameter describes the overall flow characteristics like breaking waves, run-
up and run down and the effect of wave period. Per Brunn indicated that the
forces trying to dislocate the armour units maximise with deep run down conditions
occurring simultaneously and repeatedly with collapsing, surging or plunging wave
breaking conditions, thus corresponds to the range of ξ values between 2 and 3.
Per Brunn concluded that the wave period is very significant parameter in the
design and it is supported by a number of observations in the North Sea and Arctic
Sea.

6.2.4. Van der Meer Formula: Van der Meer (1988) has given classification of
coastal structure based on parameter which is called ‘Stability Number’. The
stability number is
Ns= H / ∆D ………… (6)
Where as H = wave height,
∆ = relative mean density
D = Characteristics dimension of the armour unit (rock or concrete).

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 11
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

Small values of Ns give structure with large armour units whereas large
values imply gravel beach and sand beaches. Two types of structure can be
classified based on the response due to wave attack. These are ‘statically stable
structures’ and, dynamically stable structures’.

Statically stable structure are structures where no or minor damage is

allowed under design conditions. Damage is defined as displacement of armour
units. The mass of individual units must be large enough to withstand the wave
forces during design conditions. Caissons and traditionally designed breakwaters
belong to the group of statically stable structures.

Figure 5: Types of Structures as a Function of H/∆D

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 12
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

The design is based on an optimum solution between design conditions,

allowable damage and cost of construction and maintenance. Static stability is
characterized by the design parameter ‘damage’ and can roughly be classified by
H / ∆D = 1 – 4. Dynamically stable structures are structures where profile
development is concerned. Units (stones, gravel or sand) are displaced by wave
action until a profile is reached where the transport capacity along the profile is
reduced to a very low level. Material around the still water is continuously moving
during each run-up and run-down of water waves, but when the net transport
capacity has become zero, the profile reaches an equilibrium state. Dynamic
stability is characterized by the design parameter “profile” and can roughly
classified by H / ∆D= 1 to 500. Types of structures with function of H / ∆D are
shown in Fig. 5

Van der Meer (1988) further examined dependence of wave period on the
weight. He evolved stability formulae for rubble-mound breakwaters and
revetments under random wave attack. The main shortcomings in the Hudson
formula viz. wave period and randomness of waves have been solved in the
investigations carried out by Van der Meer based on more than 250 laboratory
tests, spectrum shape, groupiness of waves and permeability of the core.

For Plunging Waves:

0.2
Hs  S 
= 5.7 P 0.14   (ξ )−0.5
∆Dn 50  N ………… (7)

For Surging Waves:

0.2
Hs  S 
= 0.83P −0.2   (ξ ) cot θ
p

∆Dn 50  N  ………… (8)

Where, Hs = Significant wave height

Dn50 = Nominal diameter of the armour unit
ξ = Surf similarity parameter
P = Porosity
S = Damage Level
N = Number of waves
ө = Slope angle

Design values for the damage level S= 2 – 3 indicates ‘start of damage’ and
is equivalent to ‘no damage’ criterion in the Hudson Formula. For the armour slope
of 1:1.5 (cot ө = 1.5), S = 3 -5 gives ‘intermediate damage’ where as S = 8 means
‘failure’. Based on the laboratory tests, Van der Meer (1988) concludes that the
parameter such as grading of the armour, spectrum shape and groupiness of wave
have no influence on the stability of the breakwater.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 13
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

6.3. Thickness of Armour Layer and Under Layer

The thickness of the cover under layers and the no. of armour units required
can be determined from the following formulae:

1

W 

3
r = nK ∆
wr 

 ………… (9)
Where, r = Average layer thickness (m)
n = No. of armour units in thickness comprising cover layer
K∆ = Layer coefficient
W = Mass of armour unit in primary cover layer (kg)
wr = Mass density of armour unit (kg / m3)
The placing density is given by
2
Nr 
P   wr  3
= nK∆ 1 − ………… (10)
100   W 

A 

Where, Nr = Required no. of individual armour units for a given surface

A = Surface area
P = Average porosity of a cover layer in present.

6.4. Design of Structure Cross Section

The rubble structure is normally compound of a bedding layer and a core of

quarry run stone covered by one or more layers of stones and an exterior layer or
layers of quarry stone (armour) or concrete armour units.
Rock size gradation:
Layer Rock Size
Primary cover layer W
Secondary layer W / 10 to W / 15
Core W /200 to W / 6000

Both the primary and secondary layers should be carried over to the crest and
for a certain distance on the lee side so as to withstand any overtopping that may
cause during severe storms.

6.5. Crest Elevation and Width

The maximum elevation on which water from breaking wave will run-up a
given structure, determines the top elevation to which the seawall must be built.
The actual run up value depends on the characteristics of the seawall (slope and
roughness), the water depth at the toe of the structure and incident wave
characteristics. The width of the crest depends greatly on the degree of allowable
overtopping. Crest width be obtained from the following equation:
1
W  3
B = nK∆  
 wr  ………… (11)

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 14
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

Where, B = Crest width (m)

n = No. of stones
K∆ = Layer coefficient

6.6. Toe Berm for Cover Layer Stability

Structures exposed to breaking waves should have their primary cover layers
supported by a quarry stone toe berm. For preliminary design purposes, the quarry
stone in the toe berm should weight W /10. The width of top of the berm is
calculated using equation (11) with n =3. The maximum height of the berm is
calculated using equation of (9) with n =2.

6.7. Design of Filters

Appropriate filter layer on the land side between the backfill and the stone layer
and below the rubblemound should be provided in order to prevent leaching of soil
from the backfill as well as from the base, due to wave action.

6.7.1. Graded Stine Filter: The design of the filter material is based on Terzagi
– Vicksburg criteria,
d 15 Filter
<5
d 85 Base ………… (12)
d 15 Filter
4< < 20
d 15 Base ………… (13)
d 15 Filter
< 25
d 50 Base ………… (14)

d15 = Diameter exceeded by coarsest 85% of layer immediately above under layer
d50 = Diameter exceeded by coarsest 50% of layer immediately above under layer
d85 =Diameter exceeded by coarsest 15% of layer immediately above under layer

6.7.2. Geo-fabric Filter :

A) For Coarse grained soils :

i) O90 ≤ D85 of Soil; whereO90= 90% opening size of filter mesh

ii) O90 ≥ D15 of Soil
iii) O90 always ≥ 0.05 mm

B) For Fine grained soils :

i) O90 ≤ 0.12 mm
ii) O90 ≥ 0.05 mm
iii) Permeability ≥ 30 lit./m2 /sec, under 100 mm head

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 15
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

7.0 HYDRAULIC MODELLING OF RUBBLEMOUND STRUCTURES

The conceptual design of breakwater / seawall is carried out using wave

structure interaction is a complex phenomenon, which cannot be simulated by
mathematical formulation. Hydraulic modelling of breakwater / seawall in the
laboratory flume facilities evolves safe and optimal design of the structures.

The primary objective of model testing of rubblemound structure is to check

the stability of the structure up to and exceeding the design sea stage. However,
modelling is also used to gather information on the hydraulic performance of the
structure, in terms of reflection, run-up, over-topping and wave transmission. This
information can then be used in the design process for the breakwater / seawall
location, length and alignment to provide optimum wave protection for the harbour
or other coastal installations.

Breakwater / seawall models are made geometrically similar based on

Froude’s model law. A section of the breakwater / seawall is placed normally
across inside a wave flume, sufficiently away from the wave generator. The
breakwater is subjected to attack by waves of probable maximum amplitude. Test
whether displacement of structure material occurs. The wave processes h
dependent upon depth, such as sloping, refraction and breaking height. Depth and
breaking angle will be reproduced correctly in the wave flume models. Wave
reflection from sloping surfaces and those containing rough or permeable surfaces
like rubble mound structures are difficult to reproduce to scale unless no distortion
is used.

Wave breaking is somewhat dependent upon beach slope or structure slopes

so that distortion of these can influence this phenomenon. It may be possible to
distort the major bed zone and revert to nearly zero distorted at boundaries where
wave breaking is of greater importance.

The usual scales for wave action are,

Wave flume studies (no distortion) – 1: 20 to 1: 80
Basin studies – vertical 1: 60 & horizontal 1: 180
Seiching and surges (no distortion) – 1: 200 to 1: 1000

Sometimes a pilot study is necessary to a small scale in order to obtain a picture

of the complete problem. From this important aspects can be identified and
separated into larger scale models. The generation of waves in models is a
highly sophisticated procedure particularly in flumes where large-scales oscillations
are required.

7.0 Limitations in Studies of Flumes

Geometrically similar sectional models of hydraulic structure are investigated

in flumes. Flumes can be horizontal or tilting. While interpreting results from
studies in flumes, the following differences between “flume” and “field” conditions
need be reckoned.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 16
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

The standard practice in case of wave models till recently was to generate
monochromatic waves (waves with fixed height and a fixed period). However,
under actual sea conditions, a wave spectrum consists of waves of different heights
and periods approach from different directions. Therefore, it would be necessary to
generate wave of different heights and periods from different directions in the
model producing similar wave spectra to that observed in nature. The wave
spectrum varies from place to place and also from season to season in the same
area of the sea. Various theoretical spectra have been suggested (JONSWAP, PM,
OCHI, SCOTT etc). For reproduction of ocean waves in the model, it is necessary
to adopt suitable theoretical spectra available to the particular area of the sea.
Random sea wave generating facility in a model is used to generate appropriate
wave spectra in the model. It is also possible to generate different wave spectra
from different wave directions. For this purpose, a special multidirectional wave
basin would have to be constructed.

Table 2 Comparison of Flume & Field conditions

Sr.
Flume conditions Field conditions
No.
Limited range of depth and Large range of depth and discharge is most
1.
discharge can be investigated common

Slope can be varied between wide Slopes relative constant over a particular
2.
limits reach
Velocity can be varied over a wider
Velocities highly variable over a short time
3. range but can not be fluctuated
period
over a short time period
Variation in stream power and
Variation in stream power and shear stress is
4. shear stress is principally the result
principally the result of depth variation
of slope variation
Width is invariable due to rigid Banks are susceptible to erosion and width is
5.
flume banks highly variation
Similar bed configuration over Non-uniform velocity and depth in natural
6. entire flume length in equilibrium stream result in multiple bed configuration
condition across and along a reach
Experiments rarely run with large
7. Large suspended clay is common
clay cloud

7.1 Testing of Breakwater Models

The alignments of breakwaters are finalized after studies in three

dimensional wave models. The finalized alignment indicates the portions of
breakwater where there will be normal attack of waves and the portion where
there will be angular attack. Similarly, the alignment indicates water depths along
the breakwater length. After breakwater is designed by taking into consideration
the above parameters, the sectional model of breakwater is laid in the wave flume
to test its stability.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 17
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

The breakwater model is constructed at the testing section of flume

provided with glass to facilitate viewing the model as well as wave activity. The
section as per the design, reduced to the model scales is first marked on the glass.
The weight of graded stone and the weight of the model armour unit are to be
worked out from the following law.

(Wa )m = (γa )m  Lm  3  (Sa )p − 1

3

 
(Wa )p (γa )p  Lp   (Sa )m − 1 ………… (15)

Where, subscript m denotes model and subscript p denotes prototype

Wa = Weight of armour unit
γa = Specific weight of armour unit
Sa = Specific gravity of an armour unit relative to water in which
breakwater is situated
L = Length scale

Stones of various weights are picked from ready stock and laid into the
flume so as to follow the marked section. Artificial concrete armour blocks, which
have been cast pre-hand, are also laid in the section in similar manner. Breakwater
sections in a monochromatic wave flume are generally tested for significant waves.
However, they are also tested for worst conditions of breaking waves at low water
and high water. A typical test is required to run for about 2 to 4 hours. The various
hydrodynamic parameters such as wave run-up, rundown, transmission, reflection,
etc. will be observed. Actually measuring of dislodged units and finding out its
percentage to the total number of unit in the particular layer in the test section.
The damage to the armour unit up to 1% is acceptable. First order damage (1-5%)
is permitted in cases in order to reduce capital cost of the structure. However
maintenance of the structure is periodically carried out when damage occurs. For
very fine material like core material, it is not possible to measure actual number of
units dislodged. In this case, area of damage is measured and its percentage to
design area is worked out.

Sometimes the concrete model blocks would be so small in their size or the
shape may be so peculiar that it is not possible to use concrete (it is not possible to
use coarse aggregate in the concrete). Under such circumstances iron filing, small
pieces of nails and cement mortar are used in such a fashion that appropriate
weight of the model block is obtained.

The trunk section will be tested for finding out damage to armour units,
measuring disturbance on lee side due to overtopping, deciding optimum length of
toe berm, deciding level at which leeside armour should be stopped and stability of
sub grades during construction phase. The round head section laid to the scale in
the hammer head portion of the wave flume, will be tested for different
predominant wave directions namely SSE (South of South East) and ESE (East of
South East). The damage is to be observed quadrant wise separately.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 18
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

The results of wave flume studies will be utilized to finales of trunk section
and round head section.

8.0

Fig 3 : Testing of Trunk Section Fig 4 : Testing of Roundhead Section

8.0 DEVIATIONS IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SEAWALLS

8.1 Position of the seawall

For locating the seawall, beach profile and the water levels are important. The
highest water level helps in deciding the exact crest level, while the lowest water
level guides the location of the toe. The bed slope in front of a coastal structure
also has an important bearing on the extent of damage to the structure and wave
run up over the structure. The seawall should be located in such a position that
the maximum wave attack is taken by the armour slope and the toe. It should be
kept in mind that seawall is for dissipating the wave energy and not merely for
avoiding inundation of the land.

8.2 Under design of Armours

In case of seawalls provided with a large percentage of undersized armour, there

has been considerable displacement and dislocation of armours. The stones in the
lower reaches have been excessively subjected to such forces. The displacement of
the armours has resulted in the exposure of secondary layer, which is mostly
removed from the section that has created small pockets of breaches completely
exposed to the fury of waves.

8.3 Toe protection

Toe protection is supplemental armouring of the beach or bottom surface in front

of a structure, which prevents waves from scouring and undercutting it. Toe
stability is essential because failure of the toe will generally lead to failure
throughout the entire structure. Design of toe protection for seawalls must
consider geo-technical as well as hydraulic factors. Using hydraulic considerations,
the toe apron should be at least twice the incident wave height for sheet-pile walls
and equal to the incident wave height for gravity walls.

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 19
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

8.4 Inadequate or no-provision of filters

Many rubblemound structures have failed due to no or inadequate provision
of filter underneath (Photo-5). As a consequence, the insitu soil is leached
resulting in the collapse of the structure. In some cases, the toe of the seawall
sank over the years due to inadequate filter and removal of insitu bed material.
With the failure of the toe, armours in
the slope, which were otherwise intact,
were dislodged by gravity and wave
forces. These stones occupied the toe
portion and sank further due to the
absence of filter. Thus the failure is
progressive and renders the seawall
ineffective within a short period, if not
attended promptly. It is necessary to
provide a proper filter before reforming Photo 5 : Inadequate Filter Layer
the section.

8.5 Overtopping
Underestimation of design wave or the maximum water level leads to excessive
overtopping of seawalls and eventual failure particularly of leeside slope and
damage to reclamation, if any. The leeside fill and the seawall core (or secondary
layer) should be sandwiched by an appropriate filter and adequate drain be
provided for safe discharge of overtopped water.

8.6 Rounded Stones

The in-place stability of an armour unit is dependant on the interlocking achieved
at placement of armours. In order to achieve efficient interlocking, the rock should
be sound and the individual units should have sharp edges. Blunt or round edges
result in poor interlocking and hence poor stability. Rounded stones result in lower
porosity and are less efficient in dissipation of wave energy. The in-place stability
of such units is highly precarious and sensitive to small disturbances. Hence such
stones should not be used in rubblemound structures.

8.7 Weak Pockets

Several weak spots are often present in rubblemound structures, which may be
attributable to reasons such as lack of supervision or deliberate attempts to dispose
of undersized stones etc. (Photo-6).
The failure thus initiated could lead to
the failure of the structure as a whole.
Concentration of stones much smaller
than the required armour should
therefore be avoided at any cost,
otherwise the entire structure, though
carefully executed, can become
functionally ineffective.
Photo 6: Pockets in Armour Layer

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 20
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

8.8 Discontinuities in seawalls

The discontinuities in the seawalls
are often forced to meet the needs of
certain activities of the coastal
population such as beaching of small
crafts, providing pedestrian access to
beach etc. (Photo-7). If the seawall on
both sides is abruptly terminated
without proper placement of armours in
corners, in the event of severe wave
attack this is one of the most vulnerable Photo 7 : Discontinuity of a Seawall
locations along the seawall and could be the first to fail. The area in the lee of the
structure would experience considerable inundation. These waters, while flowing
back to the beach, would erode considerable in-situ soil which could undermine the
stability of seawall on both sides of the opening. Where such gaps are
unavoidable, proper care should be taken to terminate the seawall, which should
be keyed with sufficient returns and by providing armours on the leeside to some
length along the seawall depending on the expected level and extent of inundation.

8.9 Armour in Single Layer and / or Pitched

Several constructions in the country have been taken up with revetment type
pitching of rubble (Photo-8) along the beach instead of normal type of
rubblemound structures. Such structures result in poor dissipation of wave energy
due to very low porosity of the top layer and higher wave run-up. This calls for
increasing the crest level, which would
upset the cost, thereby defeating the
economy considerations. In the event
of these armours being dislodged,
there is no reserve or cover left to
protect the secondary layer. It is
therefore recommended to adopt
‘two-layer pell-mell’ type of
rubblemound structures in marine
environment. Photo 8 : Single Layer Armour Revetment

8.10 Unsound Temporary Measures

When erosion is active, authorities at

site are compelled to do ‘something’
which normally assumes the form of
dumping available rubble (Photo-9).
Often, such exercises end up in a
fiasco. The benefits derived are only
apparent and not even temporary.
On many occasions, by the time the
work commences, the fury of waves
subsides and the situation is abated Photo 9 : Stones Dumped as
Temporary Measure

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 21
Training Course on Coastal Engineering & Coastal Zone Management

before any work is carried out. It is therefore necessary to give due technical
consideration before affecting any protective measure, whether permanent or
temporary.

9.0 PLANNING OF CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMME

From the bathymetry in the vicinity of the coastal structure and the data
regarding littoral drift, the pattern of erosion/accretion can be anticipated. The
construction of beach protection structures in such regions should be undertaken at
the appropriate time. For example, construction of a seawall along the coast
where considerable erosion has been taking place should be started immediately
after the monsoon, when the eroded levels are the lowest and wave action is
comparatively reduced. In an eroding coastline, if a long length of the coast, say
about 500 m, is to be protected with a seawall and it is not possible to construct
this seawall in one season, then it is best to start construction of the seawall from
both ends and proceed towards the centre rather than constructing the seawall
from one end only. With such planning, the extent of erosion along the beach and
penetration into the beach in the coastline is reduced as compared to the extent
and penetration of erosion when the construction of seawall is started from one
end only.

10.0 MAINTENANCE OF COASTAL STRUCTURES

The most important aspect is the post construction maintenance of coastal

structures. It is a general experience that once these structures are constructed,
hardly any maintenance of the structure is undertaken. It must be remembered
that no coastal structure is permanent, since it has to bear the brunt of coastal
wave attack, which is random in nature and acts at different locations along the
structure due to tidal fluctuations. The toe normally suffers initial damage, which
leads to subsequent damage to structure. It is, therefore, essential to replenish
the damaged toe periodically.
Many times, the leeside slope and
berm or the crest are gradually
damaged due to constant
overtopping and same should be
repaired. If proper maintenance at
regular interval is undertaken, it is
possible to prevent these damages
and improve the performance of
the structure (Photo-10).
Photo 10: Well Maintained Seawall
REFERENCES

M.D. Kudale, A.V. Sitarama Sarma on “Guidelines for Design & Construction of
Seawalls”, CWPRS Technical Memorandum. May, 2010

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, coastal Engineering, (1984); Shore Protection

Manual, (SPM1984), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., USA

“Design & Construction Of Coastal Structures” by A.V. Sitarama Sarma, RO, CWPRS 22