PART 1 – WOW OPENING

GOOD MORNING SIR, AND CLASSMATES, CONTINUING ON OUR REPORT, WE

PROCEED TO THE NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF STORM SURGE.
SLIDE 1
 Basaha an slide. This has been concluded from the studies done by Reid and Bodine,
1968; Butler, 1978; Wanstrath, 1978, Tetra Tech, 1981; Mark and Scheffner, 1993)
SLIDE 2
 These are two-dimensional vertically integrated models with three independent
variables: the two horizontal coordinates (east–west and north–south) and time that
apply the long wave equations (Equations 5.1, 5.3a, and 5. 3b previously mentioned last
meeting) to a grid system that covers area to be modeled.
 In addition, according to WMO, the dependent variables are the surge amplitude and x
and y components of the vertically averaged horizontal current
SLIDE 3
 At each grid point the numerical model calculates the two horizontal flow components
and water surface elevation at successive time intervals for which the model is operated.
SLIDE 4
 Typically, the area to be modeled is divided into square segments and the three long
wave equations are written in finite difference form for application to each square
segment in the grid. At the sides of squares that are at the lateral water boundaries the
appropriate boundary conditions must be applied to allow for correct computation of flow
behavior at these boundaries.

SLIDE 5
 The computer solution for the unknown values at each grid square (qx, qy, h) proceeds
sequentially over the successive rows and columns for a given time and then time is
advanced, and the spatial calculations are repeated.

SLIDE 6
 Several important considerations arise when these models are developed and
applied and are the following:

1. If the lateral extent of the water body is sufficient for the horizontal atmospheric pressure
d to be important, the hydrostatic water surface elevation response can be calculated
separately as a function of time and added to the long wave model result.
2. The bottom stress term must be empirically established from previous experience and by
calibration using tide wave propagation analysis for periods of low winds as well as
results of previous storms.
 3. For complex coastal boundaries the grid mesh shape and size may have to be adjusted
to produce adequate surge elevation calculations.

SLIDE 7
 Wave Setup refers to the elevation of the mean water level at the shoreline due to wave
breaking in the surf zone
 Wave setup (See Section 2.6 in Basic Coastal Engineering Book) which occurs inside
the surf zone is dependent on the wave conditions generated by the storm. If this is an
important component of the total surge level, wave predictions must also be made so the
wave setup can be calculated.

SLIDE 8
 The wind and pressure fields must be specified in the model. For calibration of existing
storms, adequate information may be available. For future predictions with no adequate
measurements available, the SPH or PMH may be used or one of the available wind
field models may be used (Thompson and Cardone, 1996)
SLIDE 9
 A wind stress drag coefficient is required to convert the surface wind speed to a resulting
surface stress for the equations of motion. A commonly used relationship was developed
by Van Dorn (1953). For storm surge analysis, the wind-induced shear stress as seen in
Equation 5.23 is given by the product of the wind stress drag coefficient (denoted by S
sub K) times water density times wind speed squared (where W is the wind speed at the
standard 10m elevation)

 To get the value of K sub S, the Equation 5.24 can be used. This is based on a field
study conducted at a yacht basin along the California coast by Van Dorn.

SLIDE 10
 A storm is a moving pressure disturbance which, given the right conditions can generate
long waves that propagate ahead of the storm and can cause what has been termed an
initial setup along the coast (see Sorensen, 1993).
 This occurs when the forward velocity of the storm is close to the celerity of a shallow
water wave for the water depth over which the storm is traveling (i.e., a storm speed
Froude number close to unity). It takes time for this wave to develop so the storm must
travel over the right water depth for a significant period of time.

SLIDE 11
 For detailed and sufficiently accurate analysis of surge conditions at different locations of
the water body, a fine grid must be established since the water depth is assigned to a
constant average value over each grid square. Finer grid sizes require shorter time
intervals and a commensurately significant increase in computation time.
SLIDE 12
 An early but instructive storm surge model was the one employed by Reid and Bodine
(1968) to calculate storm surge in Galveston Bay, Texas. For this application the
equations of motion [Eqs. (5.3a) and (5.3b)] were somewhat simplified. In their model

 Allowance is made for the overflow of low-lying barrier islands and for the flooding of and
recession from low-lying land areas adjacent to the bay.
 The initial surge or tide, or both, at the seaward end of the bay outside the barrier
islands is prescribed. The system has been calibrated for spring tide conditions and for
the surge produced by hurricane Carla (September, 1961).
 Verification of the system is carried out for hurricane Cindy (September, 1963).

SLIDE 13
 A simplified approach to storm surge analysis would involve calculating the wind/
bottom stress-induced surge, the pressure-induced surge, and possibly the Coriolis-
induced surge separately. Each is calculated from a simple hydrostatic balance. Thus,
the convective and local acceleration terms as well as continuity requirements are
neglected. This basically assumes a static storm that is in position for a sufficient length
of time for the water level response to come to equilibrium with sufficient water being
available to achieve that equilibrium. Thus, in most cases a conservative setup estimate
would be produced. The effects of astronomical tide level variations and wave-induced
setup nearshore can also be separately evaluated if necessary.
SLIDE 14
 The wind acting on the water surface causes a shear stress given by Eq. (5.23), where
the wind stress drag coefficient Ks can be defined by Eq. (5.24) or some other
relationship as discussed above. The surface wind stress generates a current that, in
turn, develops a bottom stress. Usually, the bottom current velocity is not known, nor can
it easily be calculated, so the bottom stress cannot be directly calculated.
SLIDE 15
 Saville (1952), from Weld data collected at Lake Okeechobee, FL, suggested that the
bottom stress was in the order of 10% of the surface wind stress. Van Dorn (1953), from
his Weld data and the threshold limits on his equipment for measuring the bottom stress,
reported that it was generally less than 10% of the surface stress. Thus, the ratio tb/ts =
0.1 can be used for wind induced setup calculations if no better data are available. If
adequate wind, pressure, and resulting setup data are available from a previous storm at
a particular site, it is better to determine a local combined surface and bottom stress
coefficient Ksb(ts þ tb ¼ KsbrW2), which then acts as an ‘‘all inclusive’’ calibration factor
for subsequent wind/bottom stress setup calculations.
SLIDE 16
  From hydrostatics, the water level variation or setup Sp owing to a horizontal
atmospheric pressure diVerential Dp between two points on a continuous body of water
is

By combining Eqs. (5.22) and (5.26) one can calculate the static pressure setup
that occurs at a point of interest in an SPH. For a pressure differential of say 2.5
inches of mercury (e.g., 29.9 to 27.4) from the periphery to the eye of a hurricane,
the static pressure setup at the eye would be 0.86 m.
SLIDE 17
SLIDE 18

PART 2

LONG-TERM SEA-LEVEL CHANGE

SLIDE 1
 WHEN THE MEAN SEA LEVEL IS MEASURED AT MANY COASTAL SITES OVER A
LONG PERIOD OF TIME, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THIS LEVEL IS CHANGING
RELATIVE TO THE LAND.

 The change is due to a general global eustatic rise in the mean sea level superimposed
on a possible tectonic uplift or subsidence of the coast.

 Eustatic sea-level changes are global sea-level changes related either to changes in the
volume of glacial ice on land (na contributor to the increase of sea water) or to changes
in the shape of the sea floor caused by plate tectonic processes. It may produce
significant effects on the coastline
SLIDE 2

 Along most U.S. coastlines, relative sea levels have been rising, except for some
coastal regions in Alaska where coastal uplift rates (ini nga coastal uplift happens kun
nagkakamayda uplift han tuna ha shore lines tungod hin linog hinay hinay ng pagporma
overtime tikang ha natural movement han tectonic plates) (makikita ha picture is kay
example hin coastal uplift ha usa nga shoreline, kun diin mapapansin naton nga mas
humitaas an land area kaysa han level han dagat) exceed the eustatic sea level rise to
produce a lowering of the relative sea level.

 A sea level rise of 2 to 4 mm/year produces a rise of 0.2 to 0.4 m in a century. This can
have some noticeable impacts on the coast as the mean water level rises on the beach
 face and there is a concurrent retreat of the beach face caused by this sea level rise. It
can also have significant impacts on the design of coastal structures.

SLIDE 3

 BASAHA NALA AN SLIDE

SLIDE 4
 A study conducted by Kyper and Sorensen (1985) well exemplifies the potential impact
of the expected rise in mean sea level on a sandy beach backed by a seawall. As mean
sea level rises, the beach face is flooded by the rising water level. The beach profile also
responds by retreating as the raised sea levels cause a net movement of sand on the
beach profile to the offshore area
 They observed an increasing damage to the seawall as time progressed through the
1970’s and 1980’s, by which time much of the seawall had no beach in front of it.
 Apparently, the lowering of the beach face in front of the seawall combined with the rise
in mean sea level at the site allowed waves that exceed the height for which the seawall
is stable to cause the damage.
 It is estimated that the relative rise in mean sea level at the site was of the order of a half
meter during the past century. This was exacerbated by the deficiency of sand transport
past the structure which caused a further lowering of the beach face.
SLIDE 5
 In their study they investigated whether costs of constructing and maintaining an
artificial beach in front of the seawall to protect it from wave attack is economical versus
the cost of adding an additional layer of larger armor stone on the face of the seawall to
increase its stability to the increased wave attack.
 Quantifying the increased shoreline recession and coastal flooding expected from a
range of expected future sea level rise scenarios, allowed the authors to quantify the
volume of sand necessary to maintain a design beach width with a specified crest
elevation. Then the authors determined the increased armor stone size for a refurbished
seawall for the same expected sea level rise scenarios. The authors also discuss the
impact of no future coastal engineering works being implemented at the site.
SLIDE 6

 The final choice of whether to construct the protecting beach or to upgrade the
seawall depends on the material costs (beach fill, stone, etc.) and construction costs
at the time the project is to commence. It also depends on other factors such as the
economic value of recreational benefits on the expanded beach and the funding
available from national and local sources for the competitive projects.

Global eustatic sea level rises that have been observed during the past century are believed to
be caused by atmospheric warming which causes sea water to expand and land ice in glaciers
to melt, adding water to the seas. There have been a number of forecasts that this rise in global
eustatic sea level will accelerate during the coming century (U.S. National Research Council,
1987). If this happens the effects on the coastline will be significant.