HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

CIEM 5390 Coastal Structures Design

Lecture Notes - Set 6
Vertical Breakwater and Seawalls1
(Last Updated: Nov 27, 2023)

Instructor: Prof. M.S. Ghidaoui

Chinese Estates Professor of Engineering, Chair Professor of Civil Engineering
Time: Tue 19:15 - 22:05 Venue: Rm 2464

Modes of Failure

1 This set is based on Ch.9 of Introduction to Coastal Engineering and Management by J.K. Kamphuis

1
 Figure 1: Failure Mechanisms - Overall Failure Modes: a) to d); Local Failure Modes: e) to g)

Forces on Vertical Breakwater: Non-Breaking Waves

Figure 2: Wave Forces on Breakwater

Figure 3: Wave Forces by Subtracting the Pressure in the Lee of Breakwater

2
    
Δ𝐻 Δ𝐻
𝑃1 = 𝜌𝑔(Δ 𝐻 + 𝐻 𝐷 ) = 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 1 + = 𝑃 0 𝐶1 ℎ 𝜔 = 𝐻𝐷 + Δ𝐻 = 𝐻𝐷 1 + = 𝐻𝐷 𝐶 𝜔
| {z } 𝐻𝐷 𝐻𝐷
𝑃
| {z } | {z }
0
𝐶𝐼 𝐶𝜔

In this case 𝐶1 = 𝐶𝑤 . For the case 𝑓𝑣 ≤ ℎ 𝑤 = Δ 𝐻 + 𝐻 𝐷

 𝜌𝑔 𝑓𝑣   𝑓𝑣 
𝑃2 = 𝑃1 − 𝜌𝑔 𝑓𝑣 = 𝐶𝑤 𝑃0 − 𝜌𝑔 𝑓𝑣 = 𝐶𝑤 𝑃0 1 − = 𝐶 𝑤 𝑃0 1 −
𝐶 𝑤 𝑃0 𝐶𝑤 𝐻 𝐷
! !
𝑓𝑣 𝑓𝑣
= 𝐶2 𝑃0 where 𝐶2 = 𝐶𝑤 1 − = 𝐶𝑤 1 −
𝐶𝑤 𝐻 𝐷 ℎ𝑤

If 𝑓𝑣 > ℎ 𝑤 = Δ 𝐻 + 𝐻 𝐷 , 𝑃2 = 0.
The pressure 𝑃3 is: ! !
𝐻𝐷 Δ𝐻 1
𝑃3 = 𝜌𝑔 Δ 𝐻 + = 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 + = 𝐶3 𝑃0
cosh 𝑘 𝑑 𝐻 𝐷 cosh 𝑘 𝑑
| {z }
𝐶3

The pressure 𝑃𝑈 is:

𝑃𝑈 = 𝑃3 ⇒ 𝑃𝑈 = 𝐶𝑈 𝑃0 = 𝐶3 𝑃0 ⇒ 𝐶𝑈 = 𝐶3
• Horizontal force per unit width into the page:
( )
𝑃1 + 𝑃2 𝑃1 + 𝑃3 𝐶1 + 𝐶2 𝐶1 + 𝐶3
𝐹ℎ = 𝑓𝑣 + 𝑑 𝑣 = 𝑃0 𝑓𝑣 + 𝑑𝑣
2 2 2 2

• Vertical force per unit width into the page:

𝐹𝑢
𝐹𝑚𝐹𝑏 z}|{
z}|{ z}|{ 𝐵𝑣
𝐹𝑣 = 𝑚𝑔 − 𝑃𝑏 𝐵 𝑣 − 𝑃3 = 𝐹𝑚 − 𝐹𝑏 − 𝐹𝑢
2
where 𝑚 is mass of structure per unit width into the page.
• Moment per unit width into the page with respect to 𝐴:
𝑀𝑤
𝑀𝑢 𝑀𝑚 𝑀𝑏
z }| { z }| { z }| { z }| {
! !
𝑃3 2 𝑓𝑣 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 1 𝑃1 − 𝑃3 2 𝑑𝑣 𝐵𝑣 𝐵𝑣
𝑀= 𝐵 𝑣 𝐵 𝑣 + 𝑃2 𝑓 𝑣 𝑑 𝑣 + + 𝑓𝑣 𝑑 𝑣 + 𝑓𝑣 + 𝑑 𝑣 · 𝑑 𝑣 + 𝑃3 𝑑 𝑣 − 𝑀𝑔 + 𝑃𝑏 𝐵 𝑣
2 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2

• 𝑀𝑏 and 𝑀𝑚 are not wave dependent: 𝑀𝑚 − 𝑀𝑏 = Restoring Moment = 𝑀𝑟 .

• All other terms are wave dependent and become zero in the absence of waves= 𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑢 = overturning
moment = 𝑀𝑜 .

Example:
• Wave setup calculations gave a setup  0.5 m.
• Tide level at the structure  0.6 m.

• Wind surge level calculations gave  0.7 m.

• 𝑇 = 5 s.
◦
• 𝐻0 = 2 m; 𝛼0 = 30 ; 𝜌 = 1025 kg/m3 ; 𝑀 = 190000 kg/m; 𝑓𝑣 = 3 m; 𝑑 𝑣 = 6.5 m; 𝐵 𝑣 = 10 m.

3
Solution:
Δ 𝐻 = 0.5 + 0.6 + 0.7 = 1.8 m.
𝐻 at the strucutre? From wave theory we know 𝐻 = 𝐾𝑠 𝐾𝑟 𝐻0 .
Let us find 𝐾𝑠 :

𝑔𝑇 2 𝐿 0 39.05
𝐿0 = = 39.05 m ⇒ 𝐶0 = = = 7.8 m/s
2𝜋 𝑇 5
1 1
𝐶𝑔0 = 𝐶0 = 7.8 = 3.9 m/s
2 2
𝑑 10 Table 2.3 𝑑
=  0.26 −→ = 0.277; 𝑛 = 0.608; cosh 𝑘 𝑑 = 2.96
𝐿 0 39.05 𝐿
Thus,
𝑑 10 𝐿 36.1
𝐿= = = 36.1 m ⇒ 𝐶 = = = 7.22 m/s
0.277 0.277 𝑇 5
⇒ 𝐶𝑔 = 𝑛𝐶 = 0.608 × 7.22 = 4.39 m/s
Thus, √︄ √︂
𝐶𝑔0 3.9
𝐾𝑠 = = = 0.94
𝐶𝑔 4.39
Let us find 𝐾𝑟 :

2𝜋 2𝜋
𝑘 0 sin 𝛼0 = 𝑘 sin 𝛼 ⇒ sin 𝛼0 = sin 𝛼
𝐿0 𝐿
sin 30 sin 𝛼
⇒ = ⇒ 𝛼  27.5
39.05 36.1
Thus,
cos 𝛼0
√︂
cos 30
√︂
𝐾𝑟 = = = 0.988
cos 𝛼 cos 27.5
Therefore,
𝐻 = 0.988 × 0.94 × 2 = 1.85 m ≡ 𝐻 𝐷
Does the wave break?
𝐻 𝐷 1.85
= = 0.185 < 0.78 ⇒ No breaking
𝑑 10
Therefore, the force and momentum equations derived in this section are applicable.

𝑃0 = 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 = 1025 × 9.81 × 1.85 = 18602.2 𝑃 𝑎 .

4
 Δ𝐻
𝐶𝑤 = 1 + 𝐻 𝐷
= 1 + 1.85
1.8
= 1.97 = 𝐶1 .
   
𝐶2 = 𝐶𝑤 1 − 𝐶𝑤𝑓𝐻𝑣
𝐷
= 1.97 1 − 1.97×1.85 = 0.18.
3

Δ𝐻
𝐶3 = 𝐻𝐷 + 1
cosh 𝑘𝑑 = 0.97 + 1
2.9 = 1.31.

𝑃1 = 𝐶1 𝑃0 = 1.97 × 18602.2 = 36646.3 𝑃 𝑎 .

𝑃2 = 𝐶2 𝑃0 = 0.18 × 18602.2 = 3348.4 𝑃 𝑎 .

𝑃3 = 𝐶3 𝑃0 = 1.31 × 18602.2 = 24368.9 𝑃 𝑎 .

𝑃𝑏 = 𝜌𝑔𝑑 𝑣 = 1025 × 9.81 × 6.5 = 65359.1 𝑃 𝑎 .

𝑃1 +𝑃2 𝑃1 +𝑃3
𝐹ℎ = 2 𝑓𝑣 + 2 𝑑𝑣 = 36646.3+3348.4
2 × 3 = 59992 𝑁/𝑚.

𝐹𝑣 = − 𝑃23 𝐵 𝑣 − 𝑃𝑏 𝐵 𝑣 + 𝑀𝑔 = − 24368.9
2 × 10 − 65359.1 × 10 + 19000 × 9.81 = 1088464 𝑁/𝑚.

Moment with respect to 𝐴:

102 102 3 36646 − 3348 1 6.52

   
𝑀 = 65359 × + 24369 × + 3348 × 3 6.5 + + × 3 × 6.5 + 3 + 24369
2 3 2 2 3 2
36646 − 24369
+ (6.5) 2 − 190000 × 9.81 × 5
3
= 3267950 + 812296.1 + 80361.5 + 374601.8 + 172907.4 + 514795 − 9319500 = −4096588.2𝑁 · 𝑚/𝑚 = 𝑀𝑟 + 𝑀𝑜
| {z } | {z } | {z } | {z }
𝑀𝑏 𝑀𝑤 𝑀𝑢 𝑀𝑚

𝑀𝑟 = 𝑀𝑚 − 𝑀𝑏 = 9319500 − 3267950 = 6051550𝑁 · 𝑚/𝑚 ⇒ Counterclockwise

𝑀𝑜 = 𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑢 = 1954959𝑁 · 𝑚/𝑚 ⇒ Clockwise

⇒ 𝑀𝑟 ≥ 𝑀𝑜

Forces on Vertical Breakwater: Breaking Waves

The Minikin method (CERC, 1984): The assumed forces are shown in figure below. Impact from breaking
waves is assumed to produce a parabolic pressure diagram centered on the still water level and its effect is
added to the the hydrostatic forces system. The dynamic pressure, force and moment about the bottom are
approximated by
𝑑𝑡
𝑝 𝑑 = 100 (𝑑 + 𝑑𝑡 )] 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷
𝑑𝐿 !
1 n ℎ − 𝑓 o2
𝐹𝑑 = 𝑝 𝑑 𝐻 𝐷 1 − 2 for ℎ 𝑤 > 𝑓𝑣
𝑤 𝑣
3 𝐻𝐷
1
𝐹𝑑 = 𝑝 𝑑 𝐻 𝐷 for ℎ 𝑤 ≤ 𝑓𝑣
3
𝑀𝑑 = 𝐹𝑑 𝑑 𝑣 (1)

5
 Figure 4: Minikin Wave Forces

The pressure 𝑃 𝑑 is exceedingly large! For example, if we take the data of the previous problem, then 𝐿 = 36.1
m; 𝑑 = 10 m and 𝑑𝑡 = 6 m. Thus, 𝑃 𝑑 = 100 10×36.1
6
(10 + 6) 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 = 4.4𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 = 4.4𝑃0 ! Thus, the load is more
than double that of the non-breaking wave!
The coastal structure, resulting from this design will be large and costly. Therefore, if the possibility
of wave slamming exists, we must find another location or use a different design. Goda (1985) presents a
checklist to assess the possibility of wave slamming.

Goda (1985) method: It defines the higher forces due to breaking waves in terms of a pseudo-static design
and uses Fig.3 with different definitions for the pressures. Such pseudo-static design accounts for higher
forces due to waves that are in the process of breaking slowly, such as spilling breakers, but it does not
represent direct impact by suddenly breaking waves, such as plunging breakers. Direct impact over a long
section of structure may therefore cause damage to the Goda design. Care must be taken also to ensure that
the berm under the vertical section does not cause the wave to slam against the structure. Takahashi et al

6
(1994) have extended the Goda method to take this into account.

𝜂∗ = 0.75(1 + cos 𝛼)𝜆1 𝐻 𝐷

𝑝 1 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼) (𝜆1 𝜉1 + 𝜆2 𝜉∗ cos2 𝛼) 𝜌 𝑤 𝑔𝐻 𝐷

for 𝜂∗ > ℎ𝑐

(1 − ℎ𝜂𝑐∗ ) 𝑝 1
𝑝2 =
0 for ∗
𝜂 ≤ ℎ𝑐
𝑝 3 = 𝜉3 𝑝 1

𝑝 𝑢 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼)𝜆3 𝜉1 𝜉3 𝜌 𝑤 𝑔𝐻 𝐷

where 𝛼 =Angle of incidence of waves at 5𝐻 1/3 seaward of the structure;

 2 h i
ℎ𝑏 −𝑑 ℎ𝑏 −𝑑 𝐻𝐷
2 2𝑑
𝜉∗ = 𝜉2 with 𝜉2 = smallest of 3ℎ𝑏
𝐻𝐷
𝑑 and 2𝑑
𝐻𝐷 ≡ min 3ℎ𝑏 𝑑 ; 𝐻𝐷
" #2
4 𝜋ℎ/𝐿
𝜉1 = 0.6 + 0.5 sinh (4 𝜋ℎ/𝐿) ;
" #
′
ℎ −ℎ𝑐
𝜉3 = 1 − ℎ 1− 1
cosh (2 𝜋ℎ/𝐿) ;

𝐿 = Wavelength at water depth ℎ 𝑏 corresponding to that of the significant wave 𝑇𝑆 ≃ 1.1𝑇; ℎ 𝑏 = Water
depth at a distance of 5𝐻𝑆 seaward of the breakwater front wall; 𝜆1 , 𝜆2 and 𝜆3 are modification factors
depending on the structure type. For conventional vertical wall structures, 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 𝜆3 = 1. Values for
other structure types are given in related tables.

A parallel between the loads derived in the “Non-breaking wave” section and Goda’s formula can be
drawn if we define:

𝑃0 = 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 ; 𝜂∗ = ℎ 𝑤 ; 𝐶𝑤 = 0.75(1 + cos 𝛼)𝜆1 ; ℎ 𝑐 = 𝑓𝑣 ; 𝐶1 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼) (𝜆1 𝜉1 + 𝜆2 𝜉∗ cos2 𝛼); 𝐶3 = 𝜉3 ;

1 − ℎ𝜂𝑐∗ 𝜂∗ ≥ ℎ𝑐

𝐶2 =
0 ∗
𝜂 ≤ ℎ𝑐
𝐶𝑢 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼)𝜆3 𝜉1 𝜉3 = 𝐶𝑤 𝜆3 𝜉1 𝜉2 = 𝐶𝑤 𝜆3 𝜉1 𝐶3 ;

7
Goda’s Design Wave Height (𝐻 𝐷 ): 𝐻 𝐷 = Design wave height defined as the highest
wave in the design sea state at a location just in front of the breakwater.
(i) If seaward of a surf zone Goda (1985) recommends for practical design a
value of 1.8𝐻𝑆 to be used corresponding to the 0.15% exceedence value for
Rayleigh distributed wave heights. This corresponds to 𝐻1/250 (mean of the
heights of the waves included in 1/250 of the total number of waves, counted
in descending order of height from the highest wave).
(ii) If within the surf zone, 𝐻 𝐷 is taken as the highest 𝐻max of the random
breaking waves at a distance 5𝐻𝑆 seaward of the structure. Goda stresses
that 1.8 is recommended, but other values such as 1.6 and 2.0 may be used.

The variation of wave height within the surf zone can be estimated from the following formulae derived by
Goda:
If 𝐿ℎ0 ≥ 0.2,
′
1. 𝐻𝑆 = 𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂
′
2. 𝐻max = 1.8𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂
If ℎ
𝐿0 < 0.2,
1. 𝐻𝑆 is the minimum of the following:
′
• 𝐻𝑆 = 𝛽0 𝐻𝑆𝑂 + 𝛽1 𝑑 or
′
• 𝐻𝑆 = 𝛽𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐻𝑆𝑂 or
′
• 𝐻𝑆 = 𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂
2. 𝐻max is the minimum of the following:
′
• 𝐻max = 𝛽0∗ 𝐻𝑆𝑂 + 𝛽1∗ 𝑑 or
′
• 𝐻max = 𝛽𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐻𝑆𝑂 or
′
• 𝐻max = 1.8𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂
The coefficients 𝛽0 , 𝛽1 , 𝛽max , 𝛽0∗ , 𝛽1∗ and 𝛽max
∗ are given by the following expressions :
Coefficients for 𝐻𝑆 :
′
• 𝛽0 = 0.028(𝐻𝑆𝑂 /𝐿 0 ) −0.38 exp(20 tan1.5 𝜃)
• 𝛽1 = 0.52 exp(4.2 tan 𝜃)
′
• 𝛽max = max{0.92, 0.32(𝐻𝑆𝑂 /𝐿 0 ) −0.29 exp(2.4 tan 𝜃)}
Coefficients for 𝐻max :
′
• 𝛽0∗ = 0.052(𝐻𝑆𝑂 /𝐿 0 ) −0.38 exp(20 tan1.5 𝜃)
• 𝛽1∗ = 0.63 exp(3.8 tan 𝜃)
′
• 𝛽max
∗ = max{1.65, 0.53(𝐻𝑆𝑂 /𝐿 0 ) −0.29 exp(2.4 tan 𝜃)}
where 𝜃 denotes the slope of the seabed; max{𝑎, 𝑏} denotes the larger value of 𝑎 and 𝑏; exp represents the
exponential function.

Example:
Calculate the wave pressure, uplift pressure, and their moments produced by waves of the following
characteristics incident on the upright section of the vertical breakwater shown in the figure.

8
 ′ ◦
• Waves: 𝐻𝑆𝑂 = 6.3 m, 𝑇1/3 = 11.4 s, 𝛼 = 15
• Tide level: W.L.= +0.6 m

• Sea bottom slope: tan 𝜃 = 1/100

Solution:

ℎ = 9.5 + 0.6 = 10.1 m.

′
ℎ = 6.5 + 0.6 = 7.1 m, 𝑑 = 5 + 0.6 = 5.6 m.

ℎ 𝑐 = 4 − 0.6 = 3.4 m = 𝑓𝑣 ; 𝐵 𝑣 = 15 m.

Design wave height:

2
9.8×11.42
𝐿 0 = 𝑔𝑇
2𝜋 = 6.28 = 202.8 m

ℎ
𝐿0 = 10.1
202.8  0.05 ⇒ ℎ
𝐿 = 0.0942

Since
𝐿0 = 0.05 < 0.2
ℎ

′ ′ ′
⇒ 𝐻𝑆 = min{(𝛽0 𝐻𝑆𝑂 + 𝛽1 ℎ), 𝛽max 𝐻𝑆𝑂 , 𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂 }
 𝐻 ′  −0.38  
6.3 −0.38 1 1.5
𝛽0 = 0.028 exp 20(tan 𝜃) 1.5 = 0.028 exp 20 = 0.1068
𝑆𝑂




𝐿0 202.8 100

𝛽1 = 0.52 exp[4.2 tan 𝜃] = 0.52 exp 4.2 100

1
= 0.542

′
𝐻𝑆𝑂
−0.29 6.3 −0.29
𝛽max = max 0.92; 0.32 exp(2.4 tan 𝜃) = max 0.92; 0.32 exp 2.4 100
1
) = max{0.92; 0.897} =
 

𝐿0 202.8
0.92

⇒ 𝐻𝑆 = min{0.1068 × 6.3 + 0.542 × 10.1; 0.92 × 6.3; 6.3} = min{6.14; 5.8; 6.3} = 5.8 m

Location of interest: 5𝐻𝑆 seaward of breakwater= 5 × 5.8 = 29 m ⇒ ℎ 𝑏 = 10.1 + 29

100  10.4 m
′ ′ ′
𝐻max = min{𝛽0∗ 𝐻𝑆𝑂 + 𝛽1∗ ℎ; 𝛽max
∗ 𝐻𝑆𝑂 ; 1.8𝐾𝑆 𝐻𝑆𝑂 }
 𝐻 ′  −0.38
𝛽0∗ = 0.052 exp 20(tan 𝜃) 1.5 } = 𝛽0 0.052
0.028 = 0.198
𝑆𝑂


𝐿0

9
𝛽1∗ = 0.63 exp[3.8 tan 𝜃] = 0.63 exp 3.8 100
1
= 0.654
 

′

−0.29 6.3 −0.29
= max[1.65; 0.53 𝐿𝑆𝑂 exp(2.4 tan 𝜃)] = max[1.65; 0.53 exp( 100
∗ 𝐻
2.4
𝛽max 0 202.8 )]
= max[1.65; 1.4857] = 1.65

⇒ 𝐻max = min[0.198 × 6.3 + 0.654 × 10.4; 1.65 × 6.3; 1.8 × 6.3] = min[8.00; 10.4; 11.3] = 8.00 m = 𝐻 𝐷

Maximum elevation of the wave pressure:

cos 𝛼 = 0.966

𝐶𝑤 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼) = 0.5(1 + 0.966) = 0.983

𝐶1 = 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼) (𝜆1 𝜉1 + 𝜆2 𝜉∗ cos2 𝛼) = 0.983 × [0.920 + 0.314 × 0.9662 ] = 1.192

𝐶2 = 1 − ℎ𝑐
𝜂∗ =1− 3.4
11.8 = 0.712
" #
h i
ℎ𝑏 −𝑑 𝐻𝐷
2 10.4−5.6 8 2
𝜉2 = min ; 2 𝐻𝑑𝐷 = min 3×10.4 5.6 ; 2 8
5.6
= min[0.314, 1.4] = 0.314


3ℎ𝑏 𝑑

𝐶𝑢 = 𝐶𝑤 𝜆1 𝐶3 𝜉1 = 0.983 × 1 × 0.96 × 1 = 0.944

To determine 𝜉1 , we first need to find 𝐿 at ℎ 𝑏 = 10.4 m.

Table 2.3 ℎ𝑏
⇒ ℎ𝑏
𝐿0 = 10.4
202.8 = 0.0512 −→ 𝐿  0.0942

⇒ 𝐿 = 110.4 m
4 𝜋×10.1/110.4
⇒ 𝜉1 = 0.6 + 0.5 sinh 4 𝜋×10.1/110.4 = 1.0

𝜂∗ = 0.75 × (1 + 0.966) × 8.0 = 11.8 m = 𝐶𝑤 𝐻 𝐷

′
  
ℎ −ℎ𝑐
𝜉3 = 1 − ℎ′ 1 − cosh 2 𝜋ℎ′ /𝐿 = 1 − 7.1 1 −
1 7.1−3.4 1
= 0.96

7.1
cosh 2 𝜋× 110.4

𝑃0 = 𝜌𝑔𝐻 𝐷 = 1030 × 9.8 × 8 = 80.8kPa

Pressure components:

𝑝 1 = 𝐶1 𝑃0 = 0.983 × [0.920 + 0.314 × (0.966) 2 ] × 1030 × 9.8 × 8.0 = 96.3kPa

𝑝 3 = 0.892 × 96.3 = 85.9kPa

𝑝 2 = 96.3 × (1 − 3.4
11.8 ) = 68.6kPa

𝑝 𝑢 = 0.983 × 0.920 × 0.892 × 1030 × 9.8 × 8.0 = 65.1kPa

Total pressure and uplift:

ℎ∗𝑐 = min{11.8, 3.4} = 3.4 m

𝐹ℎ = 1
2 × (96.3 + 85.9) × 7.1 + 1
2 × (96.3 + 68.6) × 3.4 = 927 kN/m

10
𝐹𝑣 = 1
2 × 65.1 × 15.0 = 488 kN/m

Moment of wave pressure:

𝑀0 = 1
6 × (2 × 96.3 + 85.9) × 7.12 + 12 (96.3 + 68.6) × 7.1 × 3.4 + 1
6 × (96.3 + 2 × 68.6) × 3.42 = 4780kN · m/m

For the Minikin formula, the dynamic force 𝐹𝑑 and moment 𝑀𝑑 that account for wave plunging need to be
added.

Moment of uplift pressure:

𝑀𝑟 = 𝐹𝑣 × 32 𝐵 𝑣 = 2
3 × 488 × 15.0 = 4880kN · m/m

The coefficients for Goda’s method (as extended by Takahashi), along with the coefficients for non-breaking
waves and the Minikin method, as presented in CERC, 1984, are summarized in table below.

Non-Breaking Goda Minikin∗

𝐶𝑤 1 + Δ 𝐻 /𝐻 𝐷 0.75(1 + cos 𝛼) 0.5
𝐶1 1 + Δ 𝐻 /𝐻 𝐷 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼) (𝜉1 + 𝜉4 cos2 𝛼) 0.5/cosh (2𝜋𝑑/𝐿)
𝐶2 𝐶1 (1 − 𝑓𝑣 /ℎ 𝑤 )
𝐶3 1/cosh (2𝜋𝑑/𝐿) + Δ 𝐻 /𝐻 𝐷 𝜉3 𝐶1
𝐶𝑢 𝐶3 0.5(1 + cos 𝛼)𝜉1 𝜉3 𝐶3
𝜉1 0.6 + 0.5((4𝜋𝑑/𝐿)/sinh (4𝜋𝑑/𝐿)) 2
𝜉∗ = 𝜉2 Smallest of: ((𝑑5𝐻𝑆 − 𝑑 𝑠 )/3𝑑5𝐻𝑆 ) (𝐻 𝐷 /𝑑𝑡 ) 2 and 2𝑑𝑡 /𝐻 𝐷
𝜉3 1 − ((ℎ 𝑣 − 𝑓𝑣 )/𝑑 𝑠 ) (1 − 1/cosh (2𝜋𝑑 𝑠 /𝐿))
𝜉4 Max (𝜉2 , (𝜉5 𝜉6 ))

Table 1: Table 1: Design Parameters for Vertical Breakwaters. (*) This is only the standing wave portion
for the Minikin method. The dynamic wave (Eq.1) needs to be added.

Stability design
Principle: Using Level I design equations (see Ch.8 of Kamphuis’ book),

𝑅𝑐ℎ
𝐺= − 𝑆 𝐹𝑠 𝑆 𝑐ℎ = 0 (2)
𝑆 𝐹𝑟
where 𝑅𝑐ℎ and 𝑆 𝑐ℎ are characteristic values of resistance and load, and 𝑆 𝐹𝑟 and 𝑆 𝐹𝑠 are safety factors pertinent
to resistance and load.

Sliding: For sliding, the equation may be written as

𝑓 𝑓 (𝐹𝑚 − 𝐹𝑏 − 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 𝐹𝑢 )
− 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 (𝐹𝑤 + 𝐹𝑑 ) = 0 (3)
𝑆 𝐹𝑠

where 𝑓 𝑓 is the friction coefficient between the structure and the sub-base, 𝑆 𝐹𝑠 and 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 are the partial
coefficients for resistance against sliding and wave loading, and 𝐹𝑑 is the dynamic force that only applies to
the Minikin design. The partial factor for ice force has not been researched that well and we will use 1.2.
Typical friction coefficients may be found in CERC (1984); for concrete on rock or gravel 𝑓 𝑓 = 0.6 and on
sand 𝑓 𝑓 = 0.4. Takahashi (1996) recommends 𝑓 𝑓 = 0.6 for rock.
Traditionally the global factor of safety for deterministic design against sliding (𝑆 𝐹𝑠 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 ) has been 1.2 to
1.5. According to Burcharth and Sorensen (1988), 𝑆 𝐹𝑤  1.2 and 𝑆 𝐹𝑠  1.3.

11
Overturning: For overturning, the moments are calculated around the landward bottom corner of the
structure, resulting in

(𝑀𝑚 − 𝑀𝑏 )
− 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 (𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑑 + 𝑀𝑢 ) = 0 (4)
𝑆 𝐹𝑂
Traditionally, the overall factor of safety (𝑆 𝐹𝑂 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 ) has been 1.2 to 1.5. According to Burcharth and
Sorensen (1998) may be approximated by 𝑆 𝐹𝑤 = 1.25 and 𝑆 𝐹𝑂 = 1.3. The safety factors are a function of the
quality of the available data. In particular they can be reduced when model studies have been performed
and Burcharth and Sorensen (1998) introduce different coefficients for design based on model study and no
model study.

Geotechnical Stability:
Normally, vertical breakwaters are placed on sand or rock. One method to analyze soil stability for sand
is to calculate the stress on the “column” of soil below the structure and compare it with a critical value
◦
(Fig.5). The stress is transmitted through the granular rock berm at an angle of approximately 45 and
therefore the width of the soil column affected is

𝐵𝑐 = 𝐵 𝑣 + 2𝑑 𝐵 (5)

12
 Figure 5: Soil Loading

where 𝑑 𝐵 is the height of the berm below the caisson. The extreme stress at the harbor side of the soil
column may be computed as
𝐹𝑣 6𝑀𝑐
𝐵
𝐹𝑣 𝑀𝑐 2𝑐
𝜎𝑐 = + = + 2 (6)
𝐵𝑐 𝐼𝑐 𝐵𝑐 𝐵𝑐
where 𝐹𝑣 is the total vertical force, 𝑀𝑐 is the moment about the center of the top of the soil column and
𝐼𝑐 is the moment of inertia of the soil column section. The allowable soil pressure on a sandy bottom for a
column of width 𝐵𝑐 may be defined as a function of the “blow count” 𝑁 𝑏 .

𝜎𝑏 = (0.00016𝑁 𝑏2 − 0.006)𝐵𝑐 (MPa) (7)

Practice in Japan limits 𝜎𝑏 to 0.6 Mpa. For structures placed on a rock berm, the berm is simply
considered as surcharge of height 𝑑 𝐵 , resulting in an additional allowable stress
𝑑𝐵
𝜎𝑑 = (0.026𝑁 𝑏 + 0.047) 2 (MPa) (8)
3
The maximum allowable stress in the sandy soil is therefore the sum of 𝜎𝑏 and 𝜎𝑑 . Because the soil is
underwater, however, we use the underwater soil density, which is about half the density in air. Therefore
1
𝜎𝑢 = (𝜎𝑏 + 𝜎𝑑 ) (9)
2

13
 Equations 7-9 have been derived from Peck et al (1974). Burcharth and Sorensen (1998) present
discussions for other soil failure mechanisms.

Other Design Considerations

The above design calculation considers forces per unit length of the structure. To compute total forces on
a structural unit, we multiply the calculated forces by the length of the unit. The resulting force from such
a computation assumes that the whole structure is subjected to the calculated unit force. Particularly with
short-crested waves and with waves arriving at an angle, this is seldom the case and the portion of the
structure directly subjected to the design wave forces will be in part supported by the lateral connections
to the remainder of the breakwater. Even though Goda’s method takes wave angle into account with the
term (1 + cos 𝛼), the above calculations could be quite conservative and model testing with directional wave
spectra is advisable.
Wave transmission over the structure results in wave agitation behind the structure and possibly in
damage to ships and facilities in the harbor. Experimental curves for regular waves, presented in Goda
(1985), may be approximated by

𝐻𝑇  𝑑 2 𝑑  𝑓𝑣 𝑓𝑣
= 0.2 − 0.4 + 0.58 − 0.32 for − 1 < ≤1 (10)
𝑣 𝑣
𝐻 𝑑𝑠 𝑑𝑠 𝐻𝐷 𝐻𝐷
where 𝑑 𝑣 and 𝑓𝑣 must be related to the mean wave level for the case of non-breaking waves. Goda states that
Eq.10 can be used for irregular waves by substituting 𝐻𝑠 for 𝐻. A usual limit on transmitted wave height,
𝐻𝑇 , for small craft harbors that is about 0.3 m. Often this will result in a breakwater that is visually too
high and will be very costly. In general, breakwater height is determined by a combination of wave agitation,
esthetic considerations and cost/benefit analysis for a higher structure.
When the wave angle of incidence to the structure is large, a Mach Stem wave may occur (Wiegel, 1964).
The wave no longer breaks on the structure, but runs along it. The structure forms a converging wave ray
with the incoming wave rays, resulting in a wave that increases in height as it runs along the structure. This
can lead to large increases in hydrostatic pressure with distance along the structure, to dangerous flooding
along the breakwater crest, and to scour of the berm when the Mach Stem wave breaks.
Since direct wave impact forces are very high, considerable effort has been expended to reduce the impact
forces. Tanaka (1994) discusses some of these:

• Placing wave-dissipating armor against the seaward face

• Using a perforated seaward face that absorbs wave energy
• Curving the seaward face in the vertical plane,
• Curving the seaward face in the horizontal plane

• Using an “elastic” seaward face or foundation

• Building a submerged breakwater seaward of the vertical breakwater.

Overtopping Discharge: Vertical Structures

Besley (1999) suggests a method for calculating the amount of wave overtopping discharge for vertical walls,
which is given below. Reflecting waves predominate when 𝑑∗ > 0.3, in which case the following equation
applies:

𝑑∗ = (𝑑/𝐻 1/3 ) 2𝜋𝑑/(𝑔𝑇𝑚2 )

𝑄 ∗ = 0.05 exp(−2.78𝑅𝑐 /𝐻 1/3 ) (Valid for 0.03 < 𝑅𝑐 /𝐻 1/3 < 3.2)
3
𝑄= 𝑄 ∗ (𝑔𝐻 1/3 ) 0.5

14
where

𝑑∗ = Dimensionless depth parameter.

𝑑 = Water depth at the toe of the structure (m).
𝐻 1/3 = Significant wave height at the toe of the structure (m).
𝑔 = Acceleration due to gravity (m/𝑠2 ).
𝑇𝑚 = Mean wave period (s).
𝑄 ∗ = Dimensionless discharge.
𝑄 = Mean overtopping discharge rate per meter run of seawall (m3 /s/m).
𝑅𝑐 = Freeboard (height of crest of the wall above still water level) (m).

If the incident waves are at an angle to the normal of the seawall,

𝑄 ∗ = 0.05exp (−2.78/𝛾) (𝑅𝑐 /𝐻 1/3 )



𝛾 is the reduction factor for angle of incident waves and is given by:
◦ ◦
𝛾 = 1 − 0.0062𝛽 for 0 < 𝛽 ≤ 45
◦
𝛾 = 0.72𝛽 for 𝛽 > 45
where 𝛽 =incident wave angle relative to the normal, in degrees.
Impact waves predominate when 𝑑∗ ≤ 0.3, in which case the following equation applies:

𝑄 ∗ = 0.000137𝑅∗−3.24 (Valid for 0.05 < 𝑅∗ < 1.00)

where

𝑄 ∗ = Dimensionless discharge = {𝑄/(𝑔ℎ3 ) 0.5 }/𝑑∗2

𝑅∗ = Dimensionless crest freeboard = (𝑅𝑐 /𝐻 1/3 )𝑑∗

No data is available to describe the effect of oblique wave incidence on the mean charge when waves are
in impacting mode.

Example:
Given: 𝐻 1/3 = 5.8 m and tide level = +0.6 m. Rest of information is given in figure below. Find 𝑄. Assume
𝑑∗ > 0.3.

 
Vertical Wall: 𝑄 ∗ = 0.05 exp − 2.78 𝑅𝑐
.
𝐻 1/3

15
𝑄∗ = 𝑄
3 ≡dimensionless discharge
(𝑔𝐻 1/3 ) 0.5
This formula is valid for: 0.03 < 𝑅𝑐
< 3.2.
𝐻 1/3
In the current example: 𝑅𝑐
= 5.8 = 0.58 ⇒belongs
3.4
to valid range.
𝐻 1/3

𝑄 ∗ = 0.05 exp(−2.78 × 0.58) = 9.8 × 10−3

3
⇒ 𝑄 = (𝑔𝐻 1/3 ) 0.5 × 𝑄 ∗ = (9.8 × 5.83 ) 0.5 × 9.8 × 10−3 = 0.428 m3 /s/m
This induces an instability to the crest and rear amour of the structure.

16