Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.
DREDGING AND OFFSHORE TRANSPORT OF MATERIALS

Author(s): Per Brunn, Paul T. Gayes, William C. Schwab and William C. Eiser
Source: Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 46. Port and Coastal Engineering:
Developments in Science and Technology (2005), pp. 453-525
Published by: Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25737349
Accessed: 05-02-2016 00:07 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal
of Coastal Research.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 204.235.148.92 on Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:07:51 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
10
Dredging
Developments inDredging Technology
Recent developments in dredging technology have included an unsurpassed

increase in volumes of dredging in navigation channels and port basins, fills for
the development of industrial and other port-related areas, reclamations for vari
ous other purposes, placement of subsea structures, pipelines, storage facilities,
dams, dikes, artificial nourishment of beaches, etc. Such works have been under
taken almost everywhere, especially inChina's estuaries, to establish airports and
islands (Hong Kong, Singapore, in Egypt, The Netherlands, inArgentina, and
many other places). In theUnited States the problem of inadequate depths of nav
igation channels and port basins, averaging 10 to 12m (30-40 ft), has been fully
realized and numerous corrective steps have been or are being undertaken to
improve the situation. Examples of depths now available or being targeted are
Port Elisabeth, New Jersey (55 ft), Boston Harbor (55 ft), Charleston Harbor,
South Carolina (55 ft),Port Everglades, Florida (50 ft), thePort ofMiami, Florida
(50 ft),Galveston, Texas (60 ft),Long Beach Harbor, California (60 ft+), thePort
of Oakland, California (50 ft), the Port of Seattle, Washington (55 ft), etc. The
most inadequate depth conditions inEurope are probably found in theUK with
ports located in estuaries and riverswhere very large tidal ranges oftenmake them
accessible only at high tides. But the problem isworldwide. European examples
of some deeper navigational entrances include, but are not limited to, the Ports of
Amsterdam (12 m = 40 ft),Rotterdam (15 m = 50 ft) and Europort (18-20 m
= 60-70 = 50
ft), Southhampton (15 m ft,United Kingdom), Santander (12 m
= 40
ft, Spain), Port De Sines (18 m = 60 ft, Portgual). In the Far East the
= 53 = 47 =
Japanese ports of Kobe (16 m ft),Nigata (14 m ft),Osaka (12 m
40 ft), and Yokohama (16 m = 47 ft); the Indian ports: Bombay (12 m = 40 ft),
= 40 = 50 = 37
Cochin (12 m ft), Madras (15 m ft), Paradip (14 m ft),
m = 40 and in Pakistan the Port of Karachi m = 40
Mangalore (12 ft); (12 ft).
Some oil terminals in the Persian Gulf have depths up to 18m = 60 ft.Most har
bors and approaches are chartered to a "controlling depth" that indicates the shal
lowest areas thatmay be encountered. The need for deeper ports in theUnited
453
454 Port and Coastal Engineering
States is being driven by the increasing size of ships in theworld fleet, both liners
and bulk-carriers, not least the new type container-vessels. In the bulk trades the
largest vessels may require depths of 16-17 m (53-57 ft). The largest container
vessels mentioned in the Introduction, have reached the 60,000 to 80,000 dwt, and
carry 6-7,000 twenty-foot containers at 33-34 knots with 13-14 m (43-47 ft)
drafts requiring depths of about 15m (50 ft).On the land side major reclamation
projects are undertaken to provide handling and storage areas. Examples of that
are Port Elisabeth, New Jersey, the ports of Boston, Miami, Galveston, Long
Beach, Le Havre (France), Barcelona (Spain), and many others.
Basic Aspects ofDredging Operations
Dredging ismoving material submerged inwater from one place to another in

water or out of water with dredging equipment. It is used in projects of naviga
tion, formaintenance of beaches, for reclamation, to secure construction materi
als, and for environmental protection/restoration.
Dredging forNavigation
From the very beginnings of civilization, people, equipment, materials, and
commodities have been transported by water. Ongoing technological develop
ments and the need to improve cost-effectiveness have resulted in larger,more
efficient ships. This, in turn,has resulted in the need to enlarge or deepen many of
the rivers and canals, our "aquatic highway," to provide adequate access to ports
and harbors. Nearly all themajor ports in theworld have at some time required
new dredging works?known as capital dredging?to enlarge and deepen access
channels, provide turning basins, and achieve appropriate water depths along
waterside facilities. Many of these channels have later required maintenance
dredging, i.e., the removal of sediments thathave accumulated in the bottom of
the dredged channel, to ensure that they continue to provide adequate dimensions
for the large vessels engaged in domestic and international commerce.
In theUnited States major projects are the dredging of theKill Van Kull chan
nel inNewark Bay from 40 ft to 45 ftdepth to accommodate the largest container
vessels, and the dredging of thePort ofHouston-Galveston and its adjoining chan
nels from 40 ft to 45 ft,widening it from 400 ft to 530 ft.
Dredging for Construction, Reclamation, and Mining
Dredging is an importantway of providing sands and gravels for construction

and reclamation projects. In the last two decades, the demand, and the associated
extraction rates for such offshore aggregates have significantly increased. Dredged
aggregates have a wide range of uses.
Dredging 455
Dredging forEnvironmental Reasons

Environmental issues have become a primary motivating force for establishing
collaboration between various agencies involved. Wakeman, Ludwig, and Gallo
(2003) report?
"Throughout history, statutory laws have been enacted thatunexpectedly

create conflicts among government agency objectives (Miller, 1988). Over
the last half-century, the conflicts between mandates that favor water
resource development and environmental protection of those same waters
have become more contentious. The focusing of legal intent to the point
where conflicts can occur within a single agency has facilitated the creation
of these agency mission conflicts. The passage of supplemental legislation
in furtherance of either mandate has narrowed the focus and sharpened the
conflict, with the result that agencies are compelled to act against each other.
The conflicts between the three 'resource agencies' (US Fish & Wildlife
Service, theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National
Marine Fisheries Service, theUS Environmental Protection Agency) and
theUS Army Corps of Engineers are legendary within theUnited States.
"Today, as we move into the twenty-first century, the conflict between
improving port infrastructureby providing adequate access and the need to
protect public trust resources living within the same waters has become a
national concern (NRC, 2001). The conflict is embodied in time-of-year
restrictions on dredging and disposal of sediment. Resolution of thematter
is problematic because the objectives cannot be reconciled inmutual man
dates or economic frameworks. For example, invocation of a 'seasonal win
dow' toprotect aquatic resources may preclude a single, continuous dredging
of a desired access channel. Evaluation of the dredging expenses and cost
delays are possible, but valuing aquatic resource impacts is not an equally
well-grounded practice. Further complicating the discussions is a dearth of
information about aquatic resource needs and their adaptability to adverse
conditions. In theport ofNew York and New Jersey, these conflicts are being
dealt with through frank discussions of dredging projects and resource pro
tection measures. The effort is being supplemented by field investigations
of the potential impacts of dredging and disposal activities."
Dredging can be undertaken to benefit the environment in several ways.

Dredged materials are frequently used to create or restore habitats. Recent decades
have also seen the increasing use of dredged materials for beach replenishment.
Another environmental use of dredging has been in initiatives
designed to
remove contaminated sediments, thus improving water
quality and restoring the
health of aquatic ecosystems. This so-called "remediation" or
"cleanup" dredging
is used inwaterways, lakes, ports, and harbors in highly industrialized or urban

ized areas.
Recent Developments inDredging Equipment and Procedures
A comprehensive review of dredging technology up to year 1990 is

given inPort
Engineering, 4th edition, Chapter 10. The major developments were the oceangoing
hopper dredgers' larger capacities in quantities and greater operation distances.
Several "mega-dredgers" (> 20,000 m3) have been built, the largest being Vasco Da
Gama. Hydraulic pipeline dredgers are still being developed. While only relatively
few of them are oceangoing, many medium and smaller-size ones have been com
missioned, a significant portion of them for "developing countries." Special equip
ment like water-injection dredgers have made some progress due to economical
advantages for certain conditions. The following is a brief review.
Hopper Dredgers
The last two decades have produced equipment in a scale never seen before.
The Vasco Da Gama (Figure 10-1) with its 33,000-m3 hopper capacity so far is
the largest one (built for JanDe Nul, Belgium). It is 200 m long, 36.2 m wide. It
has two 1.4-m diameter suction pipes reaching down to 131 m and outputs to
10,000 m3/h. Loaded draft sailing speed is 16 knots. It is the scale of Vasco Da
Gama that sets it apart from previous trendsetters.
Vasco Da Gama's capacities are were recently exceeded by the lengthening of
"
Boskalis Wesminister's W. D. Fairway built in 1997. The "new Fairway has the
following dimensions:
Before Modification AfterModification
Length Overall m
231.71
173.15m
Breadth 32.00 m 32.00 m
Depth 13.10m 16.85 m
Draft 9.83 m 11.03 m
Dredging Draught 11.49 mm
13.68
Hopper Volume 23,347 m3
35,508m3
Average Speed 16.4knots
17.1 knots
Pearl River revolutionized the industry's thinking about how large a dredger
could be. She doubled the hopper capacity of her predecessors. A 23,400 m3
Boskalis' W. D. Fairway and Queen ofNetherlands had most recently held the
largest dredger title. It represents a near 90% increase in load carrying capacity,
as the use of 42% high-strength steel during construction boosted the final capa
bility to some 60,000 dwt. The very large projects in the Far East(Hong Kong,
Dredging 457
Figure 10-1. Vasco da Gama, Jan de Nul, Belgium (Dredging and Port Construction,
2000).
Singapore, China, Thailand, Persian Gulf) and in South America (Argentina,

Uruguay) are mainly responsible for the development. Large fills for ports and
industrial developments, including airports, deepening of navigation channels,
and port basins all over theworld are also in progress or planned. This includes
many projects in the United States such as New York Harbor, Charleston,
Savannah, Los Angeles, Columbia River, etc.Materials were earlier often dumped
offshore in designated areas. It is, of course, better to use it for practical purposes.
Efforts in this respect have been or are being made, e.g. inThe Netherlands, in the
United States, in Japan, China and elsewhere. The dredging companies involved
are mainly Dutch and Belgian. They compete in producing themost effective
equipment provided with the latest inventions in survey and control techniques.
They are applied in projects of tens or hundreds of millions of m3 capital dredg
ing. Smaller size equipment includes hopper dredgers of a few thousand m3 hop
pers for relatively smaller projects, capital as well as maintenance.
About "functional considerations concerning large trailing-suction hopper
dredger," Koerrt (1998), writes?
"From the 1970s a trend towards bigger trailing-suction hopper dredgers

became discernible. As with most things in life, ithappened inwaves and
clearly, now in the 1990s, the dredging fraternity is going through a surge of
very large trailers, while naval architects are contemplating even bigger
ones. Since IHC Holland?member of the IHC Caland Group?is themar
ket player spawning most of the trailing jumbos, it is interesting to dive
deeper into the subject. Why are super hoppers needed, what makes them
profitable and what is to be expected?"
Figure 10-2 shows recent years' development of hopper dredgers by Jan de

Nul, Belgium, the owner of the Vasco Da Gama.
In Singapore, where the largest dredging and filling project in theworld is in
progress, theVasco Da Gama worked togetherwith JanDe Nul's 18,000-m3 jumbo
trailer,Geradus Maercator, and the Jan De Nul, which at 11,750-m3 capacity was
theworld's largest dredger commissioned only eight years ago.
JanDe Nul also continues work in Singapore on the $256 million land recla
mation works for housing and recreational purposes at the Punggol and Coney
Island. JanDe Nul has continued its autonomous fleet expansion policy with the
order of a second 16,500-m3 capacity jumbo trailing suction hopper dredger from
the Spanish ship builder Astilleros De Sestao. The option was exercised to order a
sister ship for an additional $67.3 million.
Both new jumbos will have lengths of 145 m, widths of 27.8 m and sailing
speeds of 15.6 knots. These dredgers will be deployed primarily on large scale
land reclamation projects, but their size provides the versatility to also undertake
offshore trenching or port and harbor dredging tasks.
Other Newcomers to theWorld Dredging Fleet

One of themost recent additions to the international fleet is theLange Wapper,
a 13,700-m3 capacity trailing suction hopper dredger, which entered service at the
end ofMay, 1999 (Figure 10-3). The 20,000 dwt vessel boasts the extremely shal
low draft of 9 m fully loaded, setting it in competition with vessels in the 8,000
m3 to 10,000-m3 range, yet with substantially higher production rates (PE,
August/October 1999 and D&PC, May/June 1999). Built by IHC Holland, the
Lange Wapper is 120 m long with a 26.8-m beam. The total installed power is
13,400 kW, and dredging depth is in the range 30/50 m. With a draft of 8m, the
vessel can carry a deadweight of 13,500 t.Because of its reduced draft of 8 m
loaded, the vessel has the ability to dump the load onto relatively shallow water
dumping areas. This is a major asset when performing, for example, maintenance
dredging on the river Scheldt. With a maximum dredging depth of 50 m, she is
able to perform specialized offshore pre-sweep work and dredging of trenches for
offshore pipeline installations. Moreover, the ability to dredge at large depths cap
italizes on the ever-increasing sand-winning requirements in deeper areas for
major land reclamation purposes.
Dredging 459
Figure 10-2. Increase in size and capacity in Jan de Nul trailers (Port Engineering,
March/April,1998).
Figure 10-3. The Lange Wapper, IHC,Holland (PortEngineering, May/June, 1999).
The Lange Wapper features state-of-the-art computer software to integrate all

dredging and surveying system, and it is thought to have the first software of its
kind in the industry.
Specially designed by DEME, togetherwith IHC SYSTEMS (the electronic sub
sidiary of the IHC-group) the software provides a single program capable of han
dling all data relating to dredging, navigation, and surveying. Previously, software
systems could only communicate with each other from standalone packages.
Furthermore, up to ten extra systems were required onboard and and extra person
nel needed to operate them. The software onboard theLange Wapper is available
via several networked computer terminals and can access additional data by satellite.
Enhanced controls and accuracies are themain advantages of the new system.
Tight dredging parameters will be possible, which will enhance performance in
environmentally sensitive conditions and offshore trenching or pipe cover
ing operations.
All dredging projects, however, depend upon hydrographic surveys. As port
and channel systems throughout theworld continue to involve expansions and
extensions, the need for effective survey programs become essential. Throughout
the past years there have been some major developments within this sector of the
port construction industry (D&PC, January 2000).
Dredging 461
Some dredging projects have joined hands inmaintenance operations. A recent

example of that is the Port of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia (D&PC, October
2000)?
"Outfitting is nearing completion for the Port of Brisbane Corporation's

new 440 million trailing suction hopper dredger following the launch of the
hull from theNQEA shipyard inCairns. The world-class vessel will replace
the corporation's existing dredger Sir Thomas Hiley, which was commis
sioned in 1971.
"The new vessel will take over theQueensland ports dredging campaign,
maintaining shipping channels at Brisbane, Weipa, Cairns, Townsville,
Mackay, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Karumba and Bundaberg.
"In auspicious times for theCorporation, Brisbane has become the first
port inAustralasia to achieve certification under the ISO 14001 environ
mental management system. The environmental audit conducted by Quality
Assurance Services focused on themanagement and operation of port facil
ities and services, including port development, infrastructuremaintenance,
professional and technical services, dredging and land reclamation.
"In an audit of its safety systems under theDet Norske Veritas (DNV)
International Safety Rating System, Brisbane achieved the highest rating
recorded by any port within theAsia Pacific region."
The American dredging industryhas for long been short of hopper dredgers. A
reason for that is that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operation of hopper
dredgers has almost ceased as decided by theU.S. Congress. The replacement by
private dredgers, however, has been slow. Presently available hopper dredgers in
theUnited States are cited inTable 10-1 (D&PC, January/February 1998). New
equipment, e.g. theGreat Lakes Dredge and Docks' Liberty Island (Figure 10-4)
has been added.
Some of themedium and smaller hopper dredgers have been transferred to the
Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company. Their new hopper dredger, Liberty Island
(Figure 10-4), measures 96 m in length, is 18m wide, and has a loaded draft of
7.8 m. It is capable of dredging to a depth of 33 m through twin 800-mm diameter
suction pipes. Two 3,729-kW engines power the dredge pumps and drive control
lable pitch propellers to provide a loaded speed of 14 knots.
The latest development inThe Netherlands is best described by Dredging and
Port Construction, (February 2002)?
"Royal Boskalis Westminster has ordered two trailing suction hopper

dredgers of 16,000 m3 each from theMerwede Shipyards inHolland. The
ships, specially designed for the dredging and transport of sand and silt, fit
the fleet plans Boskalis announced earlier this year:
Table 10-1
Hopper Dredgers in the U.S. (D&PC, January/February 1998)
Class Industry Owner U.S. Army Corps District
Large Hopper Long Island NATCO Whealer, New Orleans
Stuyvesant Stuyvesan Essayons

Eagle 1 Bean Portland
Medium Hopper Columbus B andB

Quachita Gulf Coast Trailing McFarland, Philadelphia
R. N. Weeks Weeks Marine
Newport Manson
Dodge Island NATCO

Manhatten Island NATCO
Padre Island NATCO
Sugar Island NATCO
Small Hopper Northery Island NATCO

Westport Manson
Atchafalaya Gulf Trailing

Marmentau Gulf Trailing
Figure 10-4. The Liberty Island,Great Lakes Dredge and Dock, Inc. (PortEngineering,
May/June,2000).
Expansion of capacity in line with market developments, and

Replacement of older tonnage by effident, state-of-the art ships.
"The ships?operational by 2004 with an overall length of 154m, a beam
of 28 m and designed to be cost leaders in their class?will join themid-size
Dredging 463
hopper Coastway (4,900 m3) launched lastNovember and the jumbo hopper
WD Fairways?which will be extended to a 33,000 m3 mega-hopper this
year. The total investment in the two ships and the extension ofWD Fairway
is around 180 million and will be financed from the company's own funds.
"Boskalis' confidence in expanding is based on a full orderbook and a
broad range of projects in various markets that are in the pipeline. The firm
is operational in over 50 countries across five continents, has a versatile
fleet of over 300 units and employs over 3,300 people."
Ballast Nedam's new jumbo trailer (2001) is described as follows (IHC Ports
and Dredging, 2001)?
"Designing a vessel such as Rotterdam begins, of course, with the com

mercial need for it, and from this follows the size. Ballast Nedam needed
the dredger for large reclamation projects, such as are carried out at the
moment in South East Asia, where sailing distances from sand winning to
dumping areas are long. Size was therefore important, hence the 21,500-m3
hopper and a loading capacity of 37,0001.
"For operational flexibility, today's jumbo hoppers have a relatively shal
low draught, and with 11.36 m on dredging mark Rotterdam fits that bill.
Combined with 2 x 9,000 kW propulsion power for a service speed of 15.9
knots, this causes heavy loads on the propellers. Special attention has there
fore been devoted to designing the propellers, sharply reduce vibrations and
avoid drag in shallow channels. The 4,700 mm variable pitch nozzle
mounted propellers produce a remarkably low level of vibrations."
Figure 10-5 shows the cutterhead suction dredger Kattouf, built by the IHC for
National Marine Dredging inDubai, 2001.
Figure 10-6 shows shallow-water hopper dredger Hansakawa, which has a
hopper capacity of 1,200 m3. Itwas built by the IHC for the Sri Lanka Port of
Colombo. The Hansakawas' principal dimensions are?
Length, o.a. 66.10 m
Length, b.p. 62.30 m

Breadth 12.60 m
Draft 4.40 m
Propulsion 2 x 1,825 kW
Speed 12.0 knots
Hopper capacity 1,200 m3
Dredging depth 20.00 m
Suction pipe diameter 0.60 m
Crew 26
Figure 10-5. Kattouf, heavy-dutycuttersuction dredger (IHC catalogue, 2001).
An even more powerful cutter suction dredger Jan De Nul was launched inThe
Netherlands in July 2003 and commissioned at the end of 2003. Its technical spec
ifications are?
o.a. 124.4 m
Length,
b.p. 117.9 m
Length,
Breadth 27.8 m
Draft 6.51 m
Max. Dredging Depth 35 m
Suction pipe diameter 1,000 mm
CutterLadder Dredge Pump 3,800 kW
InboardDredge Pumps 2 x 6,000 kW
Cutter 6,000 kW
Propulsion 2 x 3,800 kW
Speed 12.5 knots
Total InstalledPower 27,190 kW
Accommodation 60 people
Classification Bureau Veritas
Dredging 465
Figure 10-6. The Hansakawa, 1,200-m3 trailingsuction hopper dredger (IHC catalogue,
2001).
Hydraulic Pipeline Dredgers?Cutterheads
Some larger cutterhead hydraulic pipeline dredgers are still being built in par
ticular forwork on harder bottoms and in narrow or protected environments. Some
of these are oceangoing with discharge pump capacities of many kilometers. An
example isBoskalis' 35-in. Oranje. One of itsmajor jobs was the dredging of the
Bahi Blanca estuary inArgentina. The Ellicott Machine Corporation inBaltimore,
U.S.A., and the IHC-Holland inThe Netherlands have built many relatively small
dredgers, some of which are transportable on large trailer-trucks like theEllicott
"Dragons" and the IHC "Beavers." They operate mainly in countries such as Egypt,
India, China, etc. Dredging of rock and other hard materials to increase depths at
some ports, e.g. at the Port of New York, where rock is found below softer bottom
layers may be accomplished by cutterheads, perhaps following blasting or dipper
dredgers, but unit prices may be high.
Countries such as Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, and Scotland have no

choice, however. Cutterheads may chew calcerious materials and some sand
stones, but, not granites, gneissitic or basalt rock {Port Engineering, 4th edition,
Chapter 10). D&PC (June 1998) reports about the option and maintenance of cut
terhead dredgers of theMeridian-type (Bean Dredging Company)?
"When cutterheads are used for a job in hard to very hard ground, the
total value of all cutterhead related costs is a significant part of the total
budget for the job. Every significant saving on these costs will be reflected
in reductions to the overall budget.
"The cutterhead cycle is a useful system on which to demonstrate how
operational costs can be lowered. The system is a repeating cyclic process
inwhich cutter consumables can be seen as an external supply essential to
continuous working. This particular cutterhead cycle is based on a typical
European cutter suction dredger of 2,000 hp or more and has its own crane
facilities for handling cutters.
"The repeating cyclic process, which is the cutterhead cycle, can be seen
as having ten steps, beginning in the repair shop.
1. A repaired cutterhead located in or near the repair shop is standing

by for transport.
2. The cutterhead is craned onboard a support vessel for transport to
the dredger.
3. It is craned into a position onboard the dredger where it stands by
ready for use.
4. When needed, this standby cutterhead is picked up and craned to the
ladderfront piece, where it ismounted on the cuttershaft.
5. The cutterhead is ready for operation and lowered to the seabed,
where it excavates the soil. After a predetermined time, or when there
is some other indication, the cutterhead is brought up for inspection
and/or replacement of worn teeth.This will be repeated several times
until it is necessary to replace the cutterhead.
6. The cutterhead is unlocked, removed from the shaft, and craned to a
position onboard.
7. It remains on standby for pick up.
8. The cutterhead is craned onboard the support vessel and transported
to theworkshop.
9. The cutterhead is craned into theworkshop and iswaiting for repair.
10. The cutterhead is inspected and repaired. It is now ready to begin a
new
cycle.
"Ten steps of the cycle can be divided into three groups, namely: No
Cost?steps 1, 3, 7, and 9; Low Cost?steps 2 and 8; High Cost?steps 4, 5,
6, and 10.
Dredging 467
"For theNo Cost group, there are no possible direct savings. However,
the longer it takes before the next step occurs, the longer the total cutterhead
cycle timewill become. This can result in the need formore cutterheads in
the job. Cutterhead cycle time is the sum of the times for all steps."
Next "Low Cost" and "High Cost" groups are discussed including "Big
Savings"?
"Because cutter repair requiresmuch time and expensive consumables, big

savings can be made by increasing the number of operational hours through
better design and decreasing the ratio of replaced adaptors to touched up adap
tors through better design. Improvements can also be achieved by dismount
ing the cutterhead before thedamage starts to accelerate, with good guidelines
provided for the dredge crew. Other options are improved repair procedures
and facilities, decreased repair timeper adaptor via better design and decreased
repair time per linerby using pre-fabbed liners.
"Because repair time is normally the largest portion of cutterhead cycle
time, a serious decrease in this timewill decrease the number of cutterheads
needed for a job.
"The latest design adaptors have already significantly decreased repair
time. In themost recent freecutting cutterheads, the only wear due to the
cutting process is to the teeth.The adaptor and cutter itself have no signifi
cant wear.
"Any decrease in the capital intensive external supply of teeth and lock
ings, adaptors and liners, and cutterhead mobilisation gives big savings.
"There are threemajor areas where potential future developments could
significantly lower cost.
"First would be the establishment of a specialized unit to completely han
dle the cutterhead cycle process, including the external supplies. Especially
in relation to standardized cutterheads for large cutter dredgers, this unit
could offer a more cost effectivemaintenance and wear part supply to dredg
ing contractors. Advantages would include the certainty of there always
being a perfectly repaired replacement cutterhead available. The unit would
have well trained and experienced supervisors, giving short communication
lines between supplier and user. There would be no investment cost for
dredging contractors and theywould no longer have tomaintain repair shops,
hire personnel or purchase wearparts.
"Second would be the development of software for onboard computers
which could interpret three dimensional geological models to predict tooth
wear. This could increase the average used wearlength of teeth.
"Third would be the development of automatic cutterhead and teeth
changing equipment. It is estimated that the time needed for steps 4, 5, and
6 could be reduced by at least 50%."
Equipment forNearshore Dredging

The requirements of this equipment may be summarized as follows:
1. Itmust have a relatively small loaded draft and that is a wider beam, a rein
forced bottom section (keel), bilge keels (against rolling), bow and stern
winches, and a protected propeller.
2. The dredge will mainly operate perpendicular to shore with waves approach
ing from the stern. It should be highly maneuverable, which is accomplished
with bow and stern thrusters.
3. It has no spuds, but bow and stern anchors with the corresponding winch
4. Its dredge pump may discharge directly through submerged pipeline to
shore, or itmay operate another dredge pump for discharge. But italso needs
a propulsion pump, and three pumps may be used in the hull. But power
could perhaps be delivered by cable from the shore.
The most suitable equipment is the shallow-water hopper dredger, that is

dredgers of 2,000-10,000 m3 capacities. Due to their limited loaded draft they are
able to come close to the shore.Many such dredgers are operating. They aremostly
built inThe Netherlands and inBelgium. One example cited earlier is the 5,000 m3
Liberty Island of theGreat Lakes Dredge and Dock Company. The Great Lakes
Company owns seven shallow-water hopper dredges of 2,700 to 5,000 m3, one
of 12,200 m3.
Presently available smaller dredging equipment of that type are theAmerican
Mermentau and Atchafalaya with 1,000 to 1,300-m hull capacities; theDanish
Danenas of about 1,000 m3; Rohde Nielsens with about 2,000 to 5,000 m3 capaci
ties; and many Dutch dredgers ranging 2,000 to 10,000 m3.
The Spanish shipyard at Iza Gijon recently delivered two 4,400-m3 dredgers?
Taccola and Francesco di Giorgio?to the Belgian company Jan de Nul. Their
very practical dimensions makes them useful formany operations including dredg
ing and filling, and beach nourishments {Port Engineering Management, 2004)?
Taccola and Francesco di Giorgio
Technical Details
Hopper capacity 4,400 m3

Length, o.a. 94.40 m
Length, b.p. 84.70 m
Width 21.00 m
Depth 8.50 m
Dredging draft 7.20 m
Deadweight at 6.5 draft 6,955 t

Suction pipe diameter 900 mm
Dredging Depth 21.00/24.30 m
Dredging 469
Speed 12.3 kn
PowerMain GeneratorDiesels 2 x 2,700 kW
Propulsion Power 2 x 2,150 kW
Pump power trailing Abt. 1,250 kW
Pump power shoredischarge 3,000 kW
Jetpump power 1,200 kW
power 550 kW
Bow thrusters
Wheel Dredgers
The IHC's Scorpio dredger has a dredging wheel that consists of bottomless
buckets towhich sticky soils do not adhere (Figure 10-16 of Port Engineering,
4th edition). They are arranged to form a tunnel from which dredged materials
cannot escape easily. This effectively prevents the ingress of debris. The result is
higher concentrations, no spillage or blockage, and reduced downtime. Due to the
relatively low costs of operations several such dredgers are now in operation all
over theworld. This includes theNG-IHC Beaver 4012 with its submerged pump.
The water injection dredge (WID) was developed inEurope in themid-1980s
and has been used regularly there since 1987 and recently tested in theUnited
States by theUS Army Corps of Engineers (Figure 10-7). The principle ofWID is
to fluidize the shoaled material to a condition that a gravity-driven density current
is formed, which transports the sediment down a slope into deeper water where it
Figure 10-7. Schematic of water injectiondredger {Dredging and Port Construction,

2003).
is no longer an obstruction to navigation, and natural sediment transportprocesses

can take over. This density current remains close to the bottom, minimizing tur
bidity. Fluidization is accomplished by injecting water directly into the sediment
voids under relatively low pressure through a series of nozzles evenly spaced on a
horizontal pipe. A pump mounted on the dredge, barge, or other vessel forces
water into the horizontal pipe or head. The pipe pivots from the dredge, allowing
the head to be lowered with the aid of a winch. During operation, the head with
the injection nozzles is as close to the bottom as possible, while the dredge pro
ceeds across the cut area (Bruun, 1996).
Knox et al. (1995) writes?
"The WID vessel belonging to theGulf Coast Trailing Company, named

the BT208, is a barge 87 ft long by 28 ftwide, with a 3-ft draft. A Gould
30 x 24-in. pump powered by a Caterpillar D398, 825-hp diesel engine
provides 30,000 gal of water/min at 18-20 psi, drawing thewater from a
four-foot-square opening in the bottom of the dredge hull. The water injec
tion head is 36 ftwide and 36 in. in diameter, with twenty 305-in. diameter
jets. The vessel is not self-propelled, and requires a minimum 700-hp push
boat for operation. The barge can dredge 7-42 ftdeep, in both directions.
"The first job in theUnited States was for Exxon. This job had always
been done by a cutterhead dredge and was due to be done as usual in 1992.
Representatives of Gulf Coastal Trailing Company met with Exxon inBaton
Rouge, Louisiana and proposed a substitution of theWID for the traditional
cutterhead dredge. Actual dredging began inmid-June and was completed
in less than a week, with a total of 66,000 yd3 removed to deep water. Since
WID has no floating discharge line, no anchors and no spuds, barge traffic
was able tomove in and out with only minor delays in dredging operations."
Sidecasters
These dredgers sidecast the dredged materials. They come in various sizes and
are excellent for emergency and shallow-water operations, e.g. in navigation chan
nels. The McFarland (Figure 10-32 inPort Engineering, 4th edition) also has a
hopper. McFarland was put in commission in 1967 and assigned tomaintenance
of Gulf Coast inlets (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). It is 300 ft long, 72 ftwide
with a loaded draft of 22 ft to permit efficient operation in relatively shallow water.
Recent years have not seen any furtherdevelopment of sidecasters. The existing
ones are operating at inlets and entrances on theEast and Gulf coasts.
Underwater Pumps, Crawl Cats and Dogs
Amphibious "Cats" and "Dogs" (Bruun, 1996) and underwater pumps like the
"Punaise" (Visser and Brunn, 1997) have been built (Chapter 9). A unique pump
Dredging 471
for dredging of heavy silts, the Sweepax Pump is described as follows (D&PC
1999)?
"Following is a successful one-day trial, the Sweepax system was further

tested by pumping silt between two lagoons 100 m apart. The first lagoon
was emptied in five weeks. Work on one of the three settlement lagoons
began shortly thereafter.Each lagoon is 100m long by 20 m wide and 15m
deep, holding 63,000 m3 of heavy silt at 20-40% solids content.
"The Sykes Company used 6-in. Sweepax pump to achieve a production
rate of 1 to 3 m3/min. This was connected to a 6 x 4, 4-in. hard iron Sykes
Orion booster pump to ensure continuity of flow. The Sweepax pump suc
cessfully transferred the silt to a reception pit 1,800 m distant. The 6-in.
diameter hose used included some heavy duty steel sections to cope with
the high pressure. Sykes installed all pipework and remained on site during
the firstweek to ensure the system was correctly administered. Over one
thirdof the heavy siltwas transferred in the firstfive weeks."
A similar, but diver-operated pump, theBaracuda, is reported inD&PC (1998).
Equipment forOperation ofDredgers
The equipment to support dredgers includes pumps, dragheads, pipes, hoses,

control, and survey equipment. The position of the dredger itself is obtained by
GPS-systems combined with broadcasts by land-stations (D&PC, 2000). A com
prehensive review is given by Herbich (1992).
Pumps
Pump efficiency is crucial for effective operation, The world's largest pump
manufacturer is theDutch IHC. In PE, February, 2000, the following is said about
the IHC High Efficiency Pumps, which obtained 90% efficiency rating, are
described inPort Engineering magazine (2000)?
"As knowledge of designing dredge pumps accumulated over countless

years, IHC Parts and Services can claim to possess unrivalled know-how
and experience. This knowledge is available to clients anywhere in theworld
in the form of consultancy and engineering services. Dredging contractors,
government departments and even other dredger builders profit from it.
"Parts and Services is a product-orientated business unit thathas special
ists for each product. Via these product-specialists the knowledge is avail
able for all. This makes IHC Parts and Services an interesting partner for
improving the operational results of pump equipment.
"Each pump offered is based on calculations performed specifically for

the customer, giving full consideration to the relevant operating conditions.
"In the early '90s IHC Parts and Services began its research for high
efficiency (HE) pumps. Within three years the firstHE pump was commis
sioned. Up to now, theHE pumps delivered have proven to behave according
to expectations, sometimes even better than that.A research program to fur
ther improve HE pumps is in full swing."
Next, the article describes essential improvements including "higher efficiency"

improved suction characteristics, reduced wear on wet parts, single walled dredge
and jet pumps, double walled dredge pumps, submersible dredge pumps, low pres
sure,medium pressure and high pressure. Design procedures are also mentioned.
Figure 10-8 provides an idea of pump dimensions for the larger dredgers, such
as the Vasco da Gama (Figure 10-1).
Figure 10-8. Pump forHAM 318 dredger (IHC catalogue, 2001).
Dredging 473
Dragheads
Various types of dragheads are described inPort Engineering, 4th ed., Chap
ter 10. Dragheads have grown in size and sophistication. Successful operation of
dragheads is crucial for the economy of thedredging project. D&PC (2000) explains
how theDP/DT (dredge position/dredge track) system and theUniMACS 3000,
navigation system provided a fully automatic dredging control system, as follows:
"Imtech Marine Industry, togetherwith IHC Systems inwhich itholds a

50% interest, has been awarded the contract for the dredging and platform
automation of two identical 16,500-m3 capacity trailing suction hopper
dredgers.
"Being built for Belgian contractor JanDe Nul shipyard Astilleros de
Sestao S.A.L. in Bilbao, Spain, the two vessels are due for delivery in
January and July of 2002.
"The automation concept for these vessels calls for the Imtech UniMACS
3000 system providing full integration of the navigation?DP/DT system,
the alarm, monitoring and control systems as well as the dredging automa
tion and control system. The redundant high-speed network has no single
point of failure, optimizing reliability, and safety.Multifunction worksta
tionswill optimize crew efficiency and system operation.
"Integration of radar,ECDIS, DP/DT, survey, conning and autopilot func
tionswill allow efficient route planning and flexible operation.
"The fully automated dredging control system featuring touch-screen
operation is also fully integrated in the ships' high-speed networks. Hard
ware commonality in the systemwill reduce spare parts investment and sim
plify maintenance activities. Decentralized input/output processing will
reduce the amount of electrical cabling on the ships and contribute tomini
mized life-cycle costs."
The D&PC (2000) reports on the operation of dragheads?
"Dredging with a suction hopper dredger means that the dragheads have
to deal with much varied interaction with the bottom. The force on the suc
tion pipes can change in several seconds from zero to higher than nominal,
which can force the draghead in unwanted directions. This is troublesome,
particularly during thefinal, clean-up phase of dredging, when the last under
water mounds and ridges must be removed.
Ridge Problems
"A systematic attempt to deepen the bottom before clean-up is always
made. Ifwork has to be done in parallel tracks due towidth, there is a natural
tendency for the draghead to follow the previous track.The result is that the
bottom develops longitudinal ridges. An attempt ismade to steer the drag
head over these ridges, but itwill often shift to the side. One remedy is to
dredge obliquely over the existing ridges if there is enough space, but
mounds of soil will always be leftbehind.
"Dredging will therefore end in removing these mounds. This article
describes how this can be effectively done by the interactive use of a DP/DT
system.
"DP/DT system cannot be expected to give a flat bottom fully automati
cally (or a bottom with a desired profile). The draghead has a natural ten
dency to follow the tracks already made, even when operating automatically.
Shifting into an earlier adjacent track can happen very suddenly, so the
DP/DT systemwill be unable to correct itquickly enough. Correction occurs
indirectly by moving the ship aside, which in itself takes a fewminutes. The
head by this timewill already be several meters past the ridge so that even if
it automatically steered back, a piece of the bottom would still be missed.
Exactly the same thingwill happen next time, resulting in an even bigger
mound, or rather, a deeper pit next to themound.
"Fully automatic dredging with a DP/DT system will therefore not solve
the problem. The above is less true for 'trench dredging/ where it is desir
able for the head to dredge continually in the vicinity of the previous track.
This article is limited to the creation of large bottom areas.
"The current state of the art, however, does make itpossible to provide a
bottom with a specifically desired slope more quickly than ifmanual dredg
ing is performed. This uses the navigator's experience and insight in combi
nation with the use of a DP/DT system.
Best Position
"If the navigator has a good idea of the bottom profile, he can predict
partly from the previously dredged tracks if the draghead can again shift
next to the ridge ormound. The requirement is for him to have an up-to-date
bottom profile and see the actual place of the head in thatprofile, e.g., via a
Dredge Track Presentation System. Shifting can be predicted from his visual
data. As soon as this actually happens, the navigator can order theDP/DT
system to bring the ship about into a suitable position so that the head can
be moved back. The navigator therefore concentrates on themovement of
the head, while theDP/DT system brings about the change in the ship's
position and speed that is desired by the navigator.
"Many attempts have been made to directly steer the draghead in the past
by using carriages, waterjets, etc. These methods are less economically
attractive. The head can be steered via theDP/DT system by moving the
ship sideways, which will probably happen too slowly. In practice it has
Dredging 475
appeared that compensation is also possible by rotating the ship several

degrees. The ship will turn twice as fast as itwill move sideways. The lift
ing arm can for instance be moved aside by 5 m in 45 to 60 sec by turning
and in 90 to 120 sec by moving sideways.
"A sideways force is exercised on the draghead by the ship's turning
movement while its (suction pipe) inlet remains moving over the desired
track.The DP/DT system is able tomove the inlet forwards over the planned
track while the course, at the navigator's indication, can be freely chosen.
The draghead's movement can therefore be corrected more quickly.
"The above method was 'discovered' during the DEME Group's first
dredging job with its new jumbo trailerNile River (Figure 10-9). This proj
ect involved cleaning the bottom ofMonaco Harbor in preparation for build
ing the foundation for a new 350-m long pier.
Profile Determination
"The profile of the bottom to be provided was determined by the underly
ing rock formation, resulting in one thatwas fairly complex. The desired pro
file was visible on theNile River via IHC Systems' Dredge Track Presentation
system (DTPS), as is the actual profile and the draghead's position.
"The actual bottom profile is automatically updated during dredging
using themost recent draghead depths. This gives the navigator an actual
picture of the bottom profile and the draghead's position in it.The navigator
can see where the natural tendency of the draghead or shiftwill lead to on
theDIPS after several tracks have been made. He can enter this in theDP/DT
Figure 10-9. The Nile River, IHC Holland (Dredging and Port Construction, 2000).
system in time to prevent it from happening by rotating the ship. This ship
can be rotated using a knob on theDP/DT control panel. The ship's forward
speed can also be increased or decreased or even stopped via a speed knob.
Stopping the ship in thisway is only possible in calm waters and with the
knowledge that theDP/DT system actually reduces the speed to zero and
will therefore not allow the ship to reverse.
"The interactive use of theDP/DT system in combination with theDTPS
made to perform theNile River's work 30% faster than originally
itpossible
planned. Navigators also found themethod less troublesome than fullyman
ual dredging.
"This was partly due to the fact that thework was done by dredging ahead
for 200 m in automatic trackmode or DT mode and by sailing fully auto
matically back at the end of the track to the beginning of the next tract.This
back-sailing process is done inDP mode, which means that the ship stops
exactly at the spot where the next track has to start.This means saving an
appreciable amount of time.The navigator could even relax during this auto
matic back-sailing time.Hours of dredging are made less tiringand the nav
igator is able to perform better.
"Relieving the navigator of the ship steering task enabled him to check
the ship's positioning relation to objects such as buoys shown on his moni
tor screens and have time towalk to the edge of the bridge to visually check
the ship's position. This saved the need for a look-out on theNile River.
"Virtually no mounds or ridges were encountered at the startof thework.
The accuracy of theDP/DT system could thereforebe measured well as that
moment as the navigator had to take little interactive action.
"The Nile River's firstdredging job showed that a navigator making inter
active use of a DP/DT system in combination with theDTPS can achieve
much more thanwithout these systems. The DTPS gives him an insight into
what the interaction is between the bottom and the draghead, so that devia
tions from the desired track can be corrected by steering the ship into another
position via theDP/DT system.This interactiveuse gives thenavigator greater
control over the draghead's behavior and therefore sufficientjob satisfaction.
Operator Advantage
"The navigator has to pay hardly any attention to steering the ship. He
can spend much more time planning the ship's movements, can communi
cate more effectivelywith the dredgemaster and can act as lookout himself.
"The DTPS and DP/DT systems described here were developed over the
last few years as the result of very close cooperation between IIC Systems
and DEME.
"Thus far, theDP/DT system onboard suction hopper dredgers is used
can also
only for trench dredging. The Nile River has shown that this system
be very effectively used to dredge accurately defined profiles.
Dredging 477
"The DP/DT and DTPS systems are irreplaceable and the interactive use
of both gives great job satisfaction. The navigator can now steer the drag
head instead of the ship."
Pipes and Hoses

The increased pump capacities necessitated larger pipes and hoses. D&PC
(2000) describes "the largest dredge hose for the largest dredger" as follows?
"Since 1994, when Dredging International's 17,000-m3 capacity Pearl

River became thefirst 'jumbo' dredger in theworld, therehas been a contin
ual increase in the capacity of dredging vessels. The increased capacity
enables movement of vast amounts of spoil with minimum time lost shut
tling between locations. To furtherenhance the efficient operation of these
dredgers, there has been an increasing trend in the industry towards larger
bore hoses enabling accelerated discharge of the spoil in reclamation works.
"Back in 1994, Dunlop Oil andMarine successfully designed, developed,
and supplied the first 1,000-mm bore floating dredge hoses to the Pearl
River, which has been in almost continuous service since itwas commis
sioned. Following this success, Dunlop have been chosen to supply over
70% of 1,000-mm bore hoses currently in service around theworld.
"For this year, Belgian dredging contractor JanDe Nul presented Dunlop
with its 'biggest' challenge yet. The Vasco da Gama is by far the largest
capacity dredger to date and has recently been commissioned inGermany.
To accommodate this vessel, Dunlop has designed and supplied JanDe Nul
with 1, 100-mm bore floating dredge hoses, the largest hoses of their type in
theworld to date. The finished hose weighs 12 t, stands 2.3 m high, and will
allow the passage of 20,000 m3 of spoil per hour, enabling the Vasco da
Gama to discharge its 33,000-m3 load in under two hours.
"So great was the need for large diameter hoses for the Vasco da Gama
that a large contribution to the vessel's equipment has also been made by
theDutch manufacturer Trelleborg Velp.
"The jumbo hoses provided by Dunlop benefit from an extra thick cover
providing abrasion and cut resistance, an extra thick lining suitable for all
sizes of dredged material, built-in fittingsproviding increased tensile capabil
ity,and specially designed filler blocks providing kink and crush resistance.
Challenges Faced
Some of the design technology behind the 1,100-mm bore hoses had been
proven in the smaller 1,000-mm hoses, but this increase in bore size and the
time limitations of the project raised several obstacles thatDunlop had to
tackle and overcome. Initial calculations indicated that the resulting loads
experienced by the reinforcing components would increase by more than
30% to those seen in the 1,000-mm bore hoses. This implied that consider
able design work was required to develop a hose construction capable of
accommodating these loads while fulfilling other hose requirements. The
sheer size and weight of the hoses required Dunlop to invest heavily in new
building lathes and making the necessary modifications to existing machin
ery to ensure safe handling.
"Historically, empirical relationships have been used to determine hose
properties and scale testing has been undertaken to prove these equations.
Information on hose behavior had also been gathered by testing hoses in
Dunlop's internal full-scale dynamic and tensile test rigs. The time limita
tions on the project made this approach unfeasible and finite element model
ing had to be used to stimulate the hose construction, analyze all possible
loading criteria and optimize the design while ensuring targetweights were
achieved and production capabilities satisfied. Parallel engineering was also
put into action so that design, manufacturing, and marketing requirements
were revised and implemented simultaneously within the limited time frame."
Another design of a floating hose is theDutch "Wavifloat," described by its

manufacturer inPort Engineering magazine (September/October, 2000)?
Buoyancy
"Wavifloat has a high buoyance of 950 kg/cbm and the level of buoyance
can be built in at the design stage, to suit individual customer requirements.
Sizes
"Wavifloats are available in lengths from 3 up to 10m, and inside diame
ters up to 1200 mm. The floats have a bright orange colour for safety and
good visibility.
Corrosion Resistant
"Made entirely of plastics, Wavifloat is corrosion resistant.Maintenance
costs are negligible and the floats can be re-used when the steel pipes of the
floating pipeline have worn out."
Flexible pipelinesare a new invention and have proved practical, e.g., when
dredging by hydraulic pipeline is undertaken in ship channels with discharge in
areas on the side of the channel. An example is the dredging by dustpan dredger
in lowerMississippi (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2002)?
"There is a strong desire to use sediments dredged for navigation benefi

cially formarsh creation in southern-Louisiana; however, atHead of Passes,
navigation safety, economics, and maintaining authorized channel depth are
major considerations. A potential solution at this location is a dustpan dredge
Dredging 479
with a unique, flexible pipeline which gives the dredge themaneuverability

that is lacking with the cutterhead dredges, and other modifications that
would meet the requirements outlined above.
Dustpan Demonstration
"The contractor-owned dustpan dredge Beachbuilder was provided for
demonstration. The Beachbuilder is a nonself-propelled dustpan with a total
pumping capacity of 10,000 hp, designed primarily for beach nourishment
projects on theEast Coast. A tug connected to the stern of theBeachbuilder
on this project.
provided additional maneuverability for the dredge
"Dredging operations were modified by using a two-wire/anchor lines
positioning system ('upstream' forward port and starboard) instead of the
usual six-wire/anchor lines (forward and aft).Minimizing the anchor lines
allowed the dredge tomaneuver in and out of the channel more easily. These
anchors were placed outside the navigation channel template on the right
and leftdescending bank sides up-stream of the dredge.
"Additionally, the Beachbuilder was to discharge the dredged material
through a flexible, floating hose connected to a 'hard point,' an anchored
transition point from thefloating hose to a submerged line in the river.This
line was, in turn, connected to a pipeline that emerged from thewater to
become the shore pipeline or 'dry' land into themarsh. The flexible, float
ing hose was approximately 430 m (1,420 ft) in length, allowing the dredge
towork the entire width of the navigation channel. The shore pipeline ter
minated in a simple pipe cutoff. Sections were added as needed. The maxi
mum pipeline length of the entire hydraulic circuit was 1,963 m (6,440 ft).
"Aftermobilization was complete, vessel maneuvering trials were con
ducted before any pumping occurred to verify theBeachbuilder's ability to
safely maneuver in, and completely out, of the channel to accommodate
passing vessels."
The performance of theBeachbuilder has been tested by a comprehensive proj

ect of theLouisiana Department ofNatural Resources and theUS ACE New Orleans
District in theMississippi entrance channels. Dredging Research (2002) reports?
Overall Demonstration Evaluation

"The flexible-discharge dustpan dredge demonstration project conducted
in theHead of Passes area on theMississippi River successfully met the
project objectives. The Beachbuilder demonstrated safe navigation and
dredging operations. The consensus of theNew Orleans District personnel
and the river pilots was that the dredging operation was safe with respect to
moving up and down the river.The June 2002 flexible-dustpan dredg
traffic
ing demonstration project illustrated that theBeachbuilder, or a similar dust
pan dredge, can work safely at theHead of Passes and move large volumes
of dredged material out of the channel for the beneficial use of marsh cre
ation. The dredged material can be transferred long distances by pipeline
across the existing dikes and directly discharged into themarsh without
need for re-handling or construction of disposal facilities. A dustpan dredge
would prove most efficient at the Head of Passes, working on the Right
Descending Bank side of the channel (inside of the bend) where the thick
ness of the sediment tends to be the greatest and the dredge can operate
almost continuously while allowing passage ofmost deep-draft traffic.
"The flexible-discharge hose allows the dredge tomove across the total
width of the channel but limits itsmovement up and down the channel based
on the total length of the hose. Movement beyond this range, if only one
hard point and submerged pipeline are used, requires interruption of dredg
ing operations while the hard point ismoved and submerged pipe added or
removed (the use of multiple hard points/discharge lines was not investi
gated during the demonstration). As a result, the dustpan discharge line con
figuration, as used in this demonstration, ismost efficientwhere continuous
adequate shoal thickness is available and minimal movement of the hard
point is required. The dustpan would not be as efficient in addressing spot
shoaling over long distances up and down the channel requiring frequent
movement of the hard point and associated piping.
"Such conditions would be more efficiently addressed using hopper
dredges. The demonstration project also illustrated that a flexible-discharge
dustpan and hopper dredges can work safely together in the same channel
reach. A flexible- discharge dustpan dredge could effectively dredge in other
reaches of theMississippi River and in other navigation discharge configu
rations. In addition tomaintenance dredging, theflexible-discharge dustpan
dredge would be effective for use in special dredging projects (with free
flowing, relatively noncohesive material) such as construction and mainte
nance of sediment traps.
"The complete report, currently in preparation, compares the results of
the flexible-discharge dustpan demonstration to the 'Assessment of Coast
wide Louisiana Maintenance Dredging Capabilities Under the Federal
Standard' (1998) report evaluation factors.With the conditional exception
of mobility between dredging assignments and regions, theBeachbuilder
appears to have met, or exceeded, the 1998 report evaluation requirements.
The new report provides additional discussions of potential improvements
for futureprojects. Once the report is available online, a notice will be placed
inDredging Research."
Survey and Monitoring Equipment forDredging
Equipment for navigation and positioning ismentioned in Chapter 2. For the

planning of dredging works special survey equipment is needed. The sidescanning
Dredging 481
multibeam equipment is described inD&PC (September 1999) with special refer

ence to a comprehensive survey of theBoston Harbor, on theUS East Coast?
"For a major construction project inBoston Harbor, MA, we have used a

200-kHz Atlas Fansweep 20 multibeam system for channel surveys at vari
ous critical stages of both dredging and disposal processes. The system is
permanently installed on a 30-ft Silver Ships survey vessel together with
other equipment comprising HP workstations, a Trimble 7400 GPS receiver,
a TSS HDMS 220 heading/heave/pitch/roll system, Odom Digibar sound
velocity probe, and an Atlas DESO 15 single-beam sounder. The vessel is
operated by Great Lakes assigned personnel.
"The vessel is used to sound areas at various states of construction to pro
vide a complete status of ongoing dredging and disposal activities. The main
purpose of the project is to deepen existing channel sections to 36 and 41 ft.
In addition, there are stringent requirements for placing dredge material in
dredge disposal cells within channel limits.The project involves several types
of dredge material, each necessitating pre-determined disposal requirements.
To effectivelymanage all these processes, we need to ensure completion of
each stage of dredge and disposal activities and therefore decided to use a
multibeam survey system necessary for 100% survey coverage.
"Initially, the project required contaminated materials to be dredged from
the top layers of the channel and then disposed of in underwater cells for
later capping. Both for channel deepening and disposal processes it is criti
cal to account for all materials, as is the acquisition of survey data for total
coverage of affected areas. We began by surveying the channel using single
beam survey equipment before themultibeam system became fully opera
tional. This was acceptable since preliminary stages of the project were
confined to stripping the surface sediment to a clay and rock-underlying
area. But for later surveys we needed a tighter sounding pattern possible
with theFansweep 20 system.
Integral Sidescan
"As stripping operations proceeded, the disposal cells were simultane
ously being dredged for later placement of contaminated materials. The
multibeam system was subsequently used upon completion of stripping as
well as during and after completion of each disposal cell prior to placement
of dredged materials. Additionally, the integral sidescan features of
Fansweep 20 have also been used to identify and locate any special channel
features requiring further investigation.
"Disposal cells for contaminated materials are located within channel
limits. Each cell is designed to provide a deep pit intowhich matter can be
dumped and capped once proper settlement has occurred. Individual stages
of this process necessitates 100% survey coverage to ensure a complete
assessment and status of disposal areas at each phase. During placement of

disposal material within cells, Fansweep 20 is also being used tomonitor
settlement rates prior to capping while also confirming proper capping thick
ness. Both disposal and capping processes are then analyzed by comparing
sequences of surveys.
"This is thought to be the first time a Fansweep 20 multibeam system has
been used for dredging surveys in theUS. Following initial integration of
the system, we have had very good results inmatching our surveys with
both singlebeam surveys of the same areas and those of other multibeam
systems used on the project.
"In comparison with the Boston Harbor project, where we have used
100% survey coverage to actively manage each operational phase, an addi
tional scheme inCharleston, South Carolina calls for adoption of a multi
beam survey system for channel acceptance. Because we were already
familiar and satisfied with results obtained with Fansweep 20 inBoston, we
have commissioned a second system for this particular scheme, which is
concerned with deepening an existing channel. Presently being mobilized
for the Charleston project, the system is being installed on a 65-ft survey
vessel. Ancillary equipment is identical to that used at Boston, except that
an Atlas DESO 17 singlebeam sounder replaces theDESO 15model."
The importance of themultibeam (SWATH) surveymethod is furtherdiscussed

in theD&PC (September, 2000).
"Aids to navigation, satellite and position systems as well as equipment for

underwater monitoring, e.g., cameras for observation of dragheads in opera
tion are steadily being improved. The reader is referred to innumerable adver
tisements, e.g., inmagazines such as Dredging and Port Construction, UK."
Training of Personnel for Improvement ofNavigational Safety
The D&PC (July 1999) mentions how recent developments in nautical simula
tion allow pilots and port authorities to cooperate in establishing joined training
projects. J.F. A. Hendricks, trainingmanager for theMaritime Simulation Center
of The Netherlands reports?
"Pilotage is a unique service based upon local knowledge and special

conditions prevailing in the pilotage area. Itmay be performed in coastal
waters, estuarial water rivers, ports, harbors, lakes or enclosed dock sys
tems, or any combination of these areas thatmay come within a port's juris
diction. Its prime goal is the safe and efficient moving or shipping, while
assuring the protection of themarine environment.
Dredging 483
"In the past, harbor authorities had to rely solely on pilots and pilot asso
ciation judgements for safe docking operations. This judgement usually
turned out to be correct but in some cases therewas cause for discussion
between the commanding pilot or pilot association on one side and harbor
authorities on the other. Such discussions could take the form of a 'yes or
no' argument. This happened because therewas no way to prove in a practi
cal setting if a certain maneuver inside dock or fairway was possible or not
without putting a vessel or harbor facilities at risk.
"Today, due to the recent development of nautical simulators, pilots and
harbor authorities are better able to cooperate in setting up joint simulator
training projects in which as partners both sides can benefit. Pilots can
enhance their shiphandling skills and confidence in certain nautical opera
tions when piloting a vessel during extreme weather, tidal or emergency
conditions. Likewise, simulator training might show the need to change
established tug escort operating procedures for harbor authorities as well as
for pilots.
"Many such procedures have never been put to the test in a real life situa
tion and are based on assumptions of what should happen instead of estab
lishing what does happen. Training enables the optimization of harbor
operations to reduce the risk of loss toproperty, time delays due to obstructed
fairways, or damage to the harbor marine environment. Another pleasant
side effect of joint simulator training projects is increased mutual under
standing between both partners.
Dredge Simulator
"Dredging companies have thus far been leftout of this discussion, a sit
uation that unfortunately seems to happen quite often. Most people take it
for granted that a fairway has been widened and that there is sufficientunder
keep clearance when entering a port.
"Setting up simulator training for dredgers has until recently not been
possible. However, new research conducted byMaritime Simulation Center
of The Netherlands (MSCN) has resulted in a fully operational dredger sim
ulator based at the nautical instituteWillem Barantsz at Terschilling inThe
Netherlands.
"As major dredging and land reclamation proposals often encounter oppo
sition on environmental grounds, modern simulation tools can be used to
reduce the often adverse public reaction their announcement inspires.
"Here again, harbor authorities and dredging companies working as part
ners can only gain from cooperation in the field of
training.Well trained
dredger personnel can prevent damage to themarine environment or delays
resulting from accidents or dynamic positioning equipment malfunction
caused by human error.The net gain of joint simulator training is ultimately
the satisfied customer secure in the knowledge that his property is in

good hands.
"The MSCN nautical center inWageningen has clients worldwide, among
them governmental organizations, shipowners, port authorities, and pilots.
It has participated in several harbor developments and European Community
projects as well as shiphandling and other nautical simulator training. The
Dutch pilots association (STODEL) has been a regular pilot training cus
tomer for over 25 years and several UK pilot associations have recently
completed training projects there."
Dredging forNourishment of Beaches
Experience has proven that artificial nourishment of beaches is themost practi

cal and economical measure of coastal protection. But suitable material and
equipment must be available. (Figure 10-78 of Port Engineering, 4th edition shows
split-hull dumping of dredged materials.) Hopper as well as hydraulic pipeline
dredgers are performing nourishment of beaches inmany countries. On steeper
shores "rainbowing" (Figure 10-10) may be undertaken. On shores with more
gentle offshore profiles, material is pumped to shore through shorter pipelines,
Figure 10-10. "Rainbowing"allows beach nourishmentalong steep shorelines (Dredging

and Port Construction, 2000).
Dredging 485
which may be submerged. In the United States powerful hydraulic pipeline

dredgers pump directly to shore from offshore borrow pit, which could be located
some kilometers from shore?if thewave climate, at least seasonably, permits
such operation. The most suitable equipment seems to be the shallow-water hop
per dredger, that is dredgers of 2,000-10,000 m3 capacities. Due to their limited
loaded draft, they are able to come close to the shore. Many such dredgers are
operating. They are mostly built in The Netherlands and the 5,000-m3 Liberty
Island of The Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company in theUnited States, com
missioned in 2001, is of that type (Figure 10-4).
The Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company owns nine shallow-water hopper
dredgers of about 2,500 to 5,000-m3 capacities and one of 12,200-m3 capacity.
In some dredging projects a combination of hopper and cutterhead dredging is
used. The hopper supplies offshore sand to a dump in the nearshore, fromwhere
the hydraulic cutterhead pumps it to shore. An example of that is the recent nour
ishment of Brevard County beaches on the southeast coast of Florida. A hopper
dredger pumped sand from theCanaveral Shoals 6-14 mi from the nourishment
site and dumped it4,000 ft (1,200 m) offshore at a depth of 30-38 ft (9-11 m) for
rehandling by a cutterhead dredger pumping thematerial to the beach.
Profile Nourishment Relation toBypassing Costs
The normal nourishment profile includes a horizontal beach berm with a front
slope of about 1:10. Because beach nourishment generally is paid for by a public
authority,public opinion is important in acquiring funding. It is, therefore,wise to
design beach nourishment in such a way that the public sees the beach as "wider"
and more stable than before. It should be only a modest "adaption" in the beach
shape during the first storms. This suits recreational purposes. To prevent over
wash and flooding the beach must be backed by a dune. To combat "chronic ero
sion" placement in the breaker zone is practical.
Profile nourishment attempts to follow the natural profile in the nearshore and
on the beaches near as possible in practice. The advantage of profile nourishment
is that itdecreases the initial losses of fill and produce a more stable profile. "Over
thebow" pumping (Figure 10-10) ismost suitable for operations as they are under
taken in countries like Australia, Denmark, Germany, Holland, and theUK. The
shallow-water hopper dredger, still in short supply in theUnited States, is well
suited for such operations. An example from The Netherlands should be men
tioned (D&PC, July 1999)?
"Dutch Dredging's new 2,680-m3 trailing suction

hopper Amazone is
largely conducting beach replenishment trials forHolland's Rijkswaterstaat.
"The Rijkswaterstaat has statutoryduties tomaintain the nation's overall
beach levels as theywere in 1990. It is looking for themost cost-effective
ways of protecting the coastline without resorting to hard structures,which

would alter the natural appearance.
"The Amazone's first project involved transporting 1million m3 of sand
from a site 16 km offshore to an area between The Hague and theHook of
Holland. Here itwas used to replenish an area 300 m offshore along a beach
length of 2 km.Water depths of up to 8 m below sea level were raised to a
uniform 5 m below sea level to give incoming waves a greater distance over
which to break, thus causing them to lose energy furtherfrom shore tomin
imize erosion potential.
"The Amazone then undertook similar works in a campaign at Noordwijk
and has recently been one of two dredgers moving 2.5 million m3 of sand
for a trail near the Island ofAmeland.
"The trials seek to establish if it is technically possible to set the sand at
a uniform 5 m depth to determine cost-effectiveness relative to beach nour
ishment, and tomonitor how long term a solution is provided compared to
beach nourishment. Dutch Dredging conducts regular surveys and monitor
ing of the trial areas for theRijkswaterstaat.
"As theAmazone has a draft of 5 m, tide and wave conditions are critical
at the time and point of discharge. The vessel uses RTK GPS for precise
monitoring of draft and will pump half a load out before opening its dis
charge doors if in doubt."
Change fromBerm Profile toBerm and OffshoreProfile

It has been practice in general to design nourishments entirely based upon fill
material characteristics ignoring fill geometries. This practice is now changing, as
the importance of fill geometries has been fully realized. In European countries
such as Holland and Denmark more than half of nourishment operations are now
offshore. This method of nourishment has been satisfactory. Offshore dumping
of material has also been tested in theUS by theUSACE, e.g. at Silver Strand
inCalifornia, and is probably going to increase inmagnitude. It is not fully "pro
file nourishment," but itsmain characteristics are the same only adjusted to prac
tical conditions.
As pointed out by Bruun (2002), an artificial beach berm should never extend
out in depths where wave action may cause a rapid erosion. Optimization of quan
under
tityof beach fill,may be translated intobeach width is possible and should be
taken. Fill put in the outermost part of a berm on an exposed shore should ratherbe
used for dune enhancement or be dumped offshore, e.g., on the outer slope of the
innermost bar, as they do on theDanish North Sea shore. Transitions to adjoining
beaches should be streamlined and properly managed (Hanson and Kraus, 1989). It
seems obvious that dredging from an offshore, but still rather nearshore, borrow
area may impact the shoreline. Demir Otay, Work and Borekci (2004) report on
such impacts of dredging for nourishment or for constructionmaterials?
Dredging 487
"Nearshore dredging for construction aggregate or beach nourishment

can result in a perturbation of natural littoral process changes inwave trans
formation patterns, and a net loss of sand from the littoral system.A method
is described for estimating both direct and indirect effects of dredging on
shoreline change. The direct effect results from infilling of the dredged pit
via cross-shore sediment transport and is addressed statistically, assuming
that the beach profile is in some arbitrary equilibrium shape. The indirect
effect arises from project-induced wave transformation, which alters long
shore sediment transport patterns, and is described using both spectral and
monochromatic, numerical wave transformationmodels to provide input to
a one-line model for shoreline change. Infilling of the pit neglected when
estimating the indirect effect, providing a worst-case estimate of the indi
rect effect. The methodology is applied to a shore on theTurkish Black Sea
coast, using hindcast wave data. The influences of pit location and geome
tryare investigated systematically, and recommendation regarding optimum
pit dimensions and locations are made."
OffshoreResources of Sand forNourishmentand IndustrialUse

Demands are still increasing. Sources in the nearshore are running out. That is
the case for Southeast Florida. There ismore sand in the offshore, but itfirstmust
be quantified, next, sources must be managed.
Considerable research by surveys have been or are being made, but results are
thatmore sources must be located tomaintain our shores. This is particularly true
for shores on theEastern Seaboard and theGulf ofMexico. Information is avail
able from theUS ACE inVicksburg, MS.
Michel (2004) reports on efforts that are ongoing?
"With the increased demand for federal sand and gravel resources on the
outer continental shelf, theMinerals Management Service (MMS) is devel
oping strategies for environmentally sound and fiscally responsible man
agement of the resource. A process is needed for planning, decisionmaking,
and coordination among stakeholders. Two workshops were conducted in
Texas and New Jersey to solicit input from federal, state, and local govern
ment representatives, university researchers, and private
companies on key
issues. Based on the results of theworkshop, itwas recommended that sand
management task forces be established in each state, starting with those
states that can provide a strong technical and administrative lead and have a
high level of interest in accessing federal borrow sites. Sand management
task forces would be responsible for planning, coordinating, and
facilitating
the use of OCS sand for beach nourishment and coastal restoration
projects.
MMS's responsibilities include taking the lead in the design and funding
of long-term monitoring studies of the impacts of
dredging OCS sand,
sponsoring workshops on technical and policy issues, and providing a clear

inghouse for dissemination of studies and findings on actual environmental
impacts, focusing on key issues such as cumulative impacts."
Bypassing is generally dealt with inChapter 9. Kraus and Larson (2001) report
a few subject related to planning of dredging operation in inlet channels as
follows?
"Infilling is supposed to occur by cross-channel transport. The calcula

tion procedure requires information typically available or estimated on
coastal navigation projects and is intended to provide guidance for projects
where detailed studies cannot be performed. The procedure can be applied
to any channel thatmeets the basic assumptions.
"The most important parameters are width of channel, depth, sediment
characteristics, and inputs in channel versus output by bypassing. Results are
demonstrated in formulas, as well as by figures, giving the infilling as well as
the bypassing thatmay exceed the infilling some time after the dredging.
"Speaking in general terms and referring to channel geometries, the chan
nel width is themost important parameter for sedimentation. The channel
subjected to cross currents shall be as narrow as possible. The importance
of depth is less with respect to sedimentation, but is important for storage of
sediments that settled in the channel. Side slopes shall be gentle to avoid the
formation of circular flow increasing sedimentation.
"Equipment formaintenance of navigation channels includes hydraulic
pipeline dredgers in less exposed waters and highly maneuverable hopper
dredgers with pumpout and perhaps bottom dump capability. Pumpout could
be through pipelines of considerable length to shore or downdrift shores
and beaches. Such hopper dredgers may to some extent be ocean-going,
operating inwaves up to 2-3 m. The best ocean-going dredge, however, is
the sidecaster, which may be operated with a discharge pipe in a gantry from
the ship?or itmay discharge through a relatively short floating or sub
merged pipeline, which then has to be moved by a workboat. Shallow-water
or ofmedium
hopper dredgers of smaller (e,g., 2,000 to 3,000-m3 capacity)
size (5,000 to 6,000-m3) are usually available.
Basic Analyses forPlanning and Operation ofDredging Projects
to determine natural
Every project involving dredging is preceded by surveys
physical conditions that the dredger will encounter. Geotechnical descriptors for
dredge ability include (1995)?
"In situ shear strength?defined in terms of consistency, compactness

(relative density), or cementation.
Dredging 489
"Grain size distribution?including maximum size, median size, and

amount of fines
"Angularity of coarse grains
"Plasticity of fine grains?based on theAtterberg limits
"Organic content?ash content or other indicator
"Presence of shells, debris, or other nonsoil materials"
The equipment for surveys include special survey vessels carrying the instru
ments mentioned in preceding sections on "Survey Equipment forDredging."
D&PC (2000) reports on "coastal monitoring"?
"Complete coverage during coastal monitoring can only be achieved by

carefully overlapping land survey data with bathymetric readings. The 'mid
dle ground' between topographic and hydrographic data will often fall
between thebeach and shallows, and it is here where the surveyor encounters
most difficulty and where authorities may feel they need to give surveyors
more leeway regarding complete coverage. Yet, this is arguably the one area
where a complete dataset is essential.
"Andrews Survey has been involved in coastal monitoring for several
decades. Over thepast seven years in support ofwork along theEast Anglian
coast, the company has conducted a number of surveys. These have occa
sionally included trials of different draft and survey techniques where a
complete dataset (i.e., no break in data) has proven difficult. The real key,
they conclude, is not so much in the ever more advanced positioning and
heighting technology available to surveyors but in the actual vessel or vehi
cle used to carry the surveyor and his equipment across the survey area.
"Coastal monitoring typically involves a series of profiles of the height
of the land/sea depths from several hundred meters inland to 1 km offshore.
The aim is to provide a 'snapshot' of the coastal profile at that point, and
therefore the work needs to be completed in as short a time as possible.
Survey quality will embrace both accuracy and coverage. With today's tech
nology, accurate positioning and survey measurements are normally very
accurate whatever the conditions. There can, however be limitations in the
coverage possible. Each contractor must obviously conform to quality stan
dards set down by the commissioning authority (The Environment Agency
in theUK).
"Most authorities recognize that realistic coverage can vary from one
section of the profile to the next. For example, the normal scope of works
for readings on land, every 5 to 10m, is normally easily achievable. Offshore
acquisition can provide a mass of data. Taken at a very fast rate of 10 to
20/sec this can equate to a reading every 5 cm. Between the two, however,
many authorities allow some leeway in the tidal zone, recognizing the diffi
culties, both natural and imposed, on surveyors.
"There will always be a difficult balance, when using public money,

between coverage and quality at reasonable cost. There could also be health
and safety issues. Whereas a reading every 5 m may be ideal, commission
ing authorities may sometimes have tomake do with 'as close as possible as
conditions allow.' Longer gaps may thus occur. It is possible that in the very
region where coverage should be at its best, the greatest gaps could occur.
"Along the shoreline/tidal zone, surveyors can be faced with exposed
shallow gradients or, conversely, unusually large height differences (cliffs),
difficult ground to traverse.
"Planning a dredging operation is not an easy task. It includes a great
number of factors and not all of them are simple to evaluate. Considerable
risksmay be involved.
"Dredging operations most often occur in navigable waters, where vessel
trafficalways occurs. It is therefore necessary to establish a proper marking
and warning system on an around the clock basis as requested by 'Maritime
Administrations.' Every dredging contract dictates certain volumes and
geometries, including some permissible variances. The supervisor of the
operation must be careful not to exceed these limits. In this respect he is in
the hands of his equipment, including instruments for exact position of his
vessel, its suction pipe(s), cutterhead and other operational machinery, at
any time. In these fields progress has been tremendous, improving the accu
racy, thereby the economy, of the project decreasing risks and costs.
"Ultimately, the success of the operation depends upon exact surveys
before, under and after the operation. Equipment include satellite position,
radar and sonar recorders. An important factor is the evaluation of thewater
table which varies continually during operation. A certain degree of "irregu
larity" is unavoidable. Bottom levels may best be checked by SWATH
SONAR SURVEYS, which record a wider bottom area.
Dredge Certification
D&PC (1999) in relation to safety standards describes how "the passing of the
first ISM (International Safety Management) code" deadline last year, for various
classes of cargo and passenger ships over 500 gt,was tumultuous. Owners of ves
sels thatwere not included in the first round of certification, including dredgers,
watched bemused as big ship operators got themselves very worked up. Now it is
their turn.Dredgers over 500 gtwere to be ISM compliant by July 2002. Plenty of
time? Hardly. According to Bureau Veritas Netherlands, the world's leading
dredger classification society, it can take some companies over two years to
achieve compliance for offices and fleet.According toD&PC (1999)?
"
'Setting up and implementing an ISM compliant system takes at least
12 months for shore-based activities, although the average is around 18
Dredging 491
months. After that, individual dredgers can be certified in threemonths.

Most vessels take nine months to certify, though,' saysWillem Middelbeek,
dredging and ISM specialist with Rotterdam-based Bureau Veritas
Netherlands. 'The speed with which a company achieves ISM certification
depends heavily on its commitment to the process.'
"ISM certificates forvessels cover individual ships rather than entire fleets,
so each dredger needs to be dealt with separately. Yet the practicalities of the
business dictate thatdredgers oftenwork in the inaccessible locations for long
periods of time.This stringsout the time needed to get auditors onboard every
dredger in a fleet. 'With this inmind, some companies thatoperate large fleets
decided several years ago that they would startworking on ISM well in
advance of the deadline,' saysMiddlebeek. Market leader Boskalis, which has
65 dredging related units world-wide thatwill have to be certified, was first
off the starting blocks. Bureau Veritas lead ISM auditor Edgar van Oers has
already certified its shore-based operations and a number of itsdredging units,
making it thefirstcertified dredging company in theworld.
"In one respect, dredger operators will have to go one step further than
most big ship operators. Like cargo vessels under 500 gt, dredgers under
500 gt will be exempt from ISM. Dredging personnel frequently change
ships, though,moving between vessels under and above 500 gt. In the inter
ests of consistency, some companies are voluntarily opting for fleet-wide
certification. According toMiddelbeek, 'safety is a prime consideration for
dredging companies and there is a general desire to certify vessels under
500 gt in the long run.'
"The pressure on dredging companies to comply with ISM by the 2002
deadline are substantial. In fact,Middelbeek doesn't see that they have any
choice. 'Most of theworld's dredging fleets are flagged inWestern Europe,
where the authorities have repeatedly warned that theywill not deviate from
the 2002 deadline,' he says. European governments, itwould seem, have
decided that ISM was announced far enough in advance for dredger opera
tors to sort themselves out. 'Missing the deadline means port state control
intervention and consequent unavailability of equipment,' Middelbeek warns.
"No time towaste, then.But just what are the demands made by the ISM
Code? Under the regime, dredger operators have to draw up and implement
policies formanning vessels in accordance with the international conven
tion on Standards of Training, Certification andWatchkeeping for Seafarers
(STCW) 1995, as well as establish a pro-active training and drilling pro
gramme for crew.
"Both shore-based and office-based personnel should be trained to react

effectively to emergencies. The ISM system should register and analyse
accidents and near-misses, as well as equipment failures, in order to prevent
reoccurrence. The entire systemmust be documented and monitored by log
ging possible improvements and conducting regular audits.
"ISM will mean

a small yet significant change in corporate culture for
dredging companies. Clearly defining tasks and responsibilities for individ
ual dredger crew members and shore-based staff is new formany in the
industry."
Dredging and theEnvironment
The development of navigation requires still deeper and wider channels and
basins, as well as fills for industrial harbor and other developments. This, in turn,
carries with it the needs formajor disposal areas for dredged materials.
Maintenance of depths includes removal of deposited materials that are some
times?or often?polluted.
Beaches and shores are eroding and need protective nourishments by clean
materials, which will then have to be located. Dredging may also be a useful tool
for remedying past environmental interference. However, by its very nature, the
act of dredging and relocating dredged material has an environmental impact. It
is, therefore,of theutmost importance thatwe should be able to determine whether
any planned dredging will have a positive or negative impact on our environment.
Evaluation of environmental impact should examine both shore and long-term
effects, as well as the sustainability of the altered environment.
"Dredging plumes" are unavoidable in any dredging operation. D&PC (2000)
reports?
"The results of CIRIA Project RP600, 'Scoping the Assessment of

Sediment Plumes Arising fromDredging,' has been completed and a CIRIA
report is now available. This publication is an important source of informa
tion for the dredging industry,developers, regulators, and conservationists
concerned with marine aggregate, capital and maintenance dredging.
"The need for this publication was identified through CIRIA consulta
tion with the dredging industry, regulators, and other stakeholders.
Information on sediment plumes is extensive but disparate and needs to be
brought together in documents that can be used by developers and regula
tors alike to provide a structured approach to the assessment of the effects
of sediment plumes arising from dredging.
"This scoping report thereforeprovides a review of research work under
taken on the plumes arising from dredging and examines current knowledge
of the environmental impacts. In doing so, it considers the current under
standing of dredging plumes, the existing mechanisms for knowledge trans
fer, and identifies current gaps in knowledge. It then recommends further
work required to fill these gaps and to develop a comprehensive framework
Dredging 493
for assessing the effects of sediment plumes by defining the necessary com
ponents of such a framework.
"'Scoping theAssessment of Sediment Plumes Arising fromDredging,'
is now available from the Construction Industry Research and Information
Association at a cost of f90.'"
Lobedan et al. (1995) describe design considerations for an upland dredged

materials containment facility,Port of Oakland (California)?
"The inner and outer harbor channels that lead into the Port of Oakland
have been at a depth of -10.7 m mean lower low water (MLLW) for yiars.
In response to a House of Representatives resolution in 1972 a feasibility
studywas undertaken that determined itwas in the best interest of the fed
eral government to provide a wider channel and turningbasin area to-12.8 m
MLLW. Over the next 20 years theU.S. Army Corps of Engineer's (Corps)
and the Port of Oakland have jointly and independently prepared six envi
ronmental impact statements and environmental impact reports on dredging
the channels. The main issue in each of the documents and the lawsuits they
provoked was the ultimate deposition of thematerials. Ultimately, itwas
determined that of the 4.6 million m3 of material thatmust be removed for
completion of the deepening project 1.9 million m3 will be disposed of in
the ocean approximately 90 k from the site, 1.9million m3 will be used for
wetland restoration in the north San Francisco Bay area, and 0.8 million m3
has been determined to be unsuitable for aquatic disposal in the bay, the
ocean, or forwetland restoration. Itwill need to be disposed upland. The
legislation governing dredging projects requires the local sponsor to secure
any upland disposal sites. The only site that the port was able to secure in a
timelymanner thatwould be able to handle thematerial either in the short
or long term and be economical was its own property. Of the sites reviewed
theGalbraith Golf course was the only viable site available."
Silva and Veyera (1995) describe an integrated geogrid mattress armoring sys
tem for capping of contaminated dredge materials?
"Disposal of highly toxic dredge material in offshore sites requires cap

ping of the dredge mound to insure permanent isolation of the contaminants
from the overlying waters. In areas of high energy hydrodynamic condi
tions, especially where there is potential formajor storm events to occur,
sediment caps may be eroded and the contaminated materials exposed. It is
proposed that prefabricated geogrid mattresses be used as an armouring
layer over the contaminated material to assure long-term stability and con
tainment of themound materials. An example design for a region of known
intermittent wave activity is presented including fabrication, transport,

placement, and monitoring of the armouring system."
Capping is not necessary always. If thematerial is non-toxic and allowed to be

dumped offshore, it is only necessary to determine how stable thematerial in the
dump will staywhen exposed towave action. Lange and Healy (1994) describe a
dump inNew Zealand offshore waters?
"Three methods, viz. theHands and Allison (1991) method, predictions

of sediment threshold, and predictions of sediment transport rate, are used
to assess the long-term stability of dredge spoil mounds on the inner shelf
and compared with available observations of theirbehavior. These methods
are chosen for simplicity and ease of implementation with a spreadsheet
application on a personal computer.
"Three main approaches were followed: an evaluation of the annual, and
daily limits, of onshore-offshore sediment movement near the spoil mound;
a comparison between the theoretical thresholds of sediment motion and the
annual wave height and period joint distribution; and an evaluation of sedi
ment transport rates and directions using semi-empirical relationships.
"The Hands and Allison (1991) method had the smallest data require
ments: mean and standard deviation of the annual significant wave height
distribution and themedian grain-size at themid-point of the shoal zone.
Analysis of sediment threshold and comparison with wave climate required
data concerning the annual joint wave height and period probability distri
bution, and sediment textural characteristics. Sediment transport rate calcu
lations required themost detailed information about the site: annual joint
wave height and period probability distribution sediment textural character
istics, and mean unidirectional current velocity.
"Using a spreadsheet, it is relatively easy to simulate a range of values
(that span the likely conditions) with all threemethods, if the necessary data
are not available.
"All themethods produced predictions consistent with available observa
tions, and all were straightforward to implement within a spreadsheet appli
cation. The choice of method depends on the information required, with
each method needing different data and providing contrasting but comple
mentary outputs."
While spoiling of material from dredging of tidal inlets on sandy shores has
involved littledifficulty because thematerial was clean and ample offshore dump
ing areas were available, dredging of harbors without tidal flushing, estuaries,
bays, lagoons and waterways has gradually caused many problems with respect to
the location of spoil areas.
Dredging 495
In either case, a severe disturbance of the area's biology has resulted. This has
necessitated many regulations on the extent of such operations.
When using dredging techniques, we must be aware of the environmental
effects of the changes we are trying to achieve, as well as the effects of the dredg
ing activity itself thatmay include alterations to coastal or rivermorphology, addi
tion or reduction of wildlife habitat; changes towater currents and wave climates
thatmight affect navigation, coastal defense, and other coastal matters; reduction
or improvement of water quality, affecting benthic fauna, fish spawning, and the
like; improvement of employment conditions owing to industrial development;
and removal of polluted materials and their relocation to safe, contained areas
(ADC andCEDA, 1999).
The marine environment is a complex combination of natural features and phe
nomena, supporting a diverse but largely concealed population. Because of this
complexity, it is extremely difficult to predict the effects ofman-made changes
and short-termoperations.
Past environmental ignorance has resulted inmany rivers, ports, and harbors in
the industrialized nations containing soils that have been contaminated by unde
sirable levels of metals and chemical compounds. When dredging in these soils
contaminants may be released into thewater column and thence into the food
chain. Thus, the environmental effects of dredging and relocation of the dredged
material may be more severe and will require more detailed analysis. In certain
cases it is the very existence of the polluted soils that has led to dredging: by
removing the polluted soils and relocating them to a more secure situation, the
environment is improved. Long-term improvement does, of course, depend ulti
mately on preventing pollution at its source. The treatment and storage of pol
luted soils is a highly complex subject and requires detailed study. Ports must
"face up to the contamination issue" (D&PC, 2000).
Winterverp (2000) addresses the important problem in dredging operation of
the discharge ofmaterial?
"This note summarizes the results of an experimental study on the near

field spreading of dredging spill from hopper suction dredgers operating in
shallow water. A diagram is constructed that can be used to establish the
importance of spreading by mixing and by density currents. In the latter
case, the radial dispersion of the dredging spill can be assessed from a sim
ple formula describing the gravitational spread of heavy clouds.
"The overflow will form a vertical plume when released in still water.
After impinging on the seabed (e.g., flume floor), a radial dispersion pattern
will emerge, and further spreading is caused by sediment-driven density
currents. The radial dispersion can be described following Fay (1980):
(10-1)
= radius of
where R(t) plume on flume floor
t = time
a = parameter depending on bed friction (0.5 < a < 1.0)
e = relative excess density of plume
H = thickness
For a confined amount of sediment, as released during a 10 s overflow, the

solution toEquation 10-1 reads:
(10-2)
where V0 = volume of sediment released

=
R0 integration constant representing initial conditions
"By plotting the observed radial dispersion of the plume against time, a
criterion for the occurrence of density currents is obtained."
Mechanical equipment has some advantages in dredging of narrow areas that

may be heavily polluted. Blazquez et al. (2001) write about optimization of
mechanical dredging operations for sediment remediation?
"Sediment remediation involves restricted activities in the dredging

process in order tominimize environmental risk. Operational constraints
add significant capital cost to the overall project. This paper presents an
example of the special conditions for a typical environmental dredging oper
ation. REMSIM software, which simulates the sediment remediation
processes, aids in planning for environmental dredging by reducing uncer
tainties in cost and performance estimations. The scow and bucket capaci
ties, number of scows, and effective working time are parameters that
improve productivity significantly as they are increased. The purpose of this
paper is to help dredging contractors use theirnavigational dredging knowl
edge base to estimate costs, performance, and equipment selection for future
environmental dredging projects where contaminant dispersion is a con
cern. REMSIM productivity comparisons between
is used to obtain cost and
environmental dredging and typical navigational dredging situations.
to com
Equipment and performance parameters can be adjusted in order
pensate for environmental dredging limitations while improving productiv
ity and minimizing costs."
Oil Spill Pollution

A very special kind of dredging is associated with oil spills. According to note
published inD&PC (May 2001), a convention that came into force inAugust
Dredging 497
1990, requires compliant ports, harbors and oil handling facilities to prepare a
contingency plan, establish local and regional pollution response measures, and
train and exercise their staff.
Many rules and regulations have been issued regarding the handling of pol
lutedmaterials. International conventions, e.g., the London 1972 meeting (Port
Engineering, 4th edition, Chapter 10), have resulted in published advices. The
PIANC (Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses) have
issued several guidelines including:
Report of the International Commission, Study of Environmental Effects of

Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Materials, Supplement to Bulletin
No. 27 (1977)
Report of the International Commission, Classification of Soils and Rocks to
be Dredged, Supplement toBulletin No. 47 (1984)
Disposal ofDredged Material at Sea, Supplement toBulletin No. 52 (1986)
Beneficial Uses ofDredged Material (1992)
Dredged Material Management Guide (1997)
Handling and Treatment of Contaminated Dredged Material, Vol. 1 (1997)
and Vol. 2(1998)
Management of theAquatic Disposal ofDredged Material (1998)
Confined Disposal Facilities for Contaminated Dredged Material
The ADC (Association of Dredging Companies) and the CEDA (Central
Dredging Association) have printed several reports, here particularly noted and
referred to is the 1999 report on "Environmental Aspects of Dredging." In the
United States theUS Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research
Center inVicksburg, MS, through itsDredging Research Division has published
many reports as mentioned later.
Management of Dredged Materials
Management alternatives for dredged material can be grouped into the follow
ing fourmain categories (listed in order of significance): beneficial use; open
water disposal; confined disposal; and treatment.
Beneficial Use. The definition of "beneficial use" according to theDutch ADC

and CEDA Guide #5, 1999, is "any use which does not regard thematerial as a
waste"! Dredged material is increasingly regarded as a resource rather than as a
waste. The London Convention's Dredged Material Assessment Framework
(DMAF) recognizes this by requiring possible beneficial use of thematerial to be
considered before a license for sea disposal maybe granted.
Open-water Disposal. Open-water disposal is the placement of dredged material

at designated open-water sites in oceans, estuaries, rivers and lakes such that
the dredged material is not isolated from the adjacent waters during placement.
Open-water disposal generally involves placement of clean or mildly contami
nated material.
Open-water disposal of highly contaminated material can also be considered
with appropriate control measures. This category includes unrestricted placement
on flat or gently sloping waterbeds in the form of mounds or placement with lat
eral containment (e.g., depressions). For contaminated material, a cap of clean
material can provide isolation from the benthic environment. If capping is applied
over themound formed by unrestricted placement, it is called level-bottom cap
ping (LBC). If the capping is applied with lateral containment, it is called con
tained aquatic disposal (CAD).
Confined Disposal. Confined disposal is the placement of dredged material in an

engineered containment structure (e.g., dikes, natural or constructed pits) enclos
ing the disposal area and isolating the dredged material from surrounding waters
or soils during and after placement.
Treatment. Treatment is defined as a way of processing contaminated dredged

material with the aim of reducing the amount of contaminated material or reduc
ing the contamination tomeet regulatory standards and guidelines. Each project
may raise environmental concerns and not only when thematerial in question is
contaminated. For instance, the "beneficial" use of clean, beach-compatible sand
for beach nourishment may damage well-established sensitive marine habitats or
species. Or the unrestricted open-water placement of clean material may have
unacceptable direct physical impacts, such as smothering of bottom-dwelling
organisms or local increases in suspended solids concentrations.
Assessments. The environmental assessment of management alternatives (with

controls) should consider all potential impacts. Many countries require Envi
ronmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies to be undertaken and the resultsmust
be documented in formal Environmental Impact Statements. Even if the law does
not require such studies, it is advisable to include them in the project planning as
EIS' may prove to be very useful in the permitting procedure and in gaining pub
lic acceptance for projects.
For decision making the following steps are identified in theDutch Guide #5,
by theADC andWEDA (1999); establishing the need for dredging, characteriza
tion of dredged material, assessment of beneficial use options, preliminary screen
ing of potential disposal alternatives, detailed assessment of disposal alternatives,
selection for final design and implementation, permit application and processing,
and monitoring program design.
Dredging 499
Materials Handling
What is actually dredged material (ADC and CEDA, 1999)? The World Bank
(1990) distinguishes fivemain types of dredged sediments.
1. Material frommaintenance dredging of ports, harbors, and navigation chan

nels usually consist of fine-grained silt and clays and is often rich in organic
matter and contains contaminants.
2. Material frommaintenance dredging of sand bars at the entrances to har
bors or channels usually consist of fine to coarse-grained sand and ismuch
less contaminated than (1).
3. Material from capital dredging within a port may vary considerably along
the vertical profile. The upper layer is usually fine-grained, organic rich and
contaminated, and the underlying layer is coarse-grained and uncontami
nated. In some circumstances, even the deeper layers might contain ele
vated levels of contaminants from historical discharges.
4. Material from capital dredging of channels or outer harbor areas is likely to
be coarse-grained and uncontaminated.
5. Material derived from remediation dredging is usually fine-grained, organic
rich and, by definition, highly contaminated. Its relocation requires special
control measures.
Physical Properties. The basic physical characteristics are form and composi
tion, grain size, specific gravity, plasticity, water content, shear strength,water
retention characteristics, permeability, behavior, consolidation behavior,
settling
compaction and, organic content.
Chemical Properties. They include PH-values, calcium carbonate equivalent,

cation exchange capacity, salinity, redox potential (electrive activity), dissolved
oxygen, biochemical oxygen, organic carbon, nutrients, carbon/nitrogen ratio,
potassium and, contaminants of any kind.
Biological Properties. Biological characterization of sediments may involve

testing for the presence of microbial constituents and testing for toxicology.
Microbial constituents of concern include pathogens, viruses, yeasts and para
sites. Sediments should be tested for these constituents whenever dredging sites
are close to sewage discharges and placement sites are close to sensitive areas,
such as drinking water intakes, recreation beaches, or shellfish beds.
Acute toxicity bioassays test the effects of short-term exposure. Toxicity is
expressed as median lethal concentration (LC50), i.e., concentration that theoreti
cally would kill 50% of the test organisms within a specified time span. The dura
tion varies from hours to days.
Chronic toxicity bioassays assess sub-lethal effects that can result from pro
longed exposure to relatively low concentrations. Such effects include physiolog
ical, pathological, immunological, terratological, mutagenic, or carcinogenic
effects. Chronic toxicity bioassays may take several weeks. Toxicity
bioassays
may be used to evaluate: potential impacts of dissolved and/or suspended sedi
ments on water column organisms (elutriate
bioassays); and potential impacts of
deposited sediments on benthic organisms (benthic bioassays).
Metals. Metals may exist in the aquatic environment in four basic, but interactive
forms.These dissolved forms are: freemetal ions; complexed molecules; particulate
forms absorbed to the surface of solid particles; and precipates (mostly sulphides).
In freemode (themost toxic) metals are transported with thewater and easily
taken up by organisms. The particulate associated forms are relatively inactive. In
sediments under natural conditions (anoxic, reduced, near neutral pH) only a small
fraction of heavy metals is dissolved; themajor portion is bound by sulphides or
by structurally complex, large organic compounds. Release of these may be
induced by increased salinity, reduced pH, and increased redox potential.
Sediment Properties Versus Dredging Placement Methods

In addition to the original properties at the dredging site, the behavior of sedi
ments during and after placement will also largely depend on the specific charac
teristics of the dredging and placement techniques.
Dredging techniques may be subdivided into two categories: mechanical and
hydraulic dredging.
Mechanical dredgers (e.g., bucket or clamshell) use mechanical force to dis
lodge, excavate, and lift the sediments. The material is generally placed and trans
ported to the site of discharge by barges. Barges may have bottom doors or
split-hulls and thematerial can be released within seconds as an instantaneous
discharge. Cohesive sediment dredged and placed thisway remains intact, close
to the in-situ density through thewhole dredging and placement process.
Hydraulic dredgers remove and lift the sediments as a slurry (mixture of sedi
ment solids and large amounts of dredging sitewater). The slurry is transported to
the discharge site via pipeline or in hoppers and released with large amounts of
entrained water. Hoppers may release thematerial through bottom doors or through
pump-out operations. Hydraulic dredging and transport break down the original
structure of sediments.
Beneficial Use ofDredged Materials

The main application is for fills. Recent years have also introduced a number
of practical structural usages. Publications providing guidance on beneficial use
include: Beneficial Uses ofDredged Material; Engineer Manual (USACE 1986);
Dredging 501
Beneficial Uses ofDredged Material, A Practical Guide (PIANC 1992); Handling

and Treatment of Contaminated Dredged Material (PIANC 1997); Guidelines for
theBeneficial Use ofDredged Material (H. R. Wallingford, 1996).
one may distinguish

Engineering Usages. For practical use of dredged materials
between rock, gravel, sand, silt,mud, and clay, differing greatly in grain sizes and
shape. Sand and siltsmay become "quick." Clay is cohesive.
Gravel and sand are dredged for construction purposes. Different kinds of heavy
minerals are extracted from sands in sometimes major operations; including from
the deep sea (Brunn, 1990b).
Coastal Protection. Dredged material is used for artificial nourishments of

beaches, which today is themost common coastal protection measure. The mate
rial dredged offshore or in entrances and navigation channels is pumped ashore if
suitable forwidening and raising the beach elevation.
Materials may also be used to produce protective offshore berms, which may
be designed as feeder berms, hard berms, and soft berms. The interdependence of
beach fillvolume and repetition intervals is dealt with by Dette et al. (1994).
Nearshore impact of dredging for beach nourishment is an important subject
for beach nourishment andWork et al. (2004) reports?
"A methodology is presented for predicting the impacts of nearshore

dredging on shoreline change, using numerical models forwaves, currents,
and shoreline change. The dredge pit, outside of the surf zone, was assumed
to be steady state, but alters waves reaching the surf zone. The methodology
accounts for the transformation of directional wave energy spectra due to
spatial gradients in both mean currents and bathymetry, wind inputs, and
energy dissipation via several mechanisms. The wave transformationmodel
SWAN (Simulating Waves Nearshore) was used to simulate waves at Folly
Island, S.C., which served as the test case. Wave model results were vali
dated using short-term fieldmeasurements at three locations. Longer-term
(1 year) simulations were driven using hindcast wave and wind data. Velocity
fields and tidal stages were simulated using the hydrodynamic model
Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code in two-dimensional mode, after cali
brating with field measurements. Wave model results were used to estimate
longshore sediment transport and shoreline change due to longshore gradi
ents of the longshore sediment transport rate. Empirical sediment transport
coefficients were chosen tomatch model results tomeasured beach volume
changes derived from beach profile data. The calibrated model was then
used to predict impacts of dredging on long-term shoreline change. Results
reproduced observed trends of erosion and accretion along approximately
90% of the shoreline."
Feeder Berms. These berms are produced by dumping of materials nearshore

serve partly as source ofmaterials for a possible transferofmaterials to thebeach.
Hard Berms. The construction of hard berms involves the placement of suitable
material, in depths up to 13m, to create a permanent feature on the seabed approx
imately parallel to the shoreline with gentle side slopes thatwill intercept the
troughs of incoming storm waves and decrease erosion of the shoreline. If the
berm ismade of sand, itwill be modified in the profile and some of thematerial
will be lost, implying that some maintenance will be necessary. This technique
may still be cheaper and more convenient (i.e., causing less disturbance to recre
ation) than direct beach nourishment. The surfriding underwater bar-berm built
on the shore of the town of Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, is of that
type.
Soft Berms. Naturally occurring underwater mudbanks are known to absorb

water wave energy and thereby attenuate waves thatpass over them.Energy reduc
tions of 30 to 90% are not uncommon even in the absence of wave breaking.
Attempts have been made to replicate this action by creating underwater mud
berms from dredged material.
Open Water Disposal. Material dredged maybe disposed of in deeper waters or

in shallow designated waters. Bypassing at tidal entrances is a common usage.
Offshore disposals may be taped to protect thematerial from being eroded away.
Polluted materials may be placed inside dykes, such as the large "Shifter" used by
Europort fordisposal of polluted dredged materials (Figure 10-56, Port Engineering,
4th edition). Land disposals may also use dykes. An impermeable membrane is then
placed to avoid penetration of pollutants to the surrounding areas. Material may
also be placed in dredged pits in thebottom provided with a proper protective cover.
Capping of dredged materials is furtheraddressed by Lee (2000).
Costs ofDredging and Filling or Dumping
Costs of dredging and filling vary greatly depending upon quantities involved,
availability of sources of material, site conditions, weather climate, and certain
local conditions. For example, the price for a quantity exceeding 1 x 106 yd3
from a nearshore source at Delray Beach in Florida (2001) was $3 to $3.50/yd3
($4 to $4.50/m3) using a hydraulic pipeline dredger. The price for handling a
1.6 x 106 yd3 job with a hydraulic pipeline dredger in Brevard County, north of
Palm Beach county, Florida), where sources of sand were 11 and 25 miles from
the project site,was $8 to $9.00/yd3 ($10.5 to $11.50/m3 in 2000).
Of course thishigh price is caused by a long transportdistance. A recent (2001)
bid on the delivery of 1.9 million yd3 for a nourishment project on Anna Maria
Island on the Florida Gulf Coast from a nearshore source quoted a unit price of
Dredging 503
$4.40/yd3 ($5.70/m3). For very large dredge and fill jobs, e.g., in the Far East, unit
prices are less, regardless of high mobilization costs. And European prices for
nourishment of beaches using effectiveDutch equipment are almost always lower
than theAmerican prices. But new American equipment, such as theLiberty Island
(Figure 10-4), undoubtedly will be competitive with European prices under simi
lar conditions.
Regarding prices on bypassing see Chapter 9.
Lund (1990) discusses optimization of maintenance dredging, and reports on
dredged materials disposal economics(1991)?
"While environmental, political, and other engineering concerns often

dictate the form and timing of disposal for dredged material, economics is
often important as well. This paper has explored several relatively simple
methods for evaluating the economics of disposal alternatives and increases
in disposal rates and for the development of least-cost schedules for employ
ment of various disposal alternatives. Some of thesemethods represent spe
cial cases ofmore general and complex approaches developed in the past.
"Turvey marginal cost theory is employed for very simple cases where a
single disposal alternative or an increase in disposal rates is to be evaluated.
This marginal cost formulation is closely related to a fundamental engi
neering economic approach to the problem (Walski 1983).
"A linear programming method is then proposed and illustrated formore
integrated and least-cost scheduling of a variety of disposal options. This
linear programming method is a special case of Ford's (1984, 1986) branch
and-bound solution method formore general disposal problems and requires
that only one replacement disposal site be considered at a time and that the
disposal alternatives have insignificant initial fixed costs.
"The approaches taken here are short-cut forms ofmore rigorous integer
linear programming and related approaches to evaluate and plan dredged
material disposal. While these simple methods will not be appropriate for
all disposal problems, they should be of use for a significant number of
somewhat simpler disposal problems where economics remains an impor
tant concern."
Heinz-Dieter et al. (2004) report on a disposal management concept for the

Port of Hamburg, Germany?
"Today theHamburg dredged material management concept is based on

several pillars (Figure 10-11). Harbor maintenance yields some 3 to 4 mil
lion m3 of dredged material per year. Easily one million m3 are treated on
land, the remaining amount being disposed of in open water. The greater
part of the land amount is treated in theMETHA plant, and as in the past
Figure 10-11. The Hamburg dredged materialmanagement concept (TerraetAqua, 2004).
dewatering fields are likewise in operation. The treated silt is beneficially

used or disposed in the disposal mounds inHamburg.
"Since the beginning of the 1980s, the federal state of Hamburg has spent
more than 500 million on the land-based treatment and disposal of con
taminated dredged material. By far the largest part of contamination of Elbe
sediments is traceable to sources at the upper reaches of theElbe. Over the
long term such expenditures are neither sustainable nor sensible. Therefore,
over themedium term the dredged material management concept provides
for the relocation of themajor part of the dredged material to thewaters of
theElbe. Only the contaminated dredged material that also comes from old
sediment deposits is treated on land and, where possible, put to use or
deposited. The possibility of subaquatic disposal is being investigated for
the long-term safeguarding of dredged material that cannot be relocated.
"While in 1984 strong public protests spurred on the development of the
dredged material management concept, today increasingly more legal
requirements define how dredged material is to be handled, particularly
when it concerns disposal on land. The bases for these regulations are
often European.
"Dredged material and its peculiarities have been given insufficient con
sideration in the regulations of theEU with thepossible consequence of unrea
sonable requirements being imposed. The increasingly heavy regulation calls
for a coordinated, active course of action by those responsible for the han
dling of dredged material. The EU Water Framework Directive provides man
Dredging 505
agement plans for entire river regions and to that extent offers a chance.
Correctly understood sediment management for an entire river region should
mean thatwater maintenance is required, that sediments should remain there
as natural aquatic elements and that they require protection. Such manage
ment ought not to be a dredged material treatment operated at the end of a
river at great expense, but rather the requisite measures must be established at
the sources via which the contaminants reach the river."
Dredging Research Programs
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is involved in virtually every nav
igation dredging operation performed in theUnited States. The Corps' navigation
mission entails maintenance and improvement of about 40,000 km of navigable
channels serving about 400 ports, including 130 of the nations 150 largest cities.
Dredging is a significant method for achieving theCorps' navigation mission of
maintaining these channels. The Corps dredges an average annual 230 million m3
of sedimentary material at an annual cost of about $400 million (US). The Corps
also supports theUS Navy's dredging program in both maintenance and new work.
The Corps will continually be challenged in pursuing optimal means of per
forming its dredging activities. Implementation of an applied R&D program to
meet demands of changing conditions and generation of significant technology,
adopted by all dredging interests, are means of reducing the cost of dredging the
nation's waterways and harbors.
The shallow-water hopper dredger has always been on their agenda. We may
expect a couple of additions to the fleet in a near future financed by private indus
try.They are ofmedium-size with about 5,000 m3 hopper capacity.
Reports on the development of dredging and on the environmental effects of
dredging, technical notes, are published regularly, the latter category covering the
subjects of aquatic disposal, upland disposal, wetland, estuary disposal, regula
torymanagement, beneficial uses, equipment and miscellaneous as described in
numerous reports. Copies may be acquired from theUS
Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways, Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
The long-term effects of dredging operations (LEDO) program by theDredging
Research Division of theUS Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS, focuses
on cost-effective, environmentally responsible
techniques for dredging and
dredged material disposal in aquatic, wetland, and upland environments. Current
research emphasizes risk-based procedures for effects assessment, exposure
assessment, and risk characterization. The program objective is to provide the lat
est proven technologies for identifying, quantifying, and
managing contaminated
sediments in support of cost-effective, environmentally responsible navigation.
The primary benefit is a more timely complete, and cost-effective execution of

theCorps' responsibilities under theClean Water Act (CWA), marine protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), andWater Resources Development Act (WRDA). This R&D pro
gram provides dramatic cost avoidances annually for achieving restoration goals
for contaminated dredged material disposal as mandated by law.
Recent major products include:
1. A chronic/sublethal and genotoxic assay thatmeets national regulatory

requirements.
2. National guidance for confined disposal facility contaminant loss assess
ment procedures. The guidance document was established as Corps policy
tomeet regulatorymandates.
3. A new analytical screening method thatmeasures bioavailable dioxin and
similar compounds with a 90% reduction cost and time required by previ
ous methods (co-sponsored with another research program).
4. The Environmental Residue Effects Database (ERED), the firstWWW
accessible database of bioaccumulation effects to improve the accuracy and
defensibility of environmental impact predictions while significantly reduc
ing evaluation costs.
LEDO research benefits/value-added to district projects can be demonstrated
on a recent example. Since the bioaccumulation interpretation database isWeb
accessible, it is immediately and cost-effectively available to all district projects
in need of contaminated material assessment.
Dredging and disposal problems in theNew York and New JerseyHarbors are
mentioned in reports byWEDA (Mohan et al., 1999),Wakeman (1999). The World
Bank, 1990, has issued its guidelines.
PIANC Report on Dredging and Disposal ofDredged Materials

PIANC the numerous problems associated with dredging and dis
realizing
posal, established a professional working group called the Permanent
Environmental Commission, which advised on this task in report titled
"Management ofAquatic Disposal of Dredged Material" (1998). The task, scope,
and use of the report are summarized as follows?
The
"Disposal of dredged material has become an environmental issue.
formation of international conventions for aquatic protection has stimulated
thedevelopment of international and national guidelines. Management meth
ods have also had to rise tomeet the environmental challenges.
"In view of this,PIANC has found ithelpful to summarize in a report the
state-of-the-art of themanagement of aquatic disposal of dredged material
and to give recommendations for implementing existing guidelines.
Dredging 507
"The origin of, and disposal sites for, dredged material may be marine
and coastal areas, estuaries, harbors, channels and other navigable and non
navigable waterways. This report covers all of these.
"It gives the reader broad, brief guidance to the latest developments in
regulations and management of the disposal of dredged material. It provides
information for dealing with a specific disposal problem whether themate
rial is contaminated or not. It provides a common, accepted basis for those
involved to find the optimum solution in terms of economy and ecology.
The intended readership includes:
Port and waterways authorities

Administrations
Dredging companies
Consultants
Environmental groups
"Land disposal is specifically excluded. For marine and coastal waters

the basis is theDredged Material Assessment Framework (DMAF) of the
global London Convention (1972): the flowchart is reproduced on the inside
back cover. However, most of the basic considerations and procedural steps
also apply to disposal in freshwater areas. Best use of this report will be
achieved by consulting it alongside a copy of DMAF.
"The report should not be used as a technical cookery book, but rather as
a guide to the overall framework and the complex procedure of managing
the aquatic disposal of dredged material. There are no figures given on mate
rial quality criteria because they depend verymuch on regional or local con
ditions. Instead, examples are given from a number of countries, indicating
how to develop specific values."
"The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Regional Sediment Management

Program" (RDC/CHL CHETN XIV-1, June 2001) describes the effective of lit
toral, estuarine, and riverine sediment resources in an environmentally effective
and economical manner. RSM procedures are directed atmaintaining or enhanc
ing the natural exchange of sediment within the boundaries of a physical system.
RSM changes the focus of engineering activities within the coastal, estuarine, and
riverine systems from the local, or project-specific scale to a broader scale that is
defined by the natural sediment processes and may include the entirewatershed.
Implementation of RSM recognizes that the physical system and embedded
cosystems aremodified and respond beyond the formal dimensions and time frame
of individual projects. The larger spatial and longer temporal perspectives of RSM,
as well as the broad range of disciplines with a stake inRSM projects, require
partnership with a coleadership of RSM initiatives by the stakeholders. Decisions
concerning the timing and scope of projects thatmove or use sediment must be
made with an understanding of the regional system. The National Demonstration
Program has initially been focused on coastal sediment management, although

RSM encompasses the entire watershed. The input of various U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers districts is described including diagrams and photos.
Proceedings of the 28th International Conference in Coastal Engineering
(Cardiff, Wales) include several papers on dumping of materials and how to
mitigate or eliminate adverse effects of sedimentary pollution, e.g., Luger et al.
(Vol. 2., pp. 3155-3188, Burel and Garapon (Vol. 2, pp. 3143-3155), and Yacuchi
et al. (Vol. 2, pp. 3183-3192).
The PIANC Research Program and theEnvironment
Engler (1998) reports?
"The Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses

a
(PIANC) is hundred-year-old international technical and scientific, inter
governmental, non-political, and non-profit association generally sponsored
by federal governments. It is open tomembership by individuals and corpo
rate bodies supporting engineering excellence and leadership in inland and
marine navigation and waterways development and maintenance. Until
recently, thePIANC only addressed environmental issues on an ad hoc basis,
and although a leader in the engineering community, PIANC had a minor
role in helping shape solutions to environmental problems. Instead of con
tinuing to react to these issues when they arose, it became obvious that
PIANC must be sensitive to environmental issues related to itsmission and
adopt an environmentally sustainable approach to navigation infrastructure
development and maintenance. In 1994, thePIANC established a Permanent
Environmental Commission (PEC) as a firm demonstration of its commit
ment to the environmental agenda and the principle of sustainable develop
ment. The PEC represents PIANC in international organizations, such as
theLondon and Oslo/Paris (OSPAR) Conventions, and communicates and
networks with non-PIANC groups dealing in environmental affairs. The
PEC currently has six international working groups dealing with the techni
cal aspects of: (1) management of aquatic disposal of dredged material,
(2) wildlife habitat and port management, (3) environmental management
framework, (4) glossary of environmental terms and terminology, (5 ) envi
ronmental guidelines formarine, near shore, and inland confined disposal
facilities, and (6) recreation navigation and nature (jointly with the PIANC
Permanent Commission on Recreation Navigation (PCRN)."
Dredging SafetyManagement Program

WEDA's newsletter of (October 1, 2003) mentions the goal ofWEDAs safety
commission as follows:
Dredging 509
"Dredging SafetyManagement Program is a joint program of theDredging

Contractors ofAmerica (DCA) and theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
This initiative began, in 1999 at the request of theDCA in order to improve
safety inmarine construction and dredging work. The DSMP provides for a
voluntary, trialprogram in an alternate approach to safety at dredge siteswith
the goal of achieving furtherreductions inworkplace injuries, illness, prop
erty damage, and to better protect the environment.
"On April 11, 2000, the Dredging Safety Initiative Working Group
(DSIWG) partnership was chartered by theCorps Director of Civil Works
and President of theDCA. The group was on a fast track to develop a safety
management program compatible with ISM/ISO standards. A series of 14
meetings were conducted around the country to gather input from Corps
districts and dredging contractors.
"The product, theDredging SafetyManagement Program, consists of 16
rules, guidance notes, and a model manual. It incorporates theCorps safety
manual, EM elements of risk based analysis, self certification
385-1-1,
through thirdparty audits, and will replace current accident prevention plans.
Currently there are 19 third party auditors approved by theDSMP Joint
Committee. Management of theDSMP is conducted through a joint USACE
DCA Safety Committee comprising 6 members from theCorps and 6 mem
bers fromDCA. The DSMP will change themindset of those in the dredging
business, provide compatibility with international safety standards and con
sistency in regulatory interpretations, improve incident reporting and analy
sis, and share lessons learned.
"On January 26, 2001, theDCA Board of Directors unanimously ap
proved theDSMP. The Corps approved theDSMP on July 31, 2001. Since
then, participating dredging contractors have developed their company's
safetymanagement system, and both the Corps and dredging contractors
have developed training and certification forDSMP participants and third
party auditors. On November 18, 2002, theCorps began implementation of
theDSMP by adding a clause for dredging and dredge related marine work
solicitations. The contract clause provides for participating DCA members
the opportunity to submit an approved company's DSMP in lieu of an acci
dent prevention plan. To date, threeDCA member companies are participat
ing in theDSMP and have received DSMP certification, and 11 dredges
have received DSMP certification."
How toAvoid Shoaling
Parchure and Teeter (2002) give a thorough review of shoaling problems and
experiences in solving them.They conclude?
1. A strong development of the dredging Industry is taking place with still
larger and more efficient equipment. This development ismost predominant
in the low countries in Europe, which virtually has taken over theworld
market.
2. Major projects on improvements of navigation channels and harbors remain.

Artificial nourishment of beaches is still increasing.
3. Disposal areas for dredged materials are often running short due to environ
mental concerns. Dyked areas, onshore and offshore, are becoming practices.
4. Environmental dredging is an important factor,which requires much atten
tion, planning, and monitoring. Beneficial usages of dredged polluted mate
rials are developing including sediment traps formaterials that otherwise
may have been flushed away and deposited where it is neither wanted
or needed.
5. Various organizations like the IADC, theCEDA, theWEDA, and theEODA
organize conferences and publish reports, proceedings and magazines.
References
The following abbreviations are used in the text:
ADC Association ofDredging Companies

ASCE American Society ofCivil Engineers
JCR Journal of Coastal Research
IADC Association ofDredging Companies (TheNetherlands)
International
CEDA Central Dredging Association (TheNetherlands)
D&PC Dredging and PortConstruction (UnitedKingdom)
PE PortEngineeringManagement Magazine (UnitedKingdom)
WEDA Western Dredging Association (USA)
WODA World Organization ofDredging Associations (TheNetherlands)
PIANO Permanent International Association ofNavigation Congresses (Belgium)
C. A., Adams, T. M., and Keillor, P., 2002, "Optimization of Mechanical

Blazquez,
Dredging Operations forSediment Remediation," ASCE, J.Waterways, Port, Coastal
and Ocean Engineering,Vol. 12(6), pp. 299-307.
Bruun, P., 1990a, "Beach Nourishment. Better Profiling and
Improved Economy Through
Backpassing from Offshore Sources," /. of Coastal Research, Vol. 6(2), pp. 265-277.
Bruun, P., 1990b,Port Engineering,Houston, Texas, Gulf Publishing Company, 2 vols.
Bruun, P., 1991, "OptimumDredging forArtificialNourishment of Beaches," Proc. ASCE
Conference onWater Resources (New Orleans, May 1991), pp. 303-307.
Bruun, P., 1993, "An Update on Sand Bypassing Procedures and Prices," J. of Coastal
Research, Special Issue #18, pp. 277-284.

Bruun, P., 1993, "Economic Aspects of Backpassing: New Type Profilingwith New Type
Proc. Hilton Head Island Symposium, JCR, pp. 186-189.
Equipment,"
Bruun, P., 1994, "Latest in Bypassing Technology," Proc. Iceland Symposium,
Development
Hofn, Iceland, JCR, pp. 117-131.
Dredging 511
Bruun, P., 1996, "New Principles andMethods inMaintaining Beaches and Depths in
Channels and Entrances," Proc. Bahia Blanca International Symposium, JCR, pp. 1-17.
Bruun, P., 2002, "Technical and Economic Optimization of Nourishment Operations,"

Proc. 28th International on Coastal Engineering, Cardiff, Wales, UK,
Conference
pp. 18-28.
Bruun, P. andWillekes, G., 1992, "Bypassing and Backpassing atHarbors, Navigational

Channels, and Tidal Entrances: Use of Shallow-water Draft Hopper Dredgers with
Pump-out Capabilities," JCR,Vol. 8(4), pp. 972-992.
deLange,W., Healy, T, 1994,Assessing theStability of InnerShelfDredge Spoil Mounds
Using SpreadsheetsApplication on Personal Computer," JCR 10(4), pp. 946-968.
E. N., Work, P. A, and Borecki, O. S., 2004, of Dredging on
Demir, H, Otay, "Impact
Shoreline Proc. ASCE J. Waterways, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering,
Change,"
Vol. 130,pp. 170-118.
Dette H. H. and Fiiuhrboter, A., 1994, "Beach Fill Volume and Repetition Intervals,"
J.Waterway,Port and Coastal Engineering,ASCE, 120(6), pp. 580-593.
Dredging and Port Construction, 1998-2003, January, February, May, June, September,
November, December, UK
Dredging and Port Construction,2000, "InteractionandUse ofDP/DT andDTPS Systems,"

October.
Dredging Research, 2002, Vol. 5, no. 4, Dec.
Dredging Research Technical Note, 1995, "Geotechnical Descriptors forDredge Ability,"

USACE WES, DRP-2-13, January.
Engler, R. M., 1998, "PIANC and theEnvironment,"Proc. PORTS 1998,ASCE.
Hands, E. B. andAllison, M. C, 1991, "Mound Migration inDeeper Water andMethods
of Categorizing Active and Stable Depths," Coastal Sediment '91,New York, ASCE,
pp. 1985-1999.
Heinz-Dieter, D. et al., 2004, Terra Aqua, Sept., pp. 3-13.
Hendriks, J. F. A., 1999, Dredging and Port Construction, July.
Herbich, J., 1992,Handbook ofDredging Engineering,McGraw Hill, New York.
IHC Ports and Dredging, 2001, no. 156
InternationalAssociation of Dredging Companies (ADC) and the Central Dredging
Association (CEDA), 1999, "EnvironmentalAspects ofDredging, Reuse, Recycle or
Relocate," IADC, Duinweg 21, 2585 JV,theHague, The Netherlands, 106 p.
International Dredging Review, May 1998.
Knox, D., Krumholz, D., and Clausner, J., 1995, "The Water Injection Dredger," Inter
national Dredging Review, September/October, pp. 8-10.

Koert, J.P., 1998, "Functional Constructions Concerning Large Trailing Suction Hopper
Dredge," PIANC, Bulletin No. 99.
Kraus, N. and Larson, M., 2001, "MathematicalModel forRapid Estimation of Infilling
and Sand Bypassing at InletEntrances and Harbors," Proc. ERDC/CHL CHETN-IV-35
USACE, CEREC, WES, June.
Lee, L. T, 2001, "Boston Harbor Dredged Material Capping Simulation," USACE
ERDC/CHL CHETN-VI-36.
Lobedan, F. R., Rudolph, R. W., and Servent, G. M., "Design Considerations for an Upland
Dredge Material Containment Facility, Port of Oakland," Proc. PORTS '95, ASCE.
Lund, J.R., 1990, "SchedulingMaintenance Dredging on a Single Reach withUncertainty,"

Proc. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, 116(2), pp. 211-231.
Lund, J. R., 1991, "Dredged Material Disposal Economics," ASCE J., Vol. 117, no. 4,
pp. 390-408
Michael, J.,2004, "Regional Management Strategies forOffshore Borrow Areas on US
East and Gulf ofMexico Coast," Vol. 20, no. 1,pp. 149-154.
Moffatt& Nichol, Engineers, 1994, "Sand Bypass System?Oceanside, California, Phase
III, Basic Design," Report prepared for theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers District,
Los Angeles, variously paginated.
Mohan, R. K., Urso, D. C. and Steele, P. R., 1999, "Optimization of Dredged Material
Placement Using the Sub-channel Placement Cell Concept," WEDA, Vol. 1(1),
pp. 11-34.
Parchure, T. M. and Teeter, A. M., 2002, "Lessons Learned from Existing Projects on
Shoaling inHarbors and Navigation Channels," and "PotentialMethods forReducing

Shoaling inHarbors andNavigation Channels," reportsbyUS Army Corps ofEngineers,
ERDC/CHL CHETN-XIV-5 and 6, June.
PIANC, "Risk-based Planning andManagement ofMaintenance Dredging: Development
andApplication of theReliability-based Dynamic Dredging Decision (RBD) Model,"
Bulletin No. 87, Proc. Ports '95,ASCE, pp. 239-750.
PIANC, 2000, "Management ofDredged Material Bulletin No. 4.
Port Engineering Management, 2004, Vol. 22, no. 1.
A. J. andVeyera, G., "An IntegratedGeogrid Mattress Armoring System forCapping of
Contaminated Dredge Materials," Pro.
US Army Corps ofEngineers, 2001, Dredging Research,Vol. 3, no. 1,WES, DOER Project.
Visser, K. and Bruun P., 1997, "The Punaise Underwater Dredger," J. Coastal Res., Vol.
13(4), pp. 1929-1999.

Wakeman, T. H., 1999, "Using a Materials Assessment Process for Managing Placement
of Contaminated Dredged Materials," WEDA, Vol. 1(3), pp. 15-38.
Wakeman, T, M., and Gallo, J., 2003, "Dialogue and Cooperation to Protect
Ludwig
Resources and Projects," WEDA News, Vol. 5, (1) March.
Walski, T. M., 1983, "The Nature ofLong Run Cost Savings Due toWater Conservation,"
Water Resour. Bull, 19(3), 489-498.
WEDA News, Vol. pp. 11-24
Winterwerp, J.C, 2002, "Near Field Behavior ofDredging Spill inShallowWater," ASCE,
J. Waterway Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 128(2), pp. 96-99.
Work, P., et al., 2004, ASCE J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, Vol. 130,
no. 6, Nov./Dec, pp. 306-311.
World Bank, 1990, "Environmental Considerations for Port and Harbor Developments,"
World Bank Technical Paper 126,TheWorld Bank,Washington, DC, USA.
Dredging 513
Appendix
AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO ASSESSING
NATURAL AND CONSTRUCTED BEACH SYSTEMS:
THE SOUTH CAROLINA COAST (USA)
Paul T. Gayes1,William C. Schwab2, andWilliam C. Eiser3
Introduction
A statewide monitoring program has been documenting changes within the

beach and nearshore system along the South Carolina coast since 1993.
Incorporation of regional geophysical mapping into the study of shoreline behav
ior has contributed to understanding local variation inmorphology and beach sta
bility as well as provided a more regional approach tomanaging adjacent sand
resources and critical habitats. Response of three nourished beaches in South
Carolina has generally followed the pre-nourishment patterns of erosion.
Historical hotspots and highly vulnerable areas rapidly lost the constructed sub
aerial beach fill while adjacent areas maintained volume near or in some cases
above expected levels. Localized exchange of sediment across the shoreface,
observed in profiles and time series of side scan sonarmosaics, may explain some
of the deviation between theoretical and observed fill behavior.
Like many coastal states in theUnited States, South Carolina's economy has
become progressively dependent on the revenue and growth generated by beach
front communities. Most of the coast, however, exhibits a trend of ero
long-term
sion and landward migration (Anders, 1990), which increasingly puts coastal
resources and economies at risk from both natural (sea level rise, storm events)
and human-induced change (modification of coastal morphology and processes).
The South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Act was enacted in 1977, and
amended in 1988 and 1990, and defines the basis formanagement of the state's
critical beachfront resources. This legislation established a jurisdictional baseline
fromwhich coastal development is regulated. It also mandated themonitoring of
the state's beach systems to define and periodically update the baseline. The time
series of beach change generated from thismonitoring has contributed to a more
comprehensive characterization of the state's beach systems fromwhich to assess
Center forMarine and Wetland Studies, Coastal Carolina University 1270 Atlantic Ave. Conway,
SC 29526 (USA) ptgayes@ac.coastal.edu
2
US Geological Survey, 600 4th Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701 bschwab@usgs.gov
3
SC DHEC-Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, 1362 McMillan Ave., Charleston
SC 29405 eiserwc@ chastn86. dhec.state.se. us
existing predictive capabilities, identify areas for specific study to improve the
understanding of coastal processes and behavior, and to further improve manage
ment of state's coastal resources.
The same state legislation also restricted construction of "hard" engineering

structures such as groins and seawalls. As a result, beach nourishment has emerged
as the primary method formitigating the effects of beach erosion and protecting
coastal property and infrastructure.During the last decade, ten beach nourishment
are
projects have been completed in South Carolina and three more projects
presently being considered. The demand for nourishment projects in the statewill
likely increase in the future even though limited sand resources are available for
beach nourishment (Gayes et al., 1998). This conflict further increases the need
for a long-term approach to tracking fill behavior and seeking any possible
improvement in project efficiency.
A range of temporal and spatial limitations has been cited in the historical mon
itoring of beach nourishment projects and the need formore thorough tracking of
fill behavior has been identified (i.e., National Research Council, 1995, Thieler et
al., 2000). Wading depth surveys often used tomonitor beaches do not measure
the significant exchange of sand thatmay occur between the active beach and
depths greater than-1.5 m NGVD. Such exchange has been identified in the study
area particularly associated with large storms (Birkemeier et al., 1991; Gayes,
1991, Thieler et al., 1999). In addition, monitoring of constructed beaches has
typically been conducted for periods considerably shorter than planned renourish
ment intervals. To more completely monitor the entire active beach system, a long
beach profiling program was implemented in 1993 tomonitor the entire active
beach system to depths assumed to be below closure (~ > -7 m or 1 km offshore).
This program was expanded to include additional surveys of nourished beaches to
provide greater temporal sampling in the early post-nourishment period (quar
terly surveys for two to three years) and continued annual monitoring thereafter.
The statewide program was converted to a DGPS-based survey system, in 2000,
decreasing the line spacing and using a GIS approach to tracking beach change.
of broad regions of the inner shelf has
Comprehensive geophysical mapping
been completed in several areas by theUS Geological Survey (e.g., New York;
Schwab et al., 2000). Surficial sediment on the inner shelf is surprisingly limiting
in these regions. Along much of the southern North Carolina and northern South
Carolina coasts, extensive hard bottom outcrops exist that support diverse reef
resources of the state.
assemblages and are also considered critical biological
Incorporation of geophysical, geologic, and biological monitoring of these
habitats located on the shoreface and inner shelf adjacent to recent nourishment
fill behavior
projects has provided important context for interpretation of beach
recorded by the time series of beach profiles. In some areas the regional geophys
icalmapping has identified large-scale movement of sediment within thenearshore
and inner shelf systems adjacent to recently nourished beaches. The direction of
Dredging 515
this inferred fluxmight explain observed accelerated loss of beach fill at two loca
tions located away from inlet zones and one area of unusually high stability of the
beach fill located adjacent to an inlet. Such a regional systematic approach may
provide important context for efforts comparing the effectiveness of different
projects across a region.
Study Areas
The statewide long beach profile-monitoring program was expanded to docu

ment change within the beach and adjacent nearshore habitats within two areas of
recent beach nourishment.
These areas are Folly Beach and theGrand Strand (Figure A-l).
Folly Beach. Folly Beach is a narrow transgressive barrier island located on the
central South Carolina coast 20 km south of Charleston. The region is the type sec
tion for "mesotidal barrier coasts" defined by Hayes (1979). A relatively thinveneer
of unconsolidated and mobile sediment overlying Tertiary age deposits character
izes the region. These older units form extensive outcrops on the lower shore
face and inner shelf in the region (Gayes et al., 1998). The island has historically
Figure A-1. Location of Folly Beach and Grand Strand study areas of South Carolina
(inset). Folly Beach study area (left)showing beach monitoringsurvey lines,area nour
ished, locationof borrow site, local erosion hotspots ("Holiday Inn"and "Washout") and
linear rippled scour depression field identifiedby Thieler et al. (1999). Areas recently
nourished at NorthMyrtleBeach, Arcadian Shores, MyrtleBeach, and Surfside/Garden
City are shown on right.Location of beach and geophysical surveys discussed inFigure
A-5 isalso shown (OCRM BM 5850).
experienced a high rate of erosion (Anders et al., 1990) and a series of hard ero
sion structures had been constructed along the north-central and south-central
areas of the island.
The Grand Strand. The Grand Strand of South Carolina is an 80-km long arcu
ate strand that forms the northern third of the state's coastline (Figure A-l). A
broad headland area exists along the central and north-central area centered on
the city ofMyrtle Beach. A chain of barrier islands extends from theGrand Strand
north into southern North Carolina. South ofMurrells Inlet, a continuous barrier
island chain fronts the rest of the South Carolina coast.
The Grand Strand region generally possesses relatively low long-term erosion
rates (Anders, 1990). However, coastal erosion problems are locally severe and
the overall width of the beach has diminished since the beginning of extensive
development along the coast. The framework of the shoreface and inner shelf of
theGrand Strand region is dominated by outcrops of Cretaceous and Tertiary age
formations that strongly influence themorphology and bathymetry of the inner
shelf. The most recent nourishment project in the region barged in sediment from
over 5 km offshore, highlighting the sediment-starved nature of the region and the
concern over long-term costs of nourishment.
Beach nourishment projects have recently been completed at Folly Beach and at
North Myrtle Beach, Arcadian Shores, Myrtle Beach and Surfside/Garden City
Beach in theGrand Strand area (Figure A-l). Table A-l provides information about
the design of these projects and nature of the associated monitoring programs.
Methods
A system for conducting long beach profiles along the South Carolina coast
was developed through a cooperative program between theUS Geological Survey
and the South Carolina DHEC-Office ofOcean and Coastal Resource Management
(formerly S.C. Coastal Council). This program (Project BERM-SC Beach Erosion
Research and Monitoring) has been collecting profiles at 300 sites along the coast
annually since 1993. The BERM system used a mobile survey sled that is towed
across the surf zone and shoreface by a jet Zodiac along specific shore-perpendi
cular lines (Figure A-l). Navigation for the survey as well as data acquisition and
data editing use HYPACK hydrographic surveying software. Excursion of key
elevation contours and volume change within key elevation horizons are calcu
lated using BMAP software. This system was converted to a DGPS based survey
system in 2000, which decreased the spacing between lines of survey and used
modeled surfaces within a GIS to calculate volumes and contours.
At Folly Beach and along theGrand Strand, the South Carolina Department of
Natural Resources has monitored ecological changes within both the area nour
Dredging 517
Table A-l
General Characteristics of Five Recent Nourishment Projects
and theAssociated Monitoring Projects in South Carolina
Monitoring
Program
Beach/End of Project Borrow Site Nearshore Side
Project Vol Beach Surveys Bathymetry Scan/Video Surveys
Folly Beach/Apr. 1993 1993-95 Quarterly 1993-96 Annual 1995-1996

1.9. x 106m3 1995-98 Biannual USGS-Sea Grant
1998 Annual Erosion Study
N. Myrtle Beach/March '97 1997-00 Quarterly 1997-00 Annual 1995

1.5 x 106m3 2000- Annual
Myrtle Beach/Dec. 1997 1997-00 Quarterly 1997-01 Annual 1995

1.5 x 106m3 2000- Annual 1997-00 Annual
Surfside/Oct. 1998 1999-01 Quarterly 1998-01 Annual 1995

1.4 x 106m3 2001- Annual 1997-01 Annual
Arcadian Shores/June '99 1999-01 Quarterly 1999-03 Annual

0.3 x 106m3 2001- Annual Cores Annual None
ished and theborrow sites used for the projects (Van Dolah et al., 1994, Van Dolah,
et al., 1998, Jutte, et al., 1999). High-resolution geophysical surveys have been
used to document sediment movement on the shoreface and inner shelf adjacent
to the constructed fills as part of related studies at Folly Beach (Thieler et al.,
2000) and directly as part of themonitoring of theGrand Strand Nourishment
projects (Gayes et al., 2001). These effortshave provided an important and broader
context for analysis of the behavior, effectiveness, and impact of the beach fills
and associated changes in adjacent coastal systems.
Side scan sonar (100 kHz) mosaics imaged the zone from the back of the
nearshore bar seawards for 8 km at Folly Beach, Myrtle Beach and Surfside Beach.
Figure A-l provides the location of the nourishment projects, lines of beach sur
veys and landmarks referred to in the text.Table A-l provides an overview of the
monitoring programs completed at each site. Specific methods of acquisition and
processing of the side scan surveys at Folly are provided in Swift et al. (1997) and
Danforth (1997). Similar methods were used for theGrand Strand Surveys. Side
scan imagery was "groundtruthed" using surficial sediment samples and bottom
video surveys.
Results
Folly Beach
Figure A-2 shows the change in volume of sediment over timemeasured within
the design template and overall beach and upper shoreface for the beach fills at
Folly Beach, North Myrtle Beach and Myrtle Beach. The initial assessments of
the durability of theFolly Beach project were the source of some debate (Ebersole
et al., 1996, Pilkey et al., 1996, Houston, et al., 1996). Based on the long-term
measurement of total volume observed within the project area (Figure A-2) the
Folly Beach project has performed well. Six years after construction 56% of the
constructed subaerial beach (>1.5 m NGVD) and 68% of the total project volume
(>-3 m NGVD) remain within the design template. The project was designed to
be supported on an 8-year renourishment cycle (USACE, 1991). Planning of the
first renourishment cycle began in 2001 and construction will not begin until at
least a year past the first scheduled renourishment.
While the overall project volumes showed losses on the order expected there
were four areas that experienced extensive erosion during the period. Figure A-3
shows the along shore variation of the subaerial beach during themonitoring
period. Both ends of the fill, also near the ends of the island, experienced exten
sive losses following construction. The extreme erosion of the southern tip of the
Time Since Construction (years)
Figure A-2. Volume of sediment above reference elevation relative to the pre-construc
tioncondition.The volume above +1.5 m NGVD approximates the high tidebeach forall
sites. At Myrtle Beach and NorthMyrtle Beach -7 m approximates the volume to the
lowershoreface. At Folly Beach the-1.5 m elevation approximates the depth of the base
of the constructed fill.
Dredging 519
5 100
O 2 4 6 8
Distance (km)
Figure A-3. Variation inwidth of subaerial beach along Folly Beach through time.
Distance to +1.5 m NGVD contour was measured relative to pre-construction position.
Alongshore position is referenced to the southern end of the island (and beach fill).
OCRM Inlet Hazard Zones and local "Hotspots" for erosion ("Seawall" and "Washout") are
also shown. See Figure A-1 for locations referred to in the text.
island was likely related to adjustments in the adjacent inlet system (Stono Inlet)
to the large borrow area excavated just behind this site (Figures A-1 and A-3).
Massive changes in the shoal configuration within the inlet occurred following
construction. Emergency renourishment of a county park on the southern end of
the island immediately failed and several hundred meters of the island were lost
to erosion.
Within themain body of the fill, two areas of historic chronic erosion ("The
Washout" and "Holiday Inn"; Figures A-3 and A-4) continued to experience high
rates of erosion. At both locations the constructed subaerial beach was lostwithin
months of completion of the project. At one of these areas, approximately 3 kilo
meters north of the southern end of the island, a large seawall exists to protect a
hotel complex from erosion. The surrounding beach has been free tomigrate and
has left the seawall protruding well seaward of the adjacent coast. The nourish
ment did not resolve this angularity and dramatic loss of the beach was expected
and did occur.
A second area of chronic erosion is located 6-7 km north of the southern end
of the island and is locally referred to as "The Washout" (Figures A-1 and A-2).
Regional geophysical studies (Thieler et al., 1999) identified a field of linear rip
pled scour depressions on the shoreface just south of theWashout area (Figures
Figure A-4. Distance to the -3m-elevation contour through time relative to the pre-nour
ishmentcondition.The base of the beach fillisobserved to have progressivelyprograded
seawards in the vicinityof the linear rippled scour depression field south of "The
Washout" followingconstruction (arrow).This site coincides with themost active area of
the Linear Rippled Scour Depression observed on a time series of side-scan mosaics
(Thieleret al., 1999). South ofThe Seawall area the base of thebeach fillexhibitsa higher
frequency variation thatmay reflectmore localized (rip?) processes (Modified from
=
Gayes et al., 2000). IHZ InletHazard Zones; LRSD = linear rippledscour depression
field (Theiler et al., 1999). "The Washout" and "Seawall" denote areas of chronic erosion.
A-l, A-3 and A-4). As reported by Thieler et al. (1999), a localized seaward bulge
existed in the base of the constructed beach (-3 m NGVD contour) within this
area following theMarch 1993 "Storm of theCentury," which struck the site near
the end of the construction of the project. A subsequent times-series of side scan
sonar mosaics documented active sediment transportwithin these scour depres
sions. The changes observed within thisfield supported the proposal thatbeach sed
iment was being lost to the inner shelf locally through the linear rippled scour
depression (Thieler, et al., 1999). Figure A-4 shows the excursion of the-3 m NGVD
elevation contour relative to the pre-nourishment position along the coast over the
6-year period monitored. On the shoreface within this same area, the -3 m con
tourwas observed to continue tomigrate seawards during and beyond the period
of the side scan time series further supporting the proposed connection of the
beach and localization of significant offshore loss. Local hotspots for erosion
Dredging 521
exist on each side of the linear rippled scour depression field. The proximity of an
area of inferred offshore loss of sand to local hot spots of beach erosion (Figures
A-3 and A-4) suggests that theremay be a linkage between shoreface processes
and beach stability.
The Grand Strand Projects
Although comparable volumes were placed within similar templates atMyrtle

Beach (1.4 x 106m3) and North Myrtle Beach (1.7 x 106m3), the behavior of
the projects in the first two years following construction is significantly different
(Figure A-2). During thefirst 1.5 years, theMyrtle Beach Project lost 33% of the
volume placed within the design template. The North Myrtle Beach fill lost less
than 10 % of the construction volume during the same post-construction period.
The total volume found within theMyrtle Beach project generally stabilized 1.5
years following construction and 76% of the total construction volume was found
within the design template 2.25 years after construction. North Myrtle Beach con
tinued tomaintain an unusually high percentage of the construction volume
3 years following construction (90% remaining), even though an area of relatively
severe historical erosion was included in the northern portion of theNorth Myrtle
Beach project.
As at Folly Beach, regional geophysical data and profile changes from well
below the design template identified large scale movement of sediment seaward
of the design template thatmay explain some of the apparent differences in the
two adjacent projects of similar design. At North Myrtle Beach, 600,000 m3 of
sediment were identified seaward of the design template following completion of
the project (Figure A-2). This volume was in excess of the planned volume for the
project. Much of this volume was found within a series of bars and shoals off the
northern end of the project near Hog Inlet. This offshore volume was observed to
decrease rapidly following the construction (Figure A-2) and may have served to
replace sand lost along shore from the template over the first 2 years. An addi
tional volume of sediment is again observed passing through the area seaward of
the design template in the third year after construction (Figure A-2) that is inter
preted to be related tomodifications within theHog Inlet system. During the same
period the template volume stabilized or increased slightly.The movement of sed
iment from themid-shoreface onshore into the project limits could explain the
unusual durability of theNorth Myrtle Beach project.
At Myrtle Beach, a beach with generally low background erosion rate (Anders,
1990), no significant additional volume of sediment was deposited on the upper
shoreface during the construction of the project. The beach constructed there
experienced an initial adjustment period similar to that observed at Folly Beach.
Figure A-5 shows geophysical evidence for significant offshore transport of sand
from the south-central portion of theMyrtle Beach project (Gayes et al., 2001).
Acoustic surveys completed to delineate nearshore reef habitat identified the
Findsand deposited Re-exposureofRocky

(A)_after nourishment_(B) Outcrops1-YearLater
Rockyoutcropson shoreface Lighttonesrepresent

outcropsand coarse
priortonourishment dark
shellhash; tonesare finesand
(C)
Initial Post Nourishment
Deposition
s
.2
>
Subsequent Deflation1
400 600 800

Distance from BM (m)
Pre-Fill Post-Fill 3 Months 15Months
Figure A-5. (a) pre- and post nourishmentRoxann survey (E2-values) of the shoreface
offMyrtleBeach. Light tones are high reflectivitysubstrate and correspond with rockyout
crops. Dark tones correspond to less reflectivesandy substrate. The pre-survey (1996)
image is shown in the actual location relative to the aerial photograph. The post survey
is placed adjacent to the location to show change. A largewedge of sand isvisible mov
ing intothemid-shoreface followingbeach nourishment, (b) Side scan sonar mosaic of
the same area in 1999 shows thissandy wedge has been removed fromthemid to lower
shoreface and re-emergence of rocky outcrops, (c) Enlargement of mid-to lower shore
face frombeach profile timeseries over same period showing initialdeposition offshore,
followedby losswithin first9 months afterconstruction.Line of beach survey also shown
on a and b.
Dredging 523
movement of a larger lens of sand out onto themid- to lower shoreface during the
period of rapid initial adjustment of the constructed beach (Figure A-5a). Regional
side scan sonar mosaics identify re-exposure of rocky substrate in the same area
two years after construction (Figure A-5b). Long beach profiles also recorded the
influx of sand at the base of the shoreface and subsequent deflation dispersal
(Figure A-5c). Most of the beach profiles along theMyrtle Beach area showed a
progressive seaward deposition from the base of the fill over the two-year period
following construction and this seaward loss may have greatly contributed to the
rapid adjustment of the design template volumes following construction.
Conclusions
Systematic monitoring of several beach nourishment projects using long beach

profiling and geophysical surveys has shown alongshore variation in connectivity
of constructed beaches to the shoreface and innershelf. Such interactionwas iden
tifiedby an unusually broad monitoring design. At two locations, Folly Beach and
Myrtle Beach, evidence for localized cross-shore loss exist in areas that have
experienced lower retention of the constructed beach fill.At one area, North Myrtle
Beach, localized onshore transport of a significant volume place on the shoreface
during construction may explain unusually high retention.
The very differentbehavior of two adjacent beach fills of similar design is com
patible with the differences observed seaward of the design template. Systematic
monitoring of nourishment projects beyond the design template over periods
approaching theplanned renourishment intervalmay provide important context for
evaluating the variability of change observed on the beach. This also provides a
basis formore focused studies of the variation in processes responsible for the
observed response that could greatly aid futuremanagement and prediction.
References
Anders, F. J., Reed, D. W., and Meisburger, E. R, 1990, "Shoreline Movements: Report 2,
Tybee Island, Georgia toCape Fear, North Carolina, 1851-1983," CERC Technical
Report CERC-83-1, Vicksburg,MS, 152 p.
Birkemeier, W. A., Bichner, E. W., Scarborough, B. L., McConathy, M. A. and Eiser,
W. C, 1992, Nearshore Profile Response Caused by Hurricane Hugo," Journal of
Coastal Research, Special Issue no. 8, pp. 113-128.
Danforth,W. W., 1997, "Xsonar/Showlmage: A Complete System forRapid Side-Scan

Sonar Processing andDisplay," U.S. Geological SurveyOpen File Report 97-686, 77 p.
Ebersole, B. A., Neilans, P J. and Dowd, M. W., 1996, "Beach-fill Performance at Folly
Beach, SC (1 year after construction) and Evaluation of Design Methods," Shore and
Beach: V. 64, pp. 11-26.
Gayes, P. T., Baldwin, W., Van Dolah, R. F. Jutte, P., Eiser, W. and Hansen, M., 2001,
"Systematic Coastal Monitoring in South Carolina (USA)," inHansen and Larsen,
(eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Coastal Dynamics, ASCE,
pp. 2118-2136.
Gayes, P. T. and Donovan-Ealy, P., Harris, M. S., and Baldwin, W. 1998, "Assessment of
Beach RenourishmentResources on the Inner ShelfOff Folly Beach and Edisto Island,
South Carolina," Final Report to theMinerals Management Service, Office of
International Activities and Mineral Resources. 38 pp.
Gayes, P. T., 1991, Post-Hurricane Hugo Nearshore Side-Scan Sonar Survey: Myrtle Beach
to Folly Beach, South Carolina, Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue no. 8,
pp. 95-113.
Hayes, M. O., 1979, "Barrier IslandMorphology as a Function ofTidal andWave Regime,"
in S. Leatherman (ed.), Barrier Islands, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 1-26.
Houston, J.R, 1996, "Discussion ofYoung et al., 1995: A discussion of theGeneralized

Model for Simulating Shoreline Change (Genesis)," Journal of Coastal Research,
V. 12,pp. 1038-1043.
Jutte, P. C, Van Dolah, R. E, Levisen, M. V, Donovan-Ealy, P., Gayes, P. T., and Baldwin,
W. E., 1999, "An EnvironmentalMonitoring Study of theMyrtle Beach Renourishment
Project: Physical and Biological Assessment ofOffshore Sand Borrow Sites: Phase I
Cherry Grove Borrow Area," Final Report to theUS Army Corps ofEngineers, SC
Department of Natural Resources, Charleston, SC, 79 p.
National Research Council, 1995,Beach Nourishmentand Protection,Committee on Beach
Nourishment and Protection, Marine Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical
Systems, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

334 p.
Pilkey, O. H., Young, R. S., Thieler, E. R., Jacobs, B. S., Katuna, M. P., Lennon, G., and
Moeller, M. E., 1996, "Replay to Houston, J.R., 1996, Discussion of Young et al., 1995:
A discussion of the Generalized Model for Simulating Shoreline Change
(Genesis)," Journal of Coastal Research, V. 12, pp. 1044-1050
Schwab, W. C, Thieler, E. R., Allen, J. R., Foster, D. S., Swift, B. A., and Denny, J. R,
"Influence of the Inner-ContinentalShelf Geologic Framework on theEvolution and
Behavior of theBarrier-Island System Between Fire Island Inlet and Shinnecock Inlet,
Long Island, New York," Journal of Coastal Research, V. 16, no. 2, pp. 408-422.
Swift, B. A., Paskevich, V. E, Denny, J. E, Cross, V. A., Schwab, W. C, and Gayes, P. T,
1997, "Side Scan-Sonar Image of Inner Shelf Off Folly Beach, SC," U.S. Geological
SurveyOpen File Report 97-298, 10 p.
Thieler, E. R., O. H., Young, R. S., Bush, D. M., and Chai. E, 2000, "The Use of
Pilkey,
Mathematical Models toPredictBeach Behavior forUS Coastal Engineering:A Critical
Review," Journal of Coastal Research, V. 16, no. 1, pp. 48-71.
Thieler, E. R., Gayes, P. T., Schwab, W. C, and Harris, M. S., 1999, "Tracing Sediment
on Nourished Beaches: Two Case Studies," in Kraus, N. C and McDougal,
Dispersal
on Coastal
W. G., (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium Engineering
and Science of Coastal Sediment Processes, ASCE, pp. 2118-2136.
US Army Corps of Engineers, 1991, General Design Memorandum, Folly Beach South
Carolina Shore Protection Project, USACE-Charleston, 97 p.
Dredging 525
Van Dolah, R. R, Digre, B. J., Gayes, R T., Donovan-Ealy, R, and Dowd, M. W., 1998,
"An Evaluation of Physical Recovery Rates in Sand Borrow Sites Used forBeach
Nourishment Projects in South Carolina," Final Report to theMinerals Management
Service, Office of International Activities and Mineral Resources Under agreement No.
14-35-0001-30679, 93 p.
Van Dolah, R. E Martore, R. M., Lynch, A. E., Levisen, M. V, Wendt, P. H., Whitaker,
D. J., and Anderson, W. D., 1994, "Environmental Evaluation of the Folly Beach
NourishmentProject,"Final Report to theUS ArmyCorps ofEngineers, SC Department
of Natural Resources, Charleston, SC, 101 p.

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.

DREDGING AND OFFSHORE TRANSPORT OF MATERIALS

Developments inDredging Technology

Recent developments in dredging technology have included an unsurpassed

Basic Aspects ofDredging Operations

Dredging ismoving material submerged inwater from one place to another in

Dredging for Construction, Reclamation, and Mining

Dredging is an importantway of providing sands and gravels for construction

Dredging forEnvironmental Reasons

"Throughout history, statutory laws have been enacted thatunexpectedly

Dredging can be undertaken to benefit the environment in several ways.

is used inwaterways, lakes, ports, and harbors in highly industrialized or urban

Recent Developments inDredging Equipment and Procedures

A comprehensive review of dredging technology up to year 1990 is

Before Modification AfterModification

Singapore, China, Thailand, Persian Gulf) and in South America (Argentina,

"From the 1970s a trend towards bigger trailing-suction hopper dredgers

Figure 10-2 shows recent years' development of hopper dredgers by Jan de

Other Newcomers to theWorld Dredging Fleet

Figure 10-3. The Lange Wapper, IHC,Holland (PortEngineering, May/June, 1999).

The Lange Wapper features state-of-the-art computer software to integrate all

Some dredging projects have joined hands inmaintenance operations. A recent

"Outfitting is nearing completion for the Port of Brisbane Corporation's

"Royal Boskalis Westminster has ordered two trailing suction hopper

Class Industry Owner U.S. Army Corps District

Large Hopper Long Island NATCO Whealer, New Orleans

Stuyvesant Stuyvesan Essayons

Medium Hopper Columbus B andB

Dodge Island NATCO

Small Hopper Northery Island NATCO

Atchafalaya Gulf Trailing

Expansion of capacity in line with market developments, and

"Designing a vessel such as Rotterdam begins, of course, with the com

Length, o.a. 66.10 m

Length, b.p. 62.30 m

Figure 10-5. Kattouf, heavy-dutycuttersuction dredger (IHC catalogue, 2001).

Hydraulic Pipeline Dredgers?Cutterheads

Countries such as Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, and Scotland have no

1. A repaired cutterhead located in or near the repair shop is standing

"Because cutter repair requiresmuch time and expensive consumables, big

Equipment forNearshore Dredging

The most suitable equipment is the shallow-water hopper dredger, that is

Taccola and Francesco di Giorgio

Hopper capacity 4,400 m3

Dredging draft 7.20 m

Deadweight at 6.5 draft 6,955 t

Figure 10-7. Schematic of water injectiondredger {Dredging and Port Construction,

is no longer an obstruction to navigation, and natural sediment transportprocesses

"The WID vessel belonging to theGulf Coast Trailing Company, named

Underwater Pumps, Crawl Cats and Dogs

"Following is a successful one-day trial, the Sweepax system was further

A similar, but diver-operated pump, theBaracuda, is reported inD&PC (1998).

Equipment forOperation ofDredgers

The equipment to support dredgers includes pumps, dragheads, pipes, hoses,

"As knowledge of designing dredge pumps accumulated over countless

"Each pump offered is based on calculations performed specifically for

Next, the article describes essential improvements including "higher efficiency"

Figure 10-8. Pump forHAM 318 dredger (IHC catalogue, 2001).

"Imtech Marine Industry, togetherwith IHC Systems inwhich itholds a

The D&PC (2000) reports on the operation of dragheads?

appeared that compensation is also possible by rotating the ship several

Pipes and Hoses