Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of degree of
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work described in this thesis has been carried out entirely by me in the
school of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Indian Maritime University, Visakhapatnam
campus and further state that it has not been submitted earlier wholly or in part to any other
University or Institution for the award of any degree or diploma.
SHAILESH SHUKLA
The project has been carried out at Indian Maritime University, Visakhapatnam.
K. Muthuchelvi Thangam
Project Guide
External Guide
Scientist B
SMDR
IMU, VISKHAPATNAM
Place: Visakhapatnam
Date: 06.12.2013
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I thank Almighty GOD for showering his blessings without which all my efforts would
have been in vain. I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude and indebtedness to our Director Sir for
the facilities provided to successfully carry out this project. I sincerely thank my project guide Mrs.
Muthuchelvi Thangam for her encouragement, support and sincere guidance.
Last but not least, I express my sincere thanks to my classmates and friends for their co-operation
and encouragement.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER -1 INTRODUCTION
1.1
PROBLEM DEFINITION
1.2
1.3
PLAN OF WORK
19
25
REFERENCES
31
List of Figures
Figure
Figure no.
Page no.
Site location
1.1
2.1
11
Types of seawall
2.2
11
2.3
12
2.4
13
2.5
14
2.6
15
2.7
15
Overtopping of waves
2.8
16
2.9
17
3.1
24
4.1
25
4.2
25
4.3
26
4.4
26
4.5
27
Modal of seawall
4.6
30
List of Tables
Table content
Table no.
Page no.
Table for KD
3.1
21
Table for K
3.2
22
4.1
29
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION
The Earths climate system is changing. All aspects of the climate are affected, including
temperature, ocean levels and rainfall patterns. The global average temperature is rising, mostly due
to increased greenhouse gas concentrations stemming from use of fossil fuels and land clearing. Sea
level rise creates an issue worldwide as it raises both the mean normal water level and the height of
waves during extreme weather events. Sea level rise increases the risks coastal communities face
from coastal hazards such as floods, storm surge, and chronic erosion. Coastal erosion is already
widespread, and there are many coasts where exceptional high tides or storm surges result in
encroachment on the shore, impinging on human activity. If the sea rises, many coasts that are
developed with infrastructure along or close to the shoreline will be unable to accommodate erosion.
An upside to the strategy is that moving seaward (and upward) can create land of high value which
can bring the investment required to cope with climate change. Sea walls are probably the second
most traditional method used in coastal management.
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVE
The aim of the project is to prevent destruction of property by the sea waves during high tides by the
construction of a seawall. The project involves design of 1550 m long seawall at the area where the
habitat is prone to coastal hazard here in this case is coastline near Alappuzha(Kamalapuram),
Kerala.
CHAPTER 2
INTRODUCTION TO SEA WALLS
2.1 SEA WALLS:
2.1.1 DEFINITION
A seawall is a structure built on the beach parallel to the shoreline. Seawalls can be large or small,
high or low, and constructed of a range of materials including wood, plastic, concrete, rock,
construction rubble, steel, old cars, aluminum, rubber tires, and sandbags.
Rigid
Flexible
Semi-flexible.
2.2.1 RIGID
A rigid seawall could be a gravity wall, sheet piling, a caisson or a concrete revetment. They have a
compact nature with a minimum plan area with the tendency not to harbour rubbish. However, they
can fail by a single large wave, toe erosion (undermining) or geotechnical instability (overturning) catastrophically. Mostly rigid seawalls tend to be highly reflective to incoming waves which can
result in accelerated sand loss in front of the wall during a storm, and delay beach rebuilding
following a storm. To protect the foundations of a rigid seawall from undermining, rock scour
blankets, gabions, etc. can be used. It is also possible to found the structures at depth on non-erodible
materials. However, theres a general tendency away from rigid structures due to their cost and risk
of catastrophic failure.
2.2.2 FLEXIBLE
Flexible seawalls are constructed from quarry rock, shingle and specially manufactured concrete
units. They are not as compact as rigid seawalls but they can withstand striking deformation without
total failure occurring. The failure is progressive rather than catastrophic. Flexible seawalls are also
less reflective than rigid structures. A disadvantage is the tendency to harbour rubbish because of the
broken nature of their surface.
2.2.3 SEMI-FLEXIBLE
A combination of the characteristics of rigid seawalls and flexible seawalls are the semi-flexible
seawalls. They are compact but may not fail as easy as rigid seawalls
10
These walls are usually made from poured concrete and are designed to reduce scour which means
the removal of sediment from around a structure, which weakens it at the base of the wall.
2.3.2 GRAVITY SEAWALLS
Seawalls that rely on heavy materials to give them stability are known as gravity seawalls. Gravity
seawalls are built in areas where strong soil runs right up to the coastline; the seawall is anchored,
using this strong soil as a foundation. These walls are susceptible to shearing around the base, a
process in which internal components of a structure move across each other as a response to stress.
Gravity seawalls usually have extra reinforcement around the base to counteract shearing.
Fig 2.2: Types of seawalls (Source: seawall design construction and performance Gary Blumberg)
11
12
The rubble mound seawall is generally designed to consist of three layers that are core, secondary
layer and an armour layer. A minimum of two layers of stones (units) in the armour and secondary
layer is always necessary. While the thicknesses of these layers are determined by the size of stones
used, the levels including that of the core are determined based on maximum water level, design
wave height, wave run-up, permissible overtopping and method of construction.
13
Fig 2.5: Location of Seawall between High Water & Low Water
14
15
2.4.5 OVERTOPPING
Underestimation of design wave or the maximum water level leads to excessive overtopping of
seawalls and eventual failure particularly when the freeboard is inadequate. Such failures also lead to
the failure of leeside slope and damage to reclamation, if any. This calls for not only proper
estimation of waver un-up and the crest level of the seawall, but for also providing proper filter
between the backfill and the seawall. It is also necessary to provide facilities for drainage of
overtopped water, which otherwise will find its way through seawall itself causing further damage.
There are instances where the reclamation fill in the lee has shown local depressions. Subsurface
fill/soil has been removed in the process of draining of overtopped water. In situations where it is not
possible to raise the level of seawall crest to avoid overtopping, it is advisable to provide a deflector
to throw a part of the overtopping water back to the seaward slope of the seawall. As mentioned
earlier, the leeside fill and the seawall core (or secondary layer) should be sandwiched by an
appropriate filter and adequate drain be provided for safe discharge of overtopped water. However,
some of the seawalls are designed as semi-submerged bunds, which allows overtopping at the higher
Water Levels. A proper care needs to be taken to prevent damage to the crest and the leeside slope
during the design of such seawalls
costlier. The in-place stability of such units is highly precarious and sensitive to small disturbances.
Hence such stones should not be used in rubble mound structures.
Provide for local surface runoff and overtopping runoff and make any required provisions for
other drainage facilities such as culverts and ditches
17
Provide for firm compaction of all fill and back-fill materials. This requirement should be
included on the plans and in the specifications. Also, due allowance for compaction must be
made in the cost estimate
18
CHAPTER 3
DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF SEAWALL
The primary factor influencing the wave conditions at the harbor site is the bathymetry in the
general vicinity of harbor.
Water depth will partly determine whether a structure is subjected to breaking, non-breaking,
or broken waves.
The maximum and minimum water depths at each section must be evaluated taking into
account the tidal range and the storm surge effect.
The most important single factor controlling the design of seawall will be the Design wave.
The design wave must be so chosen that the seawall during its construction and throughout
its intended service life has a sufficiently low probability of failure both in terms of
unacceptable damage and collapse.
Shore protection manual (1984) specifies that H1/10 (average of the highest one-tenth of the
waves) should be used as the design wave height for rubble mound seawall instead of
H1/3(significant wave height) as recommended in earlier editions.
The crest level is very important for the total cost, since the total volume of the seawall is
approximately proportional to the second power of the total height of the seawall.
The crest level should be as low as permitted by the functional requirements and stability of
armor units on crest and the lee side. Reduced crest level would mean overtopping when high
waves and high water levels occur. Whether overtopping will occur or not will depend on the
wave run-up and for rubble slopes.
Side slopes are generally as steep as possible to minimize the volume of core material and to
reduce the reach of cranes working from the crest.
19
However it may be possible to develop a less steep slope if the cranes operate from a barge.
Slopes are typically within the range 1V:1.5H to 1V:3H and influence the amount of
interaction between armor units.
As the angle increases, the contribution to stability from friction and interlocking also
increases due to the squeezing or increase in slope-parallel forces applied by adjacent units.
There is however a corresponding decrease in the slope-perpendicular component of selfweights. This implies optimum slope angles for maximum interaction and stability.
Hudson (1959) considered the stability of an individual armor unit subjected to wave action
and assumed that the disturbing forces could be type of drag and lift caused by the wave
motion which tends to move the armor unit.
The stabilizing forces were considered to be mainly the submerged weight of each unit.
aH 3
W
K
SG 1
D
cot
20
B nK W
a
1/3
B = Crest width
n = number of stones or armor units (n=3 is recommended).
K = layer coefficient.
W = weight of primary armor unit.
a =
21
r nK W
a
r
1/3
The purpose of the secondary core layer is to prevent core material from being washed out
through the voids of the primary armor layer and at the same time provide a good foundation
for the heavier units of the primary armor layer.
22
The secondary cover layer also should act as a temporary protection to the core before
primary armor is laid.
Shore protection manual recommends the stone sizes in the secondary layers to be W/10 to
W/15 and a minimum thickness corresponding to two stone layers.
3.9 CORE:
The purpose of the core is following:
To form a substantial portion of the total volume of the rubble mound seawall in order to
utilize the quarry run which is available as a byproduct of the quarrying for secondary and
primary armor stones.
To provide a satisfactory foundation for the secondary and primary armor layers, and for any
cap stone or cap wall on top.
To form a suitable working platform from which the secondary and primary armor layers can
be constructed.
The weight of core will vary from W/100 to W/400. A highly impermeable core may prevent
wave transmission through the structure but because of pore pressure build up, is likely to
have an adverse effect on the stability of the cover layers.
The influence of core permeability on the wave transmission and stability suggest that a
densely packed but fairly permeable core, a limit may be specified on the minimum size of
the material to be used. This is also necessary to avoid wash out of core material.
The armor units in the cover layer should be extended down slope to an elevation below
minimum still water level equal to the design wave height.
Seawalls exposed to breaking waves should have their primary cover layers supported by a
quarry stone berm.
The quarry stone in the toe berm should be of weight W/10 to W/15. The width of the toe
berm must be such as to hold at least three stones and thickness must be such as to have two
stone layers. The toe berm is generally intended to provide safety against foundation failure
and hydraulic stability of the structure.
23
Wave action against rubble mound seawalls creates enough turbulence within the structure
and in the underlying sea bed that may result in sucking of soil into the structure. This may
cause settlement of structure.
Geotextiles filters may also be used. In case of clays and silts, it will be necessary to provide
a coarse sand layer first before placing the filter blanket or bedding layer.
The bedding layers must extend well beyond the toe of the structure.
Fig: 3.1: Seawall layout (Source: CWPRS Technical Memoranda for Seawall)
24
CHAPTER 4
DESIGN OF RUBBLE MOUND SEAWALL
4.1.1 Length and location of Seawall
Fig 4.4: Significant wave height (Source: Panoply software data analysis)
The wave height obtained is 1.524 m. The significant wave height is obtained by analyzing
cumulative data from 2003 to 2013.
26
Wave Period:
Fig 4.5: Mean Wave Period (Source: Panoply software data analysis)
The mean wave period is 7 sec. The wave is determining by analyzing data from 2003 to 2013.
3.224 m
7.468 sec
2.65 t/m3
Structure slope
1 in 1.5
Shape
Symmetrical
27
aH 3
W
K
SG 1
D
cot
KD
2.65 t/ m3
1.025 t/m3
1 in 1.5
Cot
1.5
2.524 m
W = 3.56 T
Crest width:
Minimum crest width should equal the combined width of 3 armor units.
n (number of armor units) = 3
B nK W
a
1/3
B = 3.31 m
r nK W
a
n=2
Armor layer thickness (r) = 2.2068 m
28
1/3
Height of the structure = Thickness of Armour layer + Thickness of Under layer + Depth of Toe
berm + Thickness of Bedding layer
= 2.2068 + 2.2068 + 1.2896 + 1
= 6.7 m
Table 4.1: Table for Total weight of the structure
2
NAME OF
LAYER
AREA ( M )
UNIT WEIGHT
(T)
LENGTH (M)
Armour Layer
Under Layer
Core Layer
Toe Berm
Filter Layer
33.0131
20.6802
6.3770
2*3.9345 = 7.869
30
3.56
0.356
0.0356
0.356
0.00356
1550
1550
1550
1550
1550
29
TOTAL WEIGHT
(T)
(AREA*WT*L)
182,166.286
11,411.334
351.88
4342.114
165.54
Reference:
Technical memorandum on guidelines for design and construction of seawalls, May, 2010,
Central Water & Power Research Station, Pune.
Design of Coastal Revetments,Seawalls, and Bulkheads, EM 1110-2-1614
Evaluating theCondition of Seawalls/Bulkheads -Coastal Systems International, Inc.
31