Optimization of beach profile spacing: an applicable tool for coastal monitoring

  1. JUAN JOSÉ MUÑOZ-PEREZ 1
  2. ANDRÉS PAYO 2
  3. JORGE ROMAN-SIERRA 1
  4. MARINA NAVARRO 1
  5. LUÍS MORENO 3
  1. 1 Applied Physics Dept., University of Cadiz, Pol. Rio San Pedro s/n, 11510 Puerto Real, Cadiz, Spain.
  2. 2 Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, 860-8555, Japan
  3. 3 Coastal Engineering Division, Intecsa-Inarsa S.A., Santa Leonor 32, 28037 Madrid, Spain.
Show affiliations +
Journal:
Scientia Marina

ISSN: 0214-8358

Year of publication: 2012

Volume: 76

Issue: 4

Pages: 791-798

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Scientia Marina

Abstract

This paper presents a simplified and straightforward method for determining optimal beach profile spacing from an economic point of view with an admissible error. This error can be computed theoretically by comparing different profile spacings from two consecutive bathymetries. When a beach sediment budget (from previous monitoring surveys) or the volume density of a beach nourishment project is known, a virtual bathymetry can be designed; therefore, a unique real bathymetry would be needed. The method is applied and analysed for beaches with different characteristics regarding tide, energy, morphology and natural features. The results indicate that the estimated errors are proportional to a beach heterogeneity factor, depending on each particular beach case, such that large spacings do not necessarily induce large errors. In our case, profile spacings of 100 m induce average errors of less than 5%. Moreover, differences in tidal range and the existence of rocky reefs do not seem to affect the results.

Bibliographic References

  • Aarninkhof S., Holman R. 1999. Argus video-based monitoring of the nearshore zone: a tool for both nearshore science and coastal zone management. Backscatter 10(2): 8-11.
  • Bernstein D.J., Freeman C., Forte M.F., Park J-Y, Gayes P.T., Mitasova H. 2003. Proceedings Coastal Sediments 03, Tampa, Florida, May 2003.
  • Birkermeier W. 1985. Field data on seaward limit of profile change. J. Waterway, Port, Coast. Ocean Eng. 111(3): 598-602.
  • Browder A.E., Dean R.G. 2000. Monitoring and comparison to predictive models of the Perdido Key beach nourishment project, Fl., USA. Coast. Eng. 39, 173-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3839(99)00057-5
  • Dean R.G. 2002. Beach nourishment: theory and practice. World Scientific Pub. Co. New Jersey, USA. Adv. Ser. Ocean Eng. 18: 399 pp.
  • Ferreira O., Garcia T., Matias A., Taborda R., Dias J.A. 2006. An integrated method for the determination of set-back lines for coastal erosion hazards on sandy shores. Cont. Shelf. Res. 26: 1030-1044. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2005.12.016
  • Garnier R., Ortega-Sanchez M., Losada M.A., Falques A., Dodd N. 2010. Beach cusps and inner surf zone processes: growth or destruction? A case study of Trafalgar Beach (Cádiz, Spain). Sci. Mar. 74(3): 539-553. http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/scimar.2010.74n3539
  • Grosskopf W.G., Kraus N. 1993. Guidelines for surveying beach nourishment projects. Technical Note, CETN II-31. U.S. Army Engineering Water Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, 12 pp.
  • Hallermeier R.J. 1981. Seaward limit of significant sand transport by waves: An annual zonation for seasonal profiles. Coastal Engineering Technical Aid CETA 81-2. Fort Belvoir, Coastal Engineering Research Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
  • Hanson H. 1989. GENESIS: a generalized shoreline change numerical model. J. Coast. Res. 5(1): 1-27.
  • Hanson H., Brampton A., Capobianco M., Dette H.H., Hamm L., Laustrup C., Lechuga A., Spanhoff R. 2002. Beach nourishment projects, practices, and objectives – a European overview. Coast. Eng. 47(I.2): 81-111.
  • Holman R.A., Stanley J. 2007. The history and technical capabilities of Argus. Coast. Eng. 54(6-7): 477-491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2007.01.003
  • IHO 1998. Standards for Hydrographic Surveys. Special Publication No. 44. Pub. Internacional Hydrographic Organization. Monaco.
  • Irish J.L., White T.E. 1998. Coastal Engineering applications of high-resolution lidar bathymetry. Coast. Eng. 35: 47-71 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3839(98)00022-2
  • Jimenez J.A., Sanchez-Arcilla A. 1993. Medium-term coastal response at the Ebro delta, Spain. Mar. Geol. 114(1-2): 105-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(93)90042-T
  • Jimenez J.A., Sanchez-Arcilla A., Bou J., Ortiz M.A. 1997. Analysing short-term shoreline changes along the Ebro Delta (Spain) using aerial photographs. J. Coast. Res. 13(4): 1256-1266.
  • Lippmann T.C., Holman R.A. 1990. The spatial and temporal variability of sand bar morphology. J. Geophys. Res. 95 (C7): 11575-11590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/JC095iC07p11575
  • Menezes J.T., Klein A.H.F. 2006. Morphology and Sedimentary Characterization of a Nourishment Project at Navegantes Beach. J. Coast. Res. SI 39: 869-871.
  • Micallef A., Williams A.T. 2002. Theoretical strategy considerations for beach management. Ocean Coast. Manage. 45: 261-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0964-5691(02)00058-3
  • Moreno L., Tamayo O., Mey J., Martin L., Garcia A., Fernandez M, Fernandez A., Gomez J.A., Diaz J., Tobin D. 2007. Sistema de levantamiento cartográfico y geomorfológico aerotransportado. IX Jornadas Ingeniería de Costas y Puertos. San Sebastián, Spain.
  • Muñoz-Perez JJ, Tejedor L., Medina R. 1999. Equilibrium beach profile model for reef protected beaches. J. Coast. Res. 15(4): 950-957.
  • Muñoz-Perez J.J., Lopez B., Gutierrez-Mas J.M., Moreno L., Cuena G.J. 2001a. Cost of Beach Maintenance in the Gulf of Cadiz (SW Spain). Coast. Eng. 42: 43-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3839(00)00054-5
  • Muñoz-Perez J.J., Medina R., Tejedor B. 2001b. Evolution of longshore beach contour lines determined by E.O.F. method. Sci. Mar., 65(4): 393-402.
  • Muñoz-Perez J.J., Medina R. 2010. Comparison of long-, medium- and short-term variations of beach profiles with and without submerged geological control. Coast. Eng. 57: 241-251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2009.09.011
  • Navarro M., Muñoz-Pérez J.J., Román-Sierra J., Tsoar H., Rodríguez I., Gómez-Pina G. 2011. Assessment of highly active dune mobility in the medium, short and very short term. Geomorphology 129(1-2): 14-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.01.009
  • NOS 1980. Hydrographic Manual. National Ocean Service, U.S. Government, Printing Office. Washington, D.C.
  • Plant N.G., Holland K.T., Puleo J.A. 2002. Analysis of the scale of errors in nearshore bathymetric data. Mar. Geol. 191: 71-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(02)00497-8
  • Rogers S.M. 2000. Beach Nourishment for Hurricane Protection: North Carolina Project Performance in Hurricanes Dennis and Floyd. American Shore and Beach Preservatio Association, National Beach Preservation Conf. Aug. 7-10, 2000. 4 pp.
  • Stauble D.K., Garcia A.W., Kraus N.C., Grosskopf W.G., Bass G.P. 1993. Beach Nourishment Project Response and Design Evaluation: Ocean City, Maryland. Technical Report CERC-93-13. Coastal Engineering Program, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
  • Swales A. 2002. Geostatistical application of short-term changes in beach morphology and sand budget. J. Coast. Res. 18 (2): 338-351.
  • USACE 2002. Engineering and Design, Hydrographic Surveying. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Manual No. 1110-2-1003
  • Wise R.A. 1995. Recommended base-level physical monitoring of beach fills. CETN II-35. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Coast. Eng. Research Center. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
  • Wright L.D., Short A.D. 1984. Morphodynamic variability of surf zones and beaches: A synthesis. Mar. Geol. 56(1-4): 93-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(84)90008-2
Data source: Dialnet