Coastal Engineering, 11 (1987) 263-282

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - - Printed in The Netherlands

263

Laboratory Studies of B r e a k i n g Wave Forces Acting on Vertical Cylinders in Shallow Water

C.J. APELT and J. PIOREWICZ

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Qld. 4067, Australia
(Received June 16, 1986; revised and accepted February 11, 1987)

ABSTRACT Apelt, C.J. and Piorewicz, J., 1987. Laboratory studies of breaking wave forcesacting on vertical cylindersin shallow water. CoastalEng., 11: 263-232. In some locations,the best way to create a deep water port is to construct on off-shore berth which is joined to the land by a jetty. Such jettiesare usually supported on piles and these are often subjected to breaking waves. Dimensional analysisindicatesthat for smooth circularcylinders the totalwave forces and the moments from depth limited waves may be calculated as functions of parameters which, except for Re, can be measured directly [F, M = f ( d/Lo, HolLo, D/Ho, S, Re) ].Since the m R x i m u m force isexperienced at a definitelocation,the parameter d/Lo is implied in the parameters S and HolLo. The investigationsreported in this paper were based on hydraulic model testswith regular waves and present the magnitudes of the relativebreaking wave force and moment in the breaking wave zone as functions of these parameters. From the results of experiments with two cylinder diameters, D--0.102 and 0.153 m, carried out in three differentwave channels, empirical formulae for force and moment have been established with the deep water wave steepness, HolLo, and the relative cylinder diameter, D/Ho as independent variables.These apply to specificbottom slope of S = 1:15. The experimental range compares to drag dominated condition and a Reynolds number range 0.6 10s < R e < 2.7 10 s within which the drag coefficientis almost constant.

INTRODUCTION

The widespread use of pile-supported coastal and offshore structures makes the interaction of waves on piles in the breaking zone of significant practical importance. The basic problem is to predict forces on a pile due to the waveassociated flow field. Wave induced flows are complex, even in the absence of a structure, and prediction of wave forces on a pile must make use of empirical coefficients to augment the theoretical formulation of the problem. The most widely used approach to the calculation of wave forces on a rigid body is based on the assumption that the wave force can be expressed as the sum of a drag
0378-3839/87/$03.50 1987 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

264

force and an inertia force. Morison was the first to suggest the mathematical form for this approach. There is extensive literature (Hogben et al., 1977) on wave forces experienced by vertical circular cylinders which pierce the free surface and are in the region of nonbreaking waves. However, to the authors' knowledge, only a few publications deal with breaking wave forces on a vertical cylinder (Hall, 1958; Goda et al., 1966; Honda and Mitsuyasu, 1974; Apelt and Baddiley, 1981; Wiegel, 1982; Ochi and Chen Han Tsai, 1984; Sawaragi and Nochino, 1984; Kjeldsen and Akre, 1985). This paper presents the results of experiments carried out with cylinders situated in the breaking zone and in the offshore zone close to the breaking point. The experiments were carried out for two cylinder diameters and in three different wave channels.
APPROACH TO T H E FORCE DESCRIPTION The wave force experienced by a vertical cylinder is essentiallyhorizontal and it can be calculated from the general form of Morison's equation:

[: P CD D ulu] + p ~ --~-Ci --~

D2

du

(1)

where f is the force per unit length on a cylinder of diameter D, u is the horizontal component of the water particle velocity and # is the density of water. Several studies have shown that the mathematical form of this equation is satisfactory, but a particular difficulty in using it in the design of offshore structures has been the choice from a wide range of published values of the empirical drag and inertia coefficients, CD, C~appropriate to both the structure and its design sea state. There is a wide scatter in published values of CD and CI and consequently the average values suggested by CERC (1977) are seen as the best estimates available in a situation of considerable uncertainty. CERC (1977) in its recommendation for calculation of total (depth integrated) forces due to depth limited breaking waves refers to Hall's experiments and presents formulae for the total maximum horizontal force F and moment, M, as:

F~I.5pgD H~ M~_FHb

(2) (3)

where Hb is the breaking wave height. From this itisproposed that Morison's formula could be used for calculation of breaking wave forces using the drag coefficient (CD) b for breaking conditions, (CD ) = 2.5 CD. It should be noted that eqn. (2 ) was derived from experb iments on bed slope 1:10.

265

Fig. 1. Regionsof methods of b~aking waveforcecalculation (m~;erWiegel, (1982): 1=region of Morison'sformula;2 = regionof impact force. Wiegel (1982) proposed the following approach for calculation of the force due to breaking waves on a vertical circular cylinder (Fig. 1 ): (a) calculate the horizontal component of the slowly varying wave-induced force using the Morison equation (1) over the depth:

O<y<Yb --~.~
where y is the vertical coordinate measured from the bottom; Yb =db + r/b is the distance from the bottom to the crest of the breaking wave; ~/b is the height of the crest of the breaking wave about the still water level; is the curling factor. (b) calculate the impact force on the part of the pile that is affected by the vertical or nearly vertical portion of the breaking wave, 2r/b, as:

fs= CD DU~b= l.25CD pg D Hb P

(4)

where CD, the impact drag coefficient, = ~ as the cylinder is first immersed, after which it decreases rapidly; D is the diameter of the pile; Ub = 1.12 ~ is the velocity at which the breaking wave crest moves; Is is the impact force per unit length of the pile subject to this force. Wiegel referred to Goda et al. (1966) and proposes the values A<0.1 for spilling breakers and A> 0.5 for plunging breakers. The recent investigations of Sawaragi and Nochino (1984) on the impact forces show that the maximum curling factor, 2, can be as high as 0.9 for plunging breakers at a distance 0.06 L shorewards from the breaking point, where L is the wave length at the depth in front of the cylinder. The curling factor, A, varies significantly with both breaker index and location and the approach summarised above has not permitted any general formulation to be developed for practical use in design. None of the studies examined the question of scale effects. The wave crest elevation, ~/b, based on Wiegel's field data ranges from 0.55 to 0.95 Hb. Seelig and Ahrens (1983) present more details and formulate an equation to calculate the ~/bvalue.

266

The C E R C recommendation for the impact force per unit length of pile near the breaker crest is similarto eqn. (4):

/s =0.5 (CD) b pgDHb~l.25 CDpgDHb

(5)

where CD varies with Reynolds Number (0.7 _<CD < 1.2 ). This theoretically correct approach can lead to different results in particular applications because of uncertainties in estimation of the length of cylinder which is affected by impact forces and because of difficulties in estimation of the vertical distribution of velocity and acceleration in the breaking wave. Honda and Mitsuyasa (1974) considered the influence of the deep water wave steepness Ho/Lo as well as beach slope, S, on the maximum value of the breaking wave force. They presented the following empirical equations:

[F/(pg D Ho2)] ma~=0.18 (Ho/Lo) -o.s5 for S = 1:15 [F/(pg D H2o)]~x =0.30 (Ho/Lo) -0.55 for S = I : 1 0

(6) (7)

The water depth, d, where the maximum force occurs can be found from the relation:

d/Ho = (0.92-5.3S)(Ho/Lo)-0.25

(8)

All relations presented above are based on experimental work and apply to situations where drag forces dominate inertial forces. They illustrate the need for practical formulae for use in design. Such formulae should take account of all relevant parameters. Since there is no theoretical solution available, dimensional analysis must be used to indicate the functional relations between forces and moments and relevant parameters. Such analysis indicates that for a vertical smooth circular cylinder in depth-limited waves:

F=
and

pgDH2o
M

=f( d/Lo, Ho/Lo, D/Ho, S, Re)

(9)

M - p g D H2od-f(d/Lo, Ho/Lo, D/Ho, S, Re)

(10)

F is designated as "relative" force and M as "relative" moment. Equations (9) and (10) indicate that, in addition to the relative depth, d/Lo, deep water wave steepness, Ho/Lo, and Reynolds Number, Re, which involve hydrodynamic coefficients, the bottom slope, S, and the relative cylinder diameter, D/Ho, should be considered as independend parameters. D/Ho is a Keulegan-Carpenter (KC) number type of parameter. ( KC- u~,,T/D, where u ~ is the horizontal max. particle velocity and T the wave period). Within a range of Re where CD is constant the use of eqns. (9) and (10) allows the wave force and moment to be calculated from parameters which can be measured directly

267
H/d 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.. c 04 0.3 0~, 01

breaking waves ~

H, L = wave parameters d : wafer depth wavecontinuity

solitary

z,

10

12

1/*

16

18

20

L ..~d

Fig. 2. Areas of wave theory validity (after Druet, 1968).

without explicit calculation of fluid velocity and acceleration as is necessary if Morison's formula is used. WAVECONDITIONS

Wave theory
Wave conditions for regular waves are characterised by the relative wave height, Hid and relative length, Lid. The validity of various wave theories is limited to different ranges of these parameters as shown in Fig. 2, adopted from Druet (1968). This indicates that linear theory cannot be used in shallow water close to the breaking zone. In this zone other theories, such as for example higher-order stream function theory, should be used. Nevertheless, sinusoidal theory is frequently used beyond the range of its validity because of its simplicity.

Wave transformation
When the local wave parameters are to be related to the deep water wave parameters, Ho,Lo and bottom topography, a transformation process is required. Previous experiments have indicated that transformation by sinusoidal wave theory is not valid for relative depth d/Lo < 0.1. In that case, cnoidal wave theory including the influence of wave steepness, HolLo, gives more realistic results for transformation. Iwagaki et al. (1982) have developed simple approximate expressions which replace the relatively complex calculations associated with exact cnoidal theory, as follows:

H/Ho :Ks =K~o+0.0015 (d/Lo) -2.8 (Ho/Lo)l.2

(11)

268

where K,o is the shoaling coefficient given by: 2kd

K , = ( I ~ sin-h2kd)tanh kd
in which k is the wave number = 2~z/L.

(12)

Breaking waves
The breaking point is an intermediate point in the breaking process between the first stage of instability and the area of complete breaking. Therefore, the depth that indicates breaking directly against a structure is actually some distance seawards of the structure and not necessarily the depth at the toe of the structure. No theory is available to describe the process of wave-breaking on a sloping bottom nor the initiation of breaking. However, a wave theory which is applicable in the region just before breaking can be combined with an empirical breaking criterion to determine the wave parameters at breaking. The empirical formula of le M~haute and Koh (1967) was used in our analysis since it fits well with our experimental conditions. The wave height at breaking, Hb, is related to the beach slope, S, and deep Water wave steepness by;

Hb/Ho =0.76 S 1/v (HolLo) -1/4

with validity in the ranges: 0.002 <Ho/Lo <0.09 and 1 / 5 0 < S < 1/5

(13)

To estimate the breaking depth, db, the empirical expression of Singamsetti and Wind (1980) was used:

Hb/db =0.937 S '155 (HolLo) -o.lao

with validity in the ranges: 0.02 < Ho/Lo < 0.06 and 1/40 < S < 1/5

(14)

The type of breaker is indicated by the magnitude of the surf similarity parameter, ~, presented by Chue (1983) as:

~=S (HolLo)-o.4
~= spilling 0.330 1.363 2.282 I plunging ] collapsing I surging

(15)

Breaking waves travel a significant horizontal distance during the breaking process. Thus, it is possible for a higher wave to begin breaking offshore and still strike a structure while breaking. Galvin (1969), considering plunging type of breaking, described the breaker travel distance as consisting of the plunge distance, Xp, and the splash distance, X~:

269

Xp~-X~ = ( 4 - 9 . 2 5 S)Hb

(16)

Other experiments (e.g., Nguyen, 1983; Singamsetti and Wind, 1980) measured plunging distances which were much larger than those given by eqn. {16), sometimes by a factor of 2.7, with wide scatter of results. EXPERIMENTS

Aim of investigation
Previous studies reported by Apelt and Baddiley (1981) had shown that the forces and moments experienced by a cylinder in breaking waves are much larger than had been predicted by the existing formulae, The breaking process itself is considerably variable for the same incident conditions and the forces and moments generated in breaking waves are variable. The experiments described here were carried out to determine the statistical nature of this variation and to extend the range of parameters covered by the earlier experiments.

Experimental conditions
The cylinder diameter, D, was limited to be < 0.20 L. The cylinder pierced the water surface. The beach slope was mooth, uniform and impermeable. Regular incident waves were used in all cases. The ranges of parameters covered in the experiments are: cylinder diameter, D = 102 and 153 ram; bottom slope, S = 1:15; depth at toe of slope, d= 350 and 700 mm; wave period, T = 0.8 to 2.5 s; deep water wave steepness, Ho/Lo = 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.05; Reynolds Number Re = 0.6 to 1.5 105 for D = 102 m m and Re = 1.1 to 2.7 105 for D = 153 mm, where Re is calculated with the horizontal wave velocity near the still water level.

The model
The model cylinders were made from smooth circular aluminium tube. They were attached to two unbonded force tranducers (Ether Ltd type UF2 with range + 90N) which were fixed to a vertical steel arm, supported by a heavy steel channel frame which spanned across the wave channel (Fig. 3). The frame could be moved along the wave channel and fixed at selected points. E n d effects at the bottom of the cylinder were eliminated without causing any restriction on the movement of the cylinder. To achieve this a thin disc of the

270
sfee( arm

cidr y e~ n
~[

F[

stee[ channel frame

wave generafor

wave gauges.._..~

~"~"[

II

Fig. 3. Diagramof modelset-up. same diameter as the cylinder was fixed to the bottom of the vertical support arm and the small gap between the disc and the cylinder was sealed by a thin membrane of rubber. One force transducer was located above SWL and the other 35 m m above the bottom. Breaking wave forces are impulsive in nature and the combination of small mass and large stiffness in the force measuring system is essential if it is to respond accurately to the rapidly increasing wave force. Typical rise times to the maximum force in breaking waves are of order 10 ms ( see Fig. 5). Very high frequency response is required in the measuring system in order to measure the forces with sufficient accuracy. The system described above has two degrees of freedom. The natural frequencies of vibration measured with the cylinder in a typical still water depth were approximately 100 Hz in the translation mode and 20 Hz in the rotation mode. The impulsive breaking wave force is applied with a frequency corresponding to the wave period. This frequency ranged from 0.4 to 1.2 Hz in these tests and there was no danger of resonance developing between the periodic force and the response of the force measuring system. Rather, the question is how well the response of the force measuring system represents the applied impulse and to what extent the inertia and flexibility of the system modifies the response. The models used in these experiments were similar in characteristics to those used by Apelt and Baddiley (1981). They formulated a mathematical model of the system to determine the relationship between the maximum impulsive force applied to the cylinder and the indicated force, as given by the response of the force transducers, and integrated the differential equations numerically. The best estimate of rise times from the experiments is 10 ms but it appears that it can vary from 8 to 12 ms. When the rise time of the impulse function was varied over this range the mathematical model showed that the ratio of peak response to peak applied force varied from 1.19 to 0.91 in the case of a parabolic shape of impulse and from 1.21 to 0.88 in the case of a triangular shape of impulse. These values were obtained with no damping since other calculations showed that the small damping present reduced the peak response by about one per cent. This analysis has not been done for the current exper-

271 TABLE 1 Wave channels used for experiments Channel Length Width Depth Reflection coefficient

(m)
A B C 15 26 50

(m)
3.00 0.90 2.13

(m)
0.5 0.6 3.9

(%)
3.7 to 6.7 5.9 to 13.2 6.0 to 14.6

iments since the system used has a transfer function essentially similar to that used by Apelt and Baddiley. In view of the uncertainty concerning the exact shape and rise time of the impulse function in each specific wave impact, it was decided that there was little to be gained by adjusting the recorded signal from the force measuring system for dynamic response effects. Consequently, the results presented in this report are the unadjusted values. It is noted that the results of Honda and Mitsuyasu (1974) are also unadjusted. The uncertainty in the case of the current results is of order 15%. The wave channels The experiments were carried out in three different wave channels with dimensions given in Table 1. To reduce reflection, the upper part of the slopes was covered with gravel absorbers. The measured reflection coefficients are given in Table 1. Experimental procedure For the experiments in channels A and B the magnitude of forces and wave heights were measured and recorded at 1000 Hz frequency by a data acquisition system based on a PDP 11/34 computer. In the case of channel C wave heights were recorded on a pen recorder and forces on a recording oscillograph. The initial wave height was measured in the constant depth (d = 350 mm in channels A and B; d= 700 mm in channel C ). For each deep water wave steepness, HolLo, five different wave heights were selected in the range of D/Ho = 0.5 to 2.5. The force measuring system was calibrated in place at the beginning and end of each set of experiments by means of hanging weights and pulleys. For each test condition, the wave force on the cylinder was measured at a series of positions beginning offshore from the breaking point and moving progressively shorewards through the zone of breaking waves. At each position, the force produced by up to 100 successive waves was recorded. From statistical analysis,

272 the magnitudes of forces with the same probability of exceedance were estimated.

Error in experiments
Systematic error was avoided by using two different methods of recording: one with data acquisition done by computer and the other with pen and oscillograph recorders, and by repeating the experiments in different channels. Since the results obtained in all cases were similar, systematic error can be neglected. To analyse the random error the following accuracy of measurement was obtained: wave height and depth +_0.5 mm; wave period + 0.01 s; force 0.5N ( as a result of noise in transmission line to the computer). Thus the deep water wave height, Ho, and relative force, F, were calculated with maximum probable error of order of 5%. In the case of estimation of the relative force with 1% probability of exceedance, the standard deviation of the plotted data points about the best fit probability distribution, a<0.10 for the majority of experiments. RESULTS

Wave forces offshore from the breaking zone

Measurements were made offshore to a depth 4 Ho. The largest force recorded in up to 100 successive waves was compared with that evaluated from Morison's equation. The maximum value of the Reynolds Number near the breaking zone, calculated with the horizontal wave velocity near the stillwater level was Re < 1.5 105 for cylinder D = 0.102 and Re < 2.6 105 for cylinder D = 0.153
m.

For comparison with the measured results, the hydrodynamics coefficients CD= 1.2, and C~= 2.0 were adopted and wave velocities and accelerations were calculated with wave theories using the measured wave height and period. Experimental results and calculated values are compared in Fig. 4. They indicate that sinusoidal theory generally underestimates the forces while cnoidal theory overestimates them. Also Honda and Mitsuyasu (1974) showed that, close to the breaking zone, the forces increased much more rapidly than predicted by linear theory. They concluded that the differences are significant for a relative depth d/Ho < 6. However, their measurements were restricted to relative diameter of cylinder, D/Ho = 0.48. The results in Fig. 4 show that these differences decrease when D/Ho increases. The differences also decrease as deep water wave steepness, Ho/Lo, increases. It should be remembered, of course, that Morison's formula involves the hydrodynamic coefficients, selection of which is still somewhat arbitrary. The values of the coefficients, CD, C~, are not known accurately. For consis-

273

6.0
5.0 .0 ~. 3.0 2.0 1.0
J = I

60 HolLo = 0.01 O/Ho = 2.0 o exp 112A ~oidal theory ~ exp 112B exp 21/*B / . . 50

~ ~, o o' \

~.o
=. 3.0 2.0 1.0

%
~p x x

~//~
// / ~ / o

HolLo=0.02 /cnoidal f h e ~ D/Ho =2.0

a exp 122B ~ exp 225R ,~ e~p 22/,,E

-

o~plZ~A

/ o~"~ '~''~,~ ~ .................... 05

-~-

0
6"01 50 .0 u.. 3.0 I]:= I,

2'0

30

50
Ho/Lo = 0.03 ) O/Ho = 2.0

d/Ho

O.u. 00..,

'

; !5 J'2.0

'

3.5 /*0

'

' 5 5 .'0 d,.o

U~
le o~l\
fl/

~,~ ~
/ ..........
"

oexp132A
exp235C

z~ expl:33B

o.xp23

20
1.0
O0 0.0 J

o~
'

05

10

15

Z0

25

30

3.5 0

/~5 5.0

Fig. 4. Waveforce vs. relative depth. Resultsof calculationsand measurements. tency, their values should be those derived from the wave theory with which they are being used. Unfortunately, however, there are no generally applicable values of CD, CI derived for use with cnoidal theory and the values used in all of these calculations are those which have been developed for sinusoidal wave theory. This could explain some of the differences between the results obtained for wave forces using cnoidal and sinusoidal theories with the same values of CD and CI. Wave forces in the breaking zone No theory is available for predicting wave forces in the breaking zone and only empirical formulae can be used. For these experiments, the Reynolds Number in the breaking zone, calculated with the velocity u = v/g db, was in the range (0.6 to 1.7) X105 for D = 1 0 2 mm and (1.2 to 2.7) 1 0 b for D = 1 5 3 mm. The objective in these experiments was to determine the peak value of the breaking wave force. Up to 100 successive peak wave forces were recorded in each experiment. To illustrate the differences between non-breaking and breaking wave forces the sample records at one wave period, T, recorded with sampling frequency 1000 Hz are presented in Fig. 5 and their characteristics are shown in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 2, in each experiment the peak magnitude of the force measured at the location where the greatest force was experienced varied considerably from one wave to the next. This typical stochastic variation

5.0
~,.0 t,. 2,0 1.0 0.0
O0

/madal ~

o exp 151A ,~ exp 152B exp 2538 x exp 255{:

d/Ho

' 05

1.0

' 15 2.0

J ~ ~ ~ ' d/H o 25 3.0 3.5 0 45 5.0

274

FT ,N 1/* 12 10 (a)

FT,N 1/+ 12 10 (b)

ILo = 0,01 = 0.066m

8 61

8
6

2 0 -2 -4.
-6 , z , i ,

2 0 -2

J
' ~L,'

10

12 fxlOO,ms

1/*

fxlOO,ms
FT,N

~,N (al

(b) 5 Ho/L o = 0,05

-1

-1

-3

-3

-5

'

'

'

1'.

'

1'6

-s

I;

12
t"xlOO,ms

I~

16

'l" x lO0,ms

Fig. 5, Record of the totalwave force offshore from the breaking zone and in the breaking zone.

required use of statisticalanalysisto determine whether the resultsof experiments could be combined into some "universal" populations. The standard deviation of the universal population is denoted ao and that of the resultsof one experiment is a. It was assumed that the standard deviations of the results of each experiment, a, were distributed about ~o as the mean, with standard deviation equal to ~o/~/~-n, where n is the number of samples in the experiment. Then, applying the two-tailtest,the resultsof each experiment can be taken to belong to the universal population with standard

275 TABLE 2 Variation of measuredforces Waveparameters

T [s] Ho [m] go/Lo

Distance fromthe Peakforcein [N] among100 point of successivewaves maximum force Fmi, Fme~ Fm~,, 0 10 Ho 0 5 Ho 12.00 4.27 4.14 1.87 13.72 4.57 5.64 2.18 18.10 5.09 7.99 2.68

Example Remarks Fig. 5 F~, [N] 15.68 4.66 6.62 2.15 Plunging breaker Spilling breaker

2.11 0.066 0.01 0.94 0.066 0.05

deviation ao with a confidence interval 0.95, i.e. 95% probability, provided a satisfies the inequalities: ao ( 1 - 1 . 9 6 / x / ~ ) < a < a o (1+1.96/x/~) (17)

Use of this test indicated whether the results from different experiments could be grouped into a single distribution. It also made it possible to determine whether different facilities or cylinder diameters have significant influence on the results. The results of all experiments with the same wave steepness were assessed by this test. The standard deviation of the results of each experiment was compared with those of all other experiments with the same wave steepness and the experiments were grouped into populations on this basis. The results in each population so obtained were then plotted on probability paper in order to determine the magnitudes of breaking wave forces and moments with 1% probability of exceedance. This is illustrated in Fig. 6 which contains log-normal probability plots for HolLo = 0.01 in which, from a total 19 experiments, 12 are distributed along the line (a), 5 along the line (b) and 2 along the line (c) independently from the cylinder diameter and wave channel. There is no correlation between membership of one of the populations and the cylinder diameter or the wave channel in which the experiment was carried out. A similar result was obtained for each of the other values of wave steepness investigated. The authors have been unable to suggest any explanation for the formation of the three different distributions. To express mathematically the relationship between values measured in experiments with different parameters a polynomial regression analysis was carried out. The experimental results so obtained are compared with the empirical formulae proposed by other authors.

276

'

Ill
"

E
u

~'-'-|~|~|~|.'|~--|-~-'~.'~.'~'~':'~:~.'~.''~.'.'|~'~-'|'-~'~|~'..~|~-~'.~'~

~III|E-|''!~!!'~F~='''Fi!!~!!''~'~i'~r~i~!~F!~-'!'~!!~!!!~|!!!E|E~|~!~|||~||~;~!~||~

~ ' ' - ~ | III l l l l lFl l l l l'l n l l| u ~ I I IiI I I I~I I I IiI l~l l n l l~l l iI l l l ~U l l l~l l l l lM ~n I l lu l l , ,~ ~ ll llllllllllllllll II l l ll ll ll I l~ .
~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ n ~ q ' ' ~ ' ~ ` ' ~

"

I ] i i ~ =~ ; i l l l l l l l l l

"~'r ~ I L ,alll=llllllllllllll

~ii;i i~iil; i ii~;;ii; il;i;;i;;;;; i;iil;iiii i iiiii;ii~;;i;i;ii;i~ ilil

~-.=-'!iiiii =.=.i =~,',iiiidli--= ~-=.,-" .==iiii~ii:iii==,'--=iii=,~,,i~,iiii--'iiiii,liiiiiiiiiiiiii-=,ii=-E=~i, iiiiiiii'---i----~,i;i;-".-i

J~
I--

~- ~0~!',II',IIII ', ', iyill Ii ',iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii I I II ',II',II',I1 ii ~:,, ~iii ~ l',llllll',', I ',',',II',II',',',IIII IIIII',III'II',',IIII',IIIIIII',',',IIIII,"~II',I~L,~-~--~'~-, llllllllIll
1.0 . ~ I . . l',illllil]l I I l] llllllll I 0.5 0.01 01 051.02.0 5.0 10 20 30 ~0 60 80 90 95 98 99 99.9 99.99 CUMULATIVE PER CENTAI3E [ % ]

-=~ 0.6

Fig. 6. Log-normal probabilityplot f o r

Ho/Lo = 0.01.

~o~_o~.Oo~
u..- 2.0 I-

~.0 -1Q2mm 3.0 ~ ~' O "153mm Po o~,

~, _~

1.ofI

="

'~

0%
5.0 3.0

is

~o

1's

~o

~_s ~o "
o

oii . oO:
o~ 05
L

o
1

,,': zooI. 0h 0.0 1.0

=

~o

15 o

2.0

25

3.0 1

D/Ho

5.0

I-IJ~- 0.02

1o
oo.

" v.u

05 !.0 I'1~_- 0 . 0 1

15

~.0 ~3.0 uZ2.0 1.0

0.0 0.5
I

, Z0 2.5 ,~,,_,,~.___ o ~ " ~ oo

0 DIHo

I.0

1.5

2.0

Z5

3.0

L O/H

Fig. 7. Relative breaking wave force.Results of experiments.

277

Force
The results for force shown in Fig. 7 show that the relative force is not constant for a fixed wave steepness, Ho/Lo, but that it varies with the relative diameter of cylinder, D/Ho. The best-fit equations which describe the magnitude of forces with 1% probability of exceedance can be expressed as:

Ho/Lo =0.01 HolLo =0.02 Ho/Lo =0.03 Ho/Lo=O.05

FI~ = 0.846D 2 + 3.462Dr +0.610 F ~ = - 1.086D 2 + 4.031Dr +0.360 F ~ = 0.903D 2 + 2.914D, +0.269 FI~ = 0.265D~ + 1.175D~ + 0.650

(18) (19) (20) (21)

where Dr = D/Ho The maximum relative forces, F ~ , obtained from these experiments are shown in Fig. 9 as functions of HolLo together with the data obtained by Honda and Mitsuyashu (1974), Hall (1958) and Goda et al. (1966). The data from all of these earlier studies are the maximum observed values of F and these are not, in general, the same as F ~ . Nevertheless, it is reasonable to compare overall results and trends. As can be seen, the beach slope and.cylinder diameter influence the magnitude of force. For slope 1:15 and D/Ho < 1.5 the following relation is proposed on the basis of the results of our experiments: F ~ =0.41 (D/Ho) '5 (Ho/Lo) -'~ (22)

Moments
The analyses of moments was carried out in the same manner as that of force and produced best-fit equations describing the magnitude of moments with 1% probability of exceedance as follows (Fig. 8 ):

HolLo =0.01 HolLo =0.02 HolLo =0.03 Ho/Lo =0.05

M ~ = - 0.388D 2 + 1.967Dr +2.901 MI~ = - 1.521D~ + 5.979Dr - 1.121 MI~ = - 1.207D 2 + 4.290Dr -0.134 MI~ =0.134D~ + 1.030Dr + 1.087

(23) (24) (25) (26)

The maximum relative moments, MI~, obtained from the experiments, are shown in Fig. 9 as functions of HolLo. For slope 1:15 and D/Ho < 1.5 they can be approximated by the expression: MI~ =0.56 (D/Ho) '~ (Ho/Lo)-0.45 (27)

278
3.0 V
2.0

tol
O0 I 0.0 5.0 &Ot ~0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0
'

~
0.5 1~0 t5 2.0 o ~ HolLo 0.03 o = o" D : 102ram ~. D = 15]ram 1.0 1.5 2.0

0.05 1 102~rn
2.5 D/Ho 3.0

o O/Ho

0.5

Z5

3.0

==~ 3 0 2.000 00

~o~

HolLo=0.02 o D=102n~n O=153n~n I ~ 15 ~ Z0 2.5 ~ 3.0 O/Ho

05

~ 10

7o

6.0 ~SOL ~..0 t E 3.0]Z0 ~-

z~
o~

z~

~ ~ -'~'~'~'~- ~ Ho/L~0.01
o O=102nTn z~ O:153mm ~ 1.0 L 15 2.0
, L

1.0 ~
0.0 L ~ 0.0 0.5

2.5

3.0

D/Ho

Fig. 8. Relative breaking wave moment. Results of experiments.

10 k 6

3-I : ~ - - t -

-qn.~

0.8 0.6 0.5

0.00z+ 0006 0010

002 ~__ . .

003 O0& 0.06 . .

0.10 H/L

10

=os

--.~

Fig. 9. R e l a t i v e b r e a k i n g w a v e force a n d m o m e n t (compa_Hson w i t h t h e results o f t h e o t h e r a u t h o r s ) .

279 TABLE 3 Critical depth

Ho/Lo

Critical depth

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05

1.22 1.22 1.00 1.00

0.08 0.11 0.09 0.12

In all cases the line of action of the maximum force experienced by the cylinder is above the SWL, at an average level equal to 1.37d. This is the mean value for all experiments.

Critical water depth

The dimensionless critical water depth, dcr/Ho, at the cylinder where the wave force has the maximum value was determined during the experiments. The results are presented in Table 3. The average critical depth, dJHo, is shown in Fig. 10 together with the results of Honda and Mitsuyasu (eqn. 8). The relative breaking depth, db/Ho, is taken from eqns. (13) and (14). The results indicate that, within the standard deviation a = 0.10, the critical depth is shorewards from the breaking point and can be expressed for the bottom slope 1:15 as:

dr =db -O.2 Ho =db [ 1 - 0 . 2 4 ( Ho/Lo) '12]

(28)

This indicated that the maximum force occurs within the distance defined by Galvin as the plunge distance.
10

4. 3

1
0.70.5 0.004 QO06 QIO 0.02 (103 Q04 0.06 (lq 6 10

Fig. 10. Critical depth, ing experiments.

dJHo, at the cylinder where maximum breaking wave force occurred dur-

280

Scale effect in experiments

For gravity wave phenomena with negligible viscous effects, the Froude Law of similarity applies. In the absence of scale effect, the linear scale ratio, Lr, is related to the force ratio by:

L~ = (Fp/Fm)1/3
However, if scale effect is present: Fp =Fro L~ C~

(29)

(30)

where Fm denotes the measured model force, Fp is the prototype force and C , is the scale effect coefficient. The two cylinders used in the experiments give the geometrical scale, Lr = 1.5 and the measured force for both cylinders should be in relation 1:3.375 in the absence of scale effect. Considering the relative force, the scale effect coefficient can be expressed as: Fp Fp C~ =Fro L ~ - F ~ (31)

Taking Fp as the relative force measured for cylinder diameter D = 0.153 m and Fm as relative force for cylinder diameter D = 0.102 m a short analysis based on measurements of F maximum has been carried out. For similar values of D/Ho the relative forces have been compared for different channels and wave steepness. Thirty-three comparable cases were found and, for these, the average scale effect coefficient C~--1.0 with standard deviation a--0.13. This result indicates that there was no significant scale effect between the tests with the different sizes of cylinder, which is to be expected because CD is almost constant within the tested range of Re. DISCUSSIONAND CONCLUSIONS Comparison between the results of our experiments and those of earlier studies shows that the maximum breaking wave force on a vertical cylinder is influenced by the bottom slope, S, and by the relative cylinder diameter, D/Ho, as well as by the wave steepness, HolLo. Since the maximum force is experienced at a definite location, the parameter d/Lo is effectively implied in the parameters S and Ho/Lo. From Fig. 9 it can be seen that our results for maximum breaking wave force are generally in good agreement with those obtained by Honda and Mitsuyasu (1974) for the same conditions ( S = 1:15, D/Ho = 0.5 ). However, those authors did not include D/Ho as a significant parameter and its importance has been demonstrated by the results of our experiments. The influence of S is demonstrated by the results of Hall (1958) on which the CERC formula, eqn. (2), is based; the maximum force for S = 1:10 is substau-

281 tially greater than that for S = 1:15, all else being the same. On the other hand, the magnitude of the m o m e n t recommended by CERC, eqn. (3), appears to be too small when compared with our results since Hb in eqn. (3) is always smaller than 1.37 dcr, which is the average value of the elevation of the line of action of the force obtained in our experiments. The impact force component of the total breaking wave force, which must be considered in connection with the fatigue life of the structure, can only be determined accurately from the empirical data at present. The method for calculating it which has been proposed by Wiegel (1982) requires the magnitude of the curling factor, ~, and this is not known accurately yet. With the present state of knowledge, the breaking wave force can be determined only from experiment. The empirical formulae presented above which have been derived from the authors' experiments can be used for predicting the breaking wave force in conditions similar to those of the experiments. However, there is insufficient basis for generalising the results to apply to conditions which differ substantially from those of the experiments. It should be noted, in particular, that the experiments were all in the sub-critical or transitional regimes for Re < 3 X 105. Large-scale cylinders in real seas will be in the super-critical regime with Re > > 5 X 105 and the results of these experiments can not be extrapolated to such conditions without further investigation. It is very desirable that experimental studies be carried out on breaking wave forces on full-size cylinders in real seas. The following conclusions can be drawn from the present experiments: (1) The relative forces, F, and moments, M, in breaking waves can be expressed as functions of the two parameters, deep water wave steepness, Ho/Lo, and relative cylinder diameter, D/Ho. General expressions have been developed which allow the forces and moments expected in breaking waves on a bottom slope of 1:15, with probability of exceedance of 1%, to be predicted [ eqns. (22) and (27) ] for smooth cylinders, with Re < 2.7 X 105 and D/Ho < 1.5. (2) In these experiments the largest breaking wave force was found to occur 0.20 Ho shoreward from the breakpoint. (3) No significant scale effect was detected in these experiments which cover a range of Reynolds Number from 0.6 X 105 to 2.7 X 105. (4) Experiments on full size cylinders in real seas are needed to determine breaking wave force and m o m e n t coefficients in the supercritical regime of Re. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work was carried out with the support of funds from the Marine Sciences and Technologies Grants Scheme. This support is gratefully acknowledged.

282 REFERENCES Apelt, C.J. and Baddiley, P., 1981. Breaking wave forces on vertical cylinders. Fifth Australian Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Perth, pp. 85-89. Apelt, C.J. and Piorewicz, J., 1986. Breaking wave forces on vertical cylinders. Univ. Qld., Civil Eng. Dept., Research Report CE71. Chue, S.H., 1983. A Reanalysis of Nearshore Phenomena. Sixth Australian Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Gold Coast, pp. 257-263. Druet, C., 1968. A practical method for the determination of short-period waves in hydraulic structure foundation areas. Houille Blanche, 23 (8): 703-710. Galvin, C.J.J., 1969. Breaker travel and choice of design wave height, ASCE J. Waterw. Harbours Div., WW2 (96): 175-200. Goda, Y., Haranaka, S. and Kitahata, M, 1966. Study on impulsive breaking wave forces on piles. Rept. Port and Harbour Res Inst., Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 1-30 (in Japanese). Hall, M.A., 1958. Laboratory study of breaking wave force on piles. Beach Erosion Board Tech. Memo, No. 106. Hogben, N., Miller, B.L., Searle, J.W. and Ward, G., 1977. Estimation of fluid loading on off-shore structures. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Part 2, 63: 515-562. Honda, T. and Mitsuyasu, H., 1974. Experimental study of breaking wave force on a vertical cylinder. Coastal Eng. Jpn., 17: 59-70. Iwagaki, Y., Shiota, K. and Doi, H., 1982. Shoaling and refraction coefficient of finite amplitude waves. Coastal Eng. Jpn., 25: 25-35. Kjeldsen, S.P. and Akre, A.B., 1985. Wave forces on vertical piles near the free surface caused by 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional breaking waves. MARINTEK Report No. 1.10, Trondheim, Norway. Le M~haute, B. and Koh, R.C.Y., 1967. On the breaking waves arriving at an angle to the shore. J. Hydraul. Res., 5 (1): 67-88. Nguyen, T.T., 1983. An evaluation of breaking wave design data. Sixth Australian Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Gold Coast, pp. 74-79. Ochi, M.K. and Tsai Chen-Han, 1984. Prediction of Impact Pressure Induced by Breaking Waves on Vertical Cylinders in Random Seas., Appl. Ocean Res., 6(3): 157-165. Sawaragi, T. and Nochino, M., 1984. Impact forces of nearly breaking waves on a vertical cylinder. Coastal Eng. Jpn., 27: 249-263. Seelig, W.N. and Ahrens, J.P., 1983. The elevation and duration of wind crests. U.S. Army Corps of Eng. CERC, Fort Belvoir, Misc. Rep. No. 83-1, 73 pp. Singamsetti, S.R. and Wind, H.G., 1980. Breaking wave-characteristics of shoaling and breaking periodic waves normally incident to plane beaches of constant slope. Delft Hydraulics Lab., Rep. M1371. U.S. Army, Coastal Engineering Research Centre, 1977. Shore Protection Manual. Wiegel, R.L., 1982. Forces induced by breakers on piles. Proc. 18th Conf. Coastal Eng., Cape Town, pp. 1699-1715.