• Media type: Report; E-Book
  • Title: A Collection of Storm Erosion Field Data
  • Contributor: Birkmeier, William Allen [Author]; Savage, Rebecca J. [Author]; Leffler, Michael W. [Author]
  • Published: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC); Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC); Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1988
  • Language: English
  • DOI: https://doi.org/20.500.11970/111387
  • Keywords: Coast changes ; Ingenieurwissenschaften (620) ; Beach erosion ; Storms
  • Origination:
  • Footnote: Diese Datenquelle enthält auch Bestandsnachweise, die nicht zu einem Volltext führen.
  • Description: Source: https://erdc-library.erdc.dren.mil/jspui/ ; This report presents a collection of field survey data that quantifies the effects of 13 unique storm events on from two to seven beaches along the North Atlantic coast of the United States. The beaches include Nauset Beach, Massachusetts; Misquamicut Beach, Rhode Island; Westhampton and Jones Beaches, New York; and Long Beach Island, Atlantic City, and Ludlam Beach, New Jersey. From 7 to 19 profile lines were surveyed at each site permitting reliable estimates of the average change to be computed for each beach and storm, Beach change data are presented in terms of plotted profile cross sections, above mean sea level (msl) volume changes, shoreline changes, and slope changes. In addition, shallow-water wave hindcasts for each survey interval and storm are presented along with measured water level data (tide plus surge) . The data document not only the large beach changes that can occur during storms but also reveal the amoumt of variation that occurs between profile lines and between different localities. Median volume changes varied from 3.8 to -31.4 m3/m with a single profile maximum of -150 m3/m (measured along the south jetty of Absecon Inlet, Atlantic City). Above msl volume changes were the best indicator of a storm's effect. Changes in slope and shoreline (computed at msl) were surprisingly insensitive to storm effects. Of the 588 profile changes included in the study, 78.2 percent eroded based on volume losses whereas only 55.1 percent had erosional shorelines. Though the data are widely scattered, volumetric changes correlate better with measured peak water levels than with the hindcast wave heights, a finding consistent with present models of storm erosion.
  • Access State: Open Access