TECHNICAL REPORT CERC-85-8 yee 2 BREAKWATER REHABILITATION STUDY, of Engines CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CALIFORNIA Coastal Model Investigation by R. Clay Baumgartner, Robert D. Carver, D. Donald Davidson Coastal Engineering Research Center DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engine PO Box 631, Vicksburg, Mississippi 391 November 1985 meCEeRG 717)" Final Report NOTES: NUMBERS INDICATE HYDROGRAPH STEP NUMGER, Treranc owen in raeces Approved For Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Prepared for US Army Engineer District, Los Angeles Los Angeles, California 90053 no. CErc-85-8 Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator. The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered) REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Per Re a aS RUCTIONS a | REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER Technical Report CERC-85-8 4. TITLE (and Subtitle) - TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED BREAKWATER REHABILITATION STUDY, Final report CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CALIFORNIA: Coastal Model Investigation 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER 7. AUTHOR(s) 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s) R. Clay Baumgartner Intra-Army Order Robert D. Carver No. REV 84-13 D. Donald Davidson dated 23 Jan 1984 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station pia oh ey eanrih aera be Coastal Engineering Research Center PO Box 631, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631 11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE US Army Engineer District, Los Angeles November 1985 Los Angeles, California 90053 13. NUMBER OF PAGES 307 14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(if different from Controlling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of thia report) Unclassified 1Sa. DECLASSIFICATION/ DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report) Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered in Block 20, if different from Report) 18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. 19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necessary and identify by block number) Breakwaters (LC) Harbors--Maintenance and repair (LC) Harbors--California--Crescent City (LC) Crescent City (Calif.)--Harbor (LC) 20. ABSTRAGT (Continue om reverse side ff necessary and identify by block number) fin “undistorted scale hydraulic model study was conducted to develop an adequate repair plan for a section of the Crescent City breakwater which was armored with dolosse. The damaged area was to be repaired with 42-ton dolos. It was desired to quantify the number of armor units required, the optimum slope on which to place the dolosse, overall constructability, and methods of stabilizing the transition areas. Based on results of model tests, a combination of trenching and buttressing with 25-ton armor stone is a con- structable method of stabilizing the transition area. 0030110001090 DD ionoas 1473 ~—sEprTiow OF 1? NOV 65 1S OBSOLETE Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PASE (When Data Entered) SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Data Entored) SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Data Entered) PREFACE The model investigation described herein was requested by the US Army Engineer District, Los Angeles (SPL), in a letter to the US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES) dated 12 December 1983. Funding author- ization from SPL was granted in SPL Intra-Army Order No. Rev 84-13, dated 23 January 1984. Model tests were conducted at WES during the period July 1984 to March 1985 under the general direction of Dr. R. W. Whalin, former Chief, Coastal Engineering Research Center; Mr. C. E. Chatham, Chief, Wave Dynamics Divi-~ sion; and Mr. D. D. Davidson, Chief, Wave Research Branch. Tests were conducted by Messrs. R. D. Carver and R. C. Baumgartner, Research Hydraulic Engineers, and Mr. C. R. Herrington and Mrs. B. J. Wright, Engineering Technicians. Mr. Herrington served as Lead Technician under the immediate supervision of Messrs. Carver and Baumgartner. The wave refraction/ diffraction/shoaling study was performed by Dr. L. Z. Hales, Research Hydrau- lic Engineer, Coastal Processes Branch. This report was prepared by Messrs. Baumgartner, Carver, and Davidson. During the study Messrs. Tom Kendall, Bill Angeloni, Jay Soper, and John Azeveda of SPN; Messrs. Paul Berger, Tad Nazinski, Dee Gonzales, and Mrs. Laurie Ruh-Hanson of SPL; and Messrs. Bob Edmisten and Hugh Converse of US Army Engineer Division, South Pacific, visited WES to observe model opera- tion and provide input relative to the course of testing. Director of WES during the preparation of this report was COL Allen F. Grum, USA; Dr. Whalin was Technical Director. CONTENTS DUA Ho Gon UOOO GUO ODO OUD DODD UU DOCODOUUUGO GOOD NdON DOGG b09N0000000000 CONVERSION FACTORS, NON-SI TO SI (METRIC) UNITS OF MEASUREMENT.......... PART I: LORS COVDOLS MMO G6 G6000000000000009000000000000000060000005000000 TNE MPROCO CY PC lereieieeieselcleWehoherscleleleNon-Relelelenelelctenoicclon-KelioleMoNolclohel Eeolel ail Welelieleliolelre JEN a) oo Rete} EVaval /Nojeyetotevelal (oh® Iyfoxelail SheiblolWy6 65 500000000500000000000500000C PART II: THE MODEL Ce er ee ee eM Modell=Prototype Scale) Relationship si. 2). -rcickelelelelelel«ohellclelieleliclellerelielellaalele Mod eisimgrBocal Bac hyimeriyierereyereroie) cleiteloyelstcl elcid el oielielll olla oNelell- lol el=il-li-l=)i-lisieli=1i> SElle@igieya Cre? WSs CoNolionCiiSo oocacdoos000 00000000000 00000000000006 Desitenmot Model Breakwarc crn rarcrtscrtelelrctkneiencneilRNelskoeRel le lslokeleR-Nelel lee olel= NOCeal, COMGAMOTUIOMs socccascrcc0dn0 dado DD DOD DODO DOD DDODODDOOODODODNRS ENE] aVoYel: iP IRNeyoroewa? WEMEYEOD > 6 60000000000000000000000000000000000006 NSA IWIIES —WVESHINS) NNO) IMASOIIES). oo cop ono 00D KOKO CU DODO OCOQNDNDDDOSADONDOGSC HES HAC MiGiSs} yore! |oWUYoMMGS ooo ooacg0K0n00DD0DDD00DDDDDDDDODDNNS (CAulilyeneler Oi USSG WAGUIMAV>cocococqc000d 00D DOD GDD DOD DOODODDDNNNS Test Procedure Ce er ee Se MAMAN 5 6 66060000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000090000000¢ TABLES 1-3 PHOTOS 1-246 PLATES 1-31 A Ssaeseasn 6 Ssh sa) FWWW W NOWDOMAN A WY WT W alr 26 27 CONVERSION FACTORS, NON-SI TO SI (METRIC) UNITS OF MEASUREMENT Non-SI units of measurement used in this report can be converted to SI (metric) units as follows: Multiply By To Obtain cubie yards 7.645549 cubic metres feet 0.3048 metres inches 2.54 centimetres miles (US statute) 1.609347 kilometres pounds (mass) 0.4535924 kilograms pounds (mass) per cubic foot 16.01846 kilograms per cubic metre tons (2,000 pounds mass) 907.1847 kilograms Jaqemyeedq AAT) quedseug ‘dew uotyeooT pue Aqtutoty; ‘On, G4ANOGNV§V. NVII20 (L561) SAOdVYLIFL Ov! (L561) SGOdVYLIL IESL O0¢+lLv VLS Soe a —a ONV TSI 4371VHM & (d750 L401) \ NISV i ( yOadVH Ve Y4ANNI CON aN ‘\ aN Ct S3T1IW OL Ss ie) S 31V90S dVW ALINISIA . “Os > * K oe 2 iN . ° een care v 4IN39S3Y9 14 0002 OOOL 31V9S VINHOSI1V9 NO93y40O ‘| eunsty (vZ6L) NOILOSS SSOUD SO100 1VOIdAL NOILOAS SSOYD ILIYINOID GOdVYL3L WWOIdAL 2 4INOLS YOddVH GNV1SI NOLS4UYd SNe BREAKWATER REHABILITATION STUDY, CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CALIFORNIA Coastal Model Investigation PART I: INTRODUCTION The Prototype 1. Crescent City Harbor, Calif., is located on the Pacific Coast ap- proximately 17 miles* south of the Oregon-California border (Figure 1). The existing outer breakwater is 4,670-ft long, the main stem is 3,670-ft long, and the easterly extension (dogleg) of the breakwater is 1,000-ft long. Orig- inal project plans intended for the main stem of the breakwater to extend out to an area called Round Rock. However, beyond sta 37+00 the main stem of the original breakwater sustained severe damage and was reconstructed on two occa- sions. Finally, this portion of the main stem was abandoned and the present 1,000-ft-long easterly dogleg was added. 2. Two-dimensional (2-D) stability tests were conducted on the tetra- pod armor designs proposed for the trunk portion of the 1,000-ft dogleg (Hudson and Jackson 1955, 1956). In 1957, 1,836 25-ton unreinforced tetra- pods were placed on the sea-side slope from sta 41+20 to the end of the dog- leg (sta 46+70), and 140 25-ton unreinforced tetrapods were stockpiled on the sea-side slope of the first 200 ft of the dogleg, adjacent to the main stem (sta 37+00 to 39+00). As of 1975, approximately half of the tetrapods placed between sta 37+00 and 39+00 had broken because of severe wave action at the elbow. In 1974 the stone-armored section, close to sta 37+00 shoreward to about sta 35+00, had deteriorated to the extent that 246 40- to 42-ton unre- inforced dolosse were placed on the sea-side slope of the last 230 ft of the breakwater's main stem (sta 34+70 to 37+00). Various portions of the break- water, including the deteriorated tetrapod area (sta 37+00 to 39+00), were also repaired with armor stone in 1979. 3. Sea-side slopes of the outer 230 ft of the main stem (sta 34+70 el * & table of factors for converting Non-SI units of measurement to SI (metric) units is presented on page 3. to 37+00) have sustained damage during recent years. Present plans envision repairing these areas of the breakwater with 42-ton reinforced dolosse. Purpose and Approach of Model Study 4. The purpose of this study was to develop a technically sound repair plan based on results of three-dimensional (3-D) stability tests. More specifically, it was desired to quantify such variables as the number of armor units required, the optimum slope on which to place the dolosse, overall constructability, and methods of stabilization of the transition areas. PART Il: THE MODEL Model-Prototype Scale Relationships 5. Tests were conducted at a geometrically undistorted scale of 1:57.5, model to prototype. Scale selection was determined by the following condi- tions: (a) absolute size of model breakwater sections necessary to ensure the preclusion of stability scale effects (Hudson 1975), (b) capabilities of an available wave generator, and (c) the depth of water at the toe of the break- water. Based on Froude's model law (Stevens et al. 1942) and the linear scale of 1:57.5, the following model-prototype relations were derived. Dimensions are in terms of length (L) and time (T). Model-Prototype Characteristic Dimension Seale Relation Length L Ln Ss 185/05 Area LS A. Le = 1:3,306 Volume L3 ve te = 1:190, 109 Time T DNeeplia eS ibegi se 6. The specific weight of water used in the model was assumed to be 62.4 pef and that of seawater to be 64.0 pef; specific weights of model break- water construction materials were not identical with their prototype counter- parts. The variables are related using the following transference equation: Ch ee eb Che (ela ay ae where Wa = weight of an individual armor unit, lb subscripts m and p = model and prototype quantities, respectively Ve © specific weight of an individual armor unit, pcf L/L = linear scale of model Ss = specific gravity of an individual armor unit relative to water in which the breakwater is con- structed (i.e., S. = a/v , where Vs is the specific weight of water, pcf) Modeling Local Bathymetry 7. Local prototype bathymetry was represented by a 1V-on-35H slope, starting at the toe of the existing breakwater and extending seaward for a simulated prototype distance of 425 ft (7.4-ft model), followed by slopes of 1V on 85H and 1V on 20H with simulated prototype distances of 805 ft (14-ft model) and 725 ft (12.6-ft model), respectively (Figure 2). Shoreward of the existing breakwater toe the bottom was assumed to be flat, with a simulated prototype elevation of -29 ft mean lower low water (mllw). Selection of Test Conditions 8. Surge levels from the prototype data indicated that the extreme range of water levels that could be expected at the breakwater during its de- Sign life was -1 to +10 ft mllw. Four water levels were selected for testing. They included simulated prototype surges of -1, +4, +7, and +10 ft mllw. 9. For a given wave period and water depth, the most detrimental breaking wave (i.e., the most damaging wave) was determined by increasing the stroke adjustment on the wave generator in small increments and observing which wave produced the most severe breaking wave condition on the structure. Wave heights of lower amplitude did not form the critical breaking wave, and wave heights of larger amplitude would break seaward of the test section and dissipate their energy so that they were less damaging than the critically tuned wave. 10. Initially, test sections were subjected to an abbreviated hydro- graph (Table 1 and Plate 1). Only those plans which showed an acceptable Stability response for the abbreviated hydrograph were tested with the full- length hydrographs. Two typical storm-surge hydrographs, representative of conditions along the Northern California Coast, were furnished by the sponsor. Test conditions for these hydrographs are listed in Tables 2 and 3. Plates 2 and 3 graphically depict surge level as a function of time. 11. The breakwater is generally exposed to waves clockwise from south to west. From the refraction, diffraction, and shoaling report (Hales 1985), the most severe depth-limited breaking waves that can reach the structure occur from the southern to the southwestern direction and intersect the main stem of the breakwater at approximately 67.5 and 90 deg, respectively. Aujyouoas utseq asAeM “2 aun3Ty V-V NOILOAS YIPFYOSEV SINVA IGIND TVIILYIAA YOLVYINID 4INVM MOGNIM ONIMIIA 4O .GZ | Therefore these two angles were selected for testing (see Plate 4). Design of Model Breakwater 12. Plates 4 and 5 and Photos 1-6 show the existing structure as rep- resented in the model. The breakwater was reproduced from sta 31+25 to 40+00, With dolos coverage from just below mllw up to the crest of the breakwater between sta 34+70 and 37+00. Dolos used in the model represented 42-ton units in the prototype. Several different configurations, or plans, were tested in an attempt to arrive at a feasible design for the dolos rehabilitation area. These plans are described in Part III. Model Construction 13. The model breakwater was constructed to reproduce, as closely as possible, results of the usual methods of constructing prototype breakwaters. The core material was dampened as it was dumped by bucket or shovel into the flume and then was compacted with hand trowels to simulate natural consolida- tion resulting from wave action during construction of the prototype struc- ture. Once the core material was in place, it was sprayed with a low-velocity water hose to ensure adequate compaction of the material. The underlayer stone then was added by shovel and smoothed to grade by hand or with trowels. No excessive pressure of compaction was applied during placement of the under- layer stone. Except for the toe area of the dolos, armor units used in the cover layers were placed in a random manner corresponding to work performed by a general coastal contractor (i.e., they were individually placed but were laid down without special orientation or fitting). Special placement was used for the toe of the rehabilitated dolosse units (i.e., the dolos were placed with their shanks parallel to the slope of the breakwater and their vertical fluke downslope away from the crest), or in the case of transition areas, the vertical fluke faced outward from the body of the dolos section. Any devia- tion from this type of placement is described in the individual test plans. After each test, the armor units were removed from the breakwater, all of the underlayer stones were replaced to the grade of the original test section, and the armor was replaced. 10 14. The model was built on a baseplate made of 16-gage sheet metal which allowed the breakwater to be rotated so different angles of wave attack could be tested. Templates made from 20-gage sheet metal were riveted to the baseplate to aid in construction. The templates extended through only the core material in the model breakwater and had 1-in.-diam holes drilled to make them porous. Templates were necessarily avoided in the first underlayer and primary armor because they would interface with the natural stability of the material. Elevations in the first underlayer and primary armor were con- trolled by measurements with an engineer's level. 15. The model was constructed by using the cross sections (shown in Plate 5) and the considerations discussed in the following paragraphs. Main stem of breakwater 16. The average stone size used to protect the exposed shoreward sec- tion of the model (sta 31+25 to 34+70) was one layer of 25-ton stone placed over one layer of 12-ton stone, all of which was on a compound slope of 1V to 4H and 1V to 1.5H (Section A-A, Plate 5). 17. The model cap section was geometrically similar to the prototype conerete cap, but was made of wood that was bolted to the baseplate to assure no movement. Existing dolos area 18. The stone material under and seaward of the existing dolosse (Sec- tion B-B, Plate 5) consisted of an average stone size of 12 tons. 19. Positioning of the existing model dolosse was controlled by using aerial photographs in order to reproduce the existing prototype section as accurately as possible. Breakwater extension 20. The existing armor protection of the breakwater extension (sta 37+00 to 40+00) consists of one layer of 25-ton stone placed over one layer of 12-ton stone on a 1V-to-4H slope (Section C-C, Plate 5). 21. The shoal material seaward of the breakwater, representing remnants of the old deteriorated extension toward Round Rock, consists of a mixture of 12- to 25-ton stone. 22. One hundred and forty tetrapods, including 70 broken ones, were added randomly in the area from sta 37+00 to 39+00 to represent the dete- riorated tetrapod section. 11 Method of Reporting Damage 23. The following list of adjectives, in order of increasing severity, was used for recording model observations and reporting test results for each test section: (a) slight, (b) minor, (c) moderate, (d) significant, (e) ma- jor, and (f) extensive. Slight and minor were used to describe acceptable results, moderate described borderline acceptability, while significant to extensive described unacceptable conditions of increasing severity. Use of these adjectives allows for some quantification of the severity of resulting damage incurred by the breakwater's primary cover-layer units. By using the descriptive adjectives and the before- and after-test photographs, comparisons can be made between alternative test sections. PART III: TESTS AND RESULTS Test Facilities and Equipment 24, All tests were conducted in an L-shaped wave basin which is 250 ft long, 50 and 80 ft wide at the top and bottom of the L, respectively, and 4.5 ft deep (Figure 2). The test facility was equipped with a flap-type gen- erator which is capable of producing monochromatic waves of various periods and heights. Calibration of Test Facility 25. Normal procedure at the US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Sta- tion (WES) is to calibrate the wave facility without the breakwater structure present. This is the most accurate means of calibrating, and is analogous to the prototype conditions for which the measured and/or hindcast wave data were determined. Electrical resistance-type wave gages were positioned in the wave flume at a point that would coincide with the toe of the proposed breakwater section, and the wave generator was calibrated for various selected wave conditions. Test Procedure 26. A typical stability test consisted of subjecting the test section to a series of waves from a previously determined hydrograph. The test sec- tion was subjected to wave attack in approximately 45-sec intervals, between which the wave generator was stopped and the waves were allowed to decay to zero height. This procedure was necessary to prevent the structure from being subjected to an undefined wave system created by reflections from the break- water and wave generator. Newly built test sections were subjected to a short duration (five or six 45-sec intervals) of shakedown by using a wave equal in height to about one-half of the estimated no-damage wave. This procedure pro- vided a means of allowing consolidation and armor unit seating that would nor- mally occur during prototype construction. Stability Tests 27. Thirty plans were tested for 90-deg wave attack (wave direc- tion 1), and two of these were also tested at a 67.5-deg angle (wave direc- tion 2). The sponsor initially stated that the existing underwater slopes would not be dressed, nor would material be removed to make better seating for the dolos overlay and/or toe. (It was planned to lay the dolosse on whatever slope and material presently exist.) This limited the initial design alterna- tives to special toe placement, varying geometry, and area of coverage (this alternative was somewhat limited due to cost). After the initial design al- ternatives were found to be inadequate, trenching and buttressing were tried with improved results. The abbreviated hydrograph (Table 1) was used for ini- tial testing, and damage to the test structures was determined by observation. Details of the plans tested and general results follow. Development of stable sections for a 90-deg angle of wave attack 28. Plan 1 (Plate 6 and Photos 7-10) was constructed with the toe of the rehabilitation dolos 98 ft from the outer edge of the cap. A total of 177 dolosse were used. Damage to the structure was severe, and the entire toe area was displaced. Damage originated at the toe, and as the toe units were displaced the units upslope unraveled. The dolosse flukes extended above the still water level (swl) at the toe of the rehabilitation area for all water depths. Therefore, it was decided that the toe of the dolos would have to be placed in deeper water to remove it from the high wave energy region around the swl. Photos 11-14 show the structure after testing. 29. Plan 2 (Plate 7 and Photos 15-18) was constructed with the toe of the rehabilitation dolos 160 ft from the outer edge of the cap. A total of 381 dolosse were used. The toe units in the left (shoreward) transition and central areas were stable; however, there was severe damage to the toe units in the right (seaward) transition area. The damage was occurring at the swl, and as the water depth was increased the damaged area moved upslope. Because of the geometry of the breakwater (i.e., the dogleg), wave energy is concen- trated in this area and problems were expected: in this region. Photos 19-21 show the structure after testing. 30. Plan 2A (Plate 7 and Photos 22-23) was the same as Plan 2, except that the toe units in the seaward transition area were placed with their 14 vertical flukes outward rather than downslope. There was no improvement in dolos stability over Plan 2. Photos 24-26 show the structure after testing. 31. Plan 2B (Plate 7 and Photos 27-28) was the same as Plan 2A, except that special placement was used for the toe units in the seaward transition area, i.e., the toe units in the second layer were placed to ensure double locking with the toe units in the bottom layer (see Photo 29). This plan performed less satisfactorily than Plan 2A in that failure was not gradual; the entire toe area failed as one unit. Tests conducted to date indicated that additional dolosse would be required to move the seaward transition further out the extension into a region where the wave action would probably be less severe. Photos 30-32 show the structure after testing. 32. Plan 3 (Plate 8 and Photos 33-35) was constructed with the toe of the dolos rehabilitation units still 160 ft from the outside edge of the cap; however, for this plan the dolos extended further out the eastern extension to sta 38+00. A total of 576 dolosse were used in the rehabilitation area. The lower corner of the seaward transition area now rested on material in the shoal area, and the flukes of these toe units were exposed for swl's of -1 and +4 ft. Damage originated in this location for these water levels and be- came severe for the +7-ft swl. Although there was less damage than for previ- ous plans, the damage was still too excessive for the plan to be acceptable. Photos 36-38 show the structure after testing. 33. Plan 3A (Plate 8 and Photos 39-41) was the same as Plan 3, except that in the lower seaward region of the dolos rehabilitation units a 50- by 110-ft area was constructed three layers thick. The total number of rehabili- tation units used was 615. Damage still occurred at the lower toe area of the seaward transition where the toe units are exposed at the lower water levels. Plans 3 and 3A may have been improved by moving the lower toe units of the seaward transition into deeper water; however, the bottom profile in this area is virtually flat. Thus, distance from the cap to the toe would have been too great to make it a feasible alternative. Photos 42-44 show the structure after testing. 34. Plan 4 (Plate 9 and Photos 45-47) was constructed with the same dimensions as Plan 3, except the toe of the seaward transition of the reha- bilitation units formed a line perpendicular to the main breakwater stem, with the upper corner starting at sta 38+00. A total of 525 dolosse were used in the rehabilitation area. This geometry was selected for testing 15 because the toe units of the seaward transition should have been subjected to minimum force components acting to push the units outward from the rest of the rehabilitation dolosse, for the 90-deg angle of wave attack. The seaward transition still suffered severe damage. Apparently, diffraction effects in this area of the breakwater caused significant forces on the dolosse. Photos 48-50 show the structure after testing. 35. Plan 5 (Plate 10 and Photos 51-53) was the same as Plan 3, except that the seaward transition of the rehabilitation units extended out the east- ern extension to sta 39+00. A total of 776 dolosse were placed in the reha- bilitation area. The lower corner of the seaward transition still rested on material in the shoal area, leaving the flukes of toe units exposed at swl's of -1 and +4 ft; these toe units were subjected to considerable wave energy even though they had been placed out to sta 39+00. Extensive damage occurred in the area of the seaward transition. Photos 54-56 show the structure after testing. 36. Plan 6 (Plate 11 and Photos 57-59) was constructed with the reha- bilitation units ending at sta 37+00. A total of 303 rehabilitation dolosse were placed. This plan showed the most promise of any tested to data, as only six rehabilitation dolosse were displaced in the seaward transition. Damage occurred near the swl, and as the water depth was increased the damaged area moved upslope. At this time it was determined that a trench might stabilize toe units in the seaward transition. Note, existing dolosse that extended past the end of the cap received no protection from the rehabilitation units; these existing units were displaced during testing. Photos 60-62 show the structure after testing. 37. Plan 7 (Plate 11 and Photos 63-65) was the same as Plan 6, ex- cept that a trench was excavated starting at the toe of the existing dolosse (0.0 ft mllw) and ending a distance 100 ft from the outside of the cap at -11.0 ft mllw. The trench followed a line which was perpendicular to the main breakwater stem and intersected at cap at sta 37+00. The trench was about 5 ft deep, i.e., deep enough that when the vertical fluke of a dolos was placed vertically in the trench, it was securely supported from slipping. Toe units in the seaward transition of Plan 7 were placed as in Plan 6, except some of the units rested in the trench. Dolosse along the seaward transition remained stable during testing. The structure was rebuilt and the test re- peated. Results for the repeat tests were the same except three units were 16 displaced at the shoreward transition; the movement occurred during the first wave cycle and the shoreward transition units remained stable for the rest of the testing. As in Plan 6, existing dolosse that extended past the cap were displaced, and in Plan 7 damage to the existing dolosse began to progress shoreward from the end of the cap. Photos 66-68 and 69-71 show the results of the initial and repeat tests, respectively. 38. Plan 8 (Plate 12 and Photos 72-74) was tested in an effort to find a section that would encompass and provide protection to existing dolosse sea- ward of sta 37+00. A total of 334 rehabilitation dolosse were placed. A trench was excavated along part of the seaward transition to stabilize the toe and is shown in Plate 12. The existing dolosse seaward of the cap end still sustained damage; in addition, three rehabiliation units were displaced along the toe of the seaward transition. Photos 75-77 show the structure after testing. 39. Plan 9 (Plate 13 and Photos 78-80 was constructed with the 42-ton rehabilitation units encircling the existing dolosse in a continuing effort to provide protection for the existing dolosse seaward of the cap. A total of 381 rehabilitation dolosse were placed. Once again, a trench was excavated along part of the seaward transition and is shown in Plate 13. Although this plan did protect the existing dolosse, the seaward transition of the rehabili- tation units sustained damage. Photos 81-83 show the structure after testing. 4O. Plan 10 (Plate 14 Photos 84-86) was based on the photographs taken of the prototype in 1984; the existing dolosse section in the model was modi- fied to more closely represent the 1984 conditions. A new geometry of the seaward transition was tried along with another excavated trench as shown in Plate 14. A total of 348 42-ton rehabilitation units were used. Plan 10 sustained an unacceptable amount of damage for the abbreviated hydrograph. Photos 87-89 show the structure after testing. 41, Plan 11 (Plate 15 and Photos 90-92) was similar to Plan 10, except the area of coverage was increased. A total of 384 42-ton rehabilitation units were placed. The excavated trench is shown in Plate 15. This plan per- formed satisfactorily for the abbreviated hydrograph. Photos 93-95 show the structure after testing. It was thought by visiting sponsor representatives that the toe placement in the transition areas of the model may have been more precise than what could be obtained in the prototype; thus, Plan 11 was re- peated with the vertical leg of the toe units still placed seaward but ina UG more random fashion. The units along the seaward transition sustained consid- erable damage for the repeat test. Photos 96-98 show the structure after re- peat testing. The repeat test indicated that toe placement is critical in the stability of the structure. 42, Plan 12 (Plate 16 and Photos 99-101) was constructed with two rows of 58-ton dolosse along the seaward transition of the elbow; the 58-ton units along the toe were randomly placed. It was hoped that the heavier units would stabilize this area without trenching. A total of 46 58-ton and 319 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse were placed. The seaward transition sustained severe damage during testing. Photos 102-104 show the structure after testing. 43, Plan 13 (Plate 16 and Photos 105-107) was similar to Plan 12, ex- cept some additional 58-ton dolosse were placed. Also, special placement was used for the toe units. A total of 65 58-ton and 313 42-ton rehabilitation units were placed. The seaward transition still sustained damage during test- ing. Photos 108-110 show the structure after testing. 44. Plan 14 (Plate 16 and Photos 111-113) was similar to Plan 13, ex- cept a trench was excavated along part of the seaward transition. A total of 61 58-ton and 312 42-ton rehabilitation units were placed. Again the seaward transition sustained damage during testing. Photos 114-116 show the structure after testing. At this time it was decided that the larger units exhibited more surface area for the waves to work on and were not a feasible alternative unless higher density concrete was used, which in effect, would increase the weight without increasing the surface area. Since high-density model units were not available to show this effect and the time limitation prevented mak- ing additional model units, future efforts concentrated on finding a stable section using the 42-ton dolosse. 45, Plan 15 (Plate 17 and Photos 117-119) was constructed with a trench approximately one dolos wide and about 5 ft (one-stone-diameter) deep. After the units were placed in the trench, the voids between units in the trench were backfilled with material left over from the excavation. Special place- ment was used for the toe units. The total number of 42-ton rehabilitation units was 373. Again damage exceeded acceptable limits. Although much of the backfill material was scoured out during testing, placement of the backfill material did improve the stability of the seaward transition. Photos 120-122 show the structure after testing. 46. Plan 16 (Plate 18 and Photos 123-125) was similar to Plan 15, 18 except the area of coverage was increased. The waves tended to break on the structure and then rush out the dogleg, and it was hoped additional units in this area would dissipate enough of the wave energy to protect the toe units in the seaward transition area of the elbow. A total of 406 42-ton rehabili- tation dolosse were used. Damage of the seaward transition was still unac- ceptable. Photos 126-128 show the structure after testing. 47. Plan 17 (Plate 19 and Photos 129-131) was similar to Plan 15, ex- cept the area of coverage again was increased. A total of 443 42-ton reha- bilitation dolosse were placed. This plan performed satisfactorily for the abbreviated hydrograph. Photos 132-134 show the structure after testing. 48. Plan 18 (Plate 20 and Photos 135-137) was a refinement of Plan 17. The total number of 42-ton rehabilitation dolose was reduced to 398 by remov- ing units near the crown of the dogleg. Plan 18 performed satisfactorily for the abbreviated hydrograph; results are shown in Photos 138-140. The test section was rebuilt and again subjected to the abbreviated hydrograph. A total of 394 rehabilitation units were used and Photos 141-143 show the struc- ture after the repeat test. The repeat test sustained more damage than the original, but the amount of movement was considered acceptable. Plan 18 was rebuilt and subjected to a full-length storm (Hydrograph A, Table 2). A total of 410 rehabilitation dolosse were placed. Plan 18 performed satisfactorily for the full-length storm. Photos 144-146 show the structure after testing. Concern arose as to the prototype constructability of the toe trench; there- fore, it was decided to develop alternative plans. 49. Plan 19 (Plate 21 and Photos 147-149) was similar to Plan 18, except a rock buttress was placed around the outer perimeter of the seaward transition. Also three concrete blocks were added to represent remnants of the deteriorated cap of the old breakwater extension. No trenching was used for this plan, and special placement was used for the dolos toe units. The rock buttress was placed before the rehabilitation dolosse and consisted of 25-ton armor stone two layers deep and approximately 35 ft wide. The total number of armor stones added was 188; assuming a specific weight of 170 pcf and a porosity factor of 0.63, the total weight of stone used was 4,700 tons with a volume of approximately 3,250 cu yd. A total of 408 42-ton rehabilita- tion dolosse were used. Plan 19 was subjected to the abbreviated hydrograph. The rock buttress sloughed off in the lower region of the seaward transition and was undamaged near the crown of the dogleg where the stone was protected 19 by dolosse. However, the armor stone of the barricade in the central region of the seaward transition (in the range of swls used for testing) where the wave energy was most severe were completely washed out. The rock buttress did afford the dolosse some protection but the performance of this plan was considered marginal. Although only one dolos was actually displaced, there was a separation of dolosse near the seaward transition toe. These units probably would have been displaced during a longer storm. Photos 150-153 show the structure after testing. 50. Plan 20 (Plate 22 and Photos 154-156) had about the same area of coverage as Plan 18; however, 74 rehabilitation dolosse were removed and re- placed with 82 37-ton tetrapods (37-ton tetrapods were used since this was the model size tetrapod available nearest to the 42-ton dolos size). The tet- rapods were placed in one layer. It was thought that the tetrapods might be a more appropriate shape for interfacing the existing stone. A total of 334 42-ton dolosse were used. The tetrapods suffered extensive damage. There was minimum movement of the dolosse during the abbreviated hydrograph, but since they had lost the protection afforded by the tetrapods it is likely damage would have progressed to this area for a longer duration storm. Photos 157- 159 show the structure after testing. 51. Plan 21 (Plate 23 and Photos 160-162) was similar to Plan 20, ex- cept more dolosse were replaced with tetrapods and the tetrapods were placed in two layers. A total of 304 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse and 116 37-ton tetrapods were used. The tetrapods sustained severe damage; damage progressed to the dolosse. Photos 163-165 show the structure after testing. Using tet- rapods to stabilize the seaward transition was found to be unfeasible. 52. Plan 22 (Plate 24 and Photos 166-168) was similar to Plan 18, except that dolos toe units extended along a line which intersected with one of the concrete block remnants from the earlier breakwater extension. It was hoped the conerete block would act as a buttress for the dolosse. No trenching or other buttressing was used. The toe units of the rehabilita- tion dolosse were specially placed. A total of 445 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse were used. Although only four dolosse were displaced while testing with the abbreviated hydrograph, performance of the plan was considered mar- ginal. There was a separation of toe units along the lower section of the seaward transition; these units probably would have been displaced for a longer duration storm. The concrete block did provide some protection to 20 the dolosse near it. Photos 169-171 show the structure after testing. 53. Plan 23 (Plate 25 and Photos 172-174) was similar to Plan 22, ex- cept coverage was reduced near the crown of the dogleg where dolosse were not needed and coverage was increased along the lower part of the seaward transi- tion toe to provide additional protection in this area. A total of 484 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse were placed. Damage was severe in the seaward transi- tion area for the abbreviated hydrograph. Photos 175-177 show the structure after testing. 54. Plan 24 (Plate 26 and Photos 178-180) was similar to Plan 19, ex- cept that the 25-ton armor stone used as a buttress extended back to the con- crete block remnants. The buttress again was placed before the rehabilitation dolosse and consisted of 25-ton armor stone two layers deep. The total number of armor stones added was 278 with a total weight of 6,950 tons and a volume of approximately 4,810 cu yd. A total of 387 42-ton dolosse were placed and the test section was subjected to the abbreviated hydrograph. The rock but- tress sloughed off during testing, as in Plan 19. However, the armor stone did remain in place long enough to protect the dolosse from displacement. Photos 181-183 show the structure after testing. Plan 24 was rebuilt and subjected to Hydrograph A to see if the dolosse would survive a storm of longer duration. A total of 410 42-ton dolosse and 293 25-ton armor stones were placed. The dolosse in the shoreward transition sustained some damage early in the testing, but this area stabilized and showed no movement during the rest of the hydrograph. The buttressing armor stone in the seaward tran- sition again sloughed off and was scattered down the dogleg, with most of the damage occurring in the first half of the hydrograph. The dolosse in the sea- ward transition remained stable throughout the testing, except for a slight separation of dolosse in the lower seaward quadrant. Apparently the 25-ton armor stone remained in place long enough for the dolosse to become nested and interlock for the duration of Hydrograph A. At the end of Hydrograph A, a small amount of the 25-ton buttressing stone was left in the extreme lower and upper areas of the original buttressing, but most of the stone was scat- tered down the dogleg and/or was carried off the model section at sta 40+00. Photos 184-186 show the structure after testing with Hydrograph A. Although the dolosse remained virtually intact at this point, movement of the buttress- ing armor stone was excessive and could possibly have done structural harm to the tetrapod section further down the dogleg. Also, the dolos section was 21 left without buttressing for subsequent storm events.- Based on these results and discussion with the Los Angeles District, it was decided that the test should be continued using Hydrograph B (Table 3). During testing of Hydro- graph B, deterioration of the 25-ton buttressing stone continued and addi- tional separation and displacement of dolos occurred in the lower seaward quadrant. Photos 187-189 show the structure after cumulative testing of Hydrograph A and B. Based on the overall test results, it appears that the stability of Plan 24 is questionable. 55. Plan 25 (Plate 27 and Photos 190-192) utilized the best merits of Plan 18 and Plan 24. A trench, approximately one dolos wide, was excavated starting above water at the end of the existing concrete cap and ending at -1 ft mllw. A rock buttress, consisting of 25-ton armor stone two layers deep and about 60 ft wide, was then placed around the outer perimeter of the sea- ward transition, starting at the end of the trench and proceeding below water to a depth of about -30 ft mllw. Special placement was used for the dolos toe units. After the dolosse were placed, voids in the trench were backfilled with material left over from the excavation. A total of 420 42-ton dolosse and 200 25-ton armor stone were placed. Plan 25 was subjected to the abbre- viated hydrograph with marginal results. The rock buttress sloughed off to about a water depth of -5 ft mllw. Four dolosse were displaced at the seaward transition toe approximately where the trench ended and there was additional separation in this area. Photos 193-195 show the structure after testing. Although Plan 25 appeared questionable, it was felt worthwhile to continue testing. Plan 25 was rebuilt and subjected to Hydrograph A. A total of 412 42-ton dolosse and 154 25-ton armor stone were placed. The structure sur- vived the storm up to the +10 ft swl where damage originated at the end of the trench. The damage progressed shoreward as the storm continued and a total of 14 dolosse were displaced. At this time, it was determined that the trench should extend into deeper water. Photos 196-198 show the structure after testing with Hydrograph A. It was felt that the dolosse movement was extensive enough to preclude acceptability of this plan. 56. Plan 26 (Plate 28 and Photos 199-201) was similar to Plan 25, ex- cept that the trench ended at a depth of -5 ft mllw and the rock barricade started at -2 ft mllw. A total of 410 42-ton dolosse and 152 25-ton armor stone were placed. Plan 26 was subjected to Hydrograph A. There was some separation of units along the shoreward transition and three units were 22 displaced along the toe, but this movement was considered acceptable. The rock buttress sloughed off to a depth of approximately -5 ft mllw; however, dolosse in the seaward transition area remained stable throughout Hydro- graph A. Photos 202-204 show the structure after testing with Hydrograph A. Testing was then continued using Hydrograph B without rebuilding the struc- ture. The structure remained stable throughout the second hydrograph. Photos 205-207 show the structure after cumulative testing of Hydrograph A and B. Plan 26 was rebuilt and again subjected to Hydrograph A. A total of 409 42-ton dolosse and 152 25-ton armor stone were placed. The structure survived the storm up to the +10 mllw still water level. Damage initiated at the end of the trench for this water level and progressed shoreward as the storm continued; a total of 10 dolosse were displaced. Photos 208-210 show the structure after testing. Although the damaged area eventually appeared to stabilize, it was felt worthwhile to repeat testing of Plan 26 with Hydro- graph A again. A total of 415 42-ton dolosse and 154 25-ton armor stone were placed during rebuilding. Plan 26 performed satisfactorily for this repeat test. Photos 211-213 show the results. Based on these test results, -5 ft mllw is the minimum allowable depth at which the trench should end and Plan 26 appears to be a viable option for stability from wave direc- tion 1. 57. Plan 27 (Plate 29 and Photos 214-216) was constructed with a berm of 25-ton armor stone placed offshore of the structure in an attempt to trip the wave and dissipate energy before it reached the seaward transition area. The berm was built after the dolosse were placed and had an average elevation of approximately -14 ft, which stayed about constant shoreward to where it transitioned into the existing breakwater material or dolosse. The berm tran- sitioned from the -14 ft elevation to the sea floor over a distance of about 30 ft. Plate 29 shows a plan view of the stone placement. The rehabilitation dolosse were placed in the same geometry as for Plan 26, but no trenching or buttressing was used. A total of 410 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse and 354 25-ton stone were used. Plan 27 was subjected to the abbreviated hydrograph. The dolosse in the seaward transition area sustained extensive damage. Photos 217-219 show the structure after testing. The stone berm constructed in Plan 27 was not nearly large enough to dissipate the incoming wave energy, and it was surmised that it would take at least two to three times more volume of stone selectively placed in order for wave attenuation to occur. Based on 23 discussions with the US Army Engineer District, Los Angeles, it was decided to discontinue testing of this plan. Stability tests of Plans 18 and 26 for a 67.5-deg angle of wave attack 58. Plan 18 (Plate 30 and Photos 220-222) was constructed the same as for the 90-deg angle of wave attack except for a modification to the shoreward transition. Two rows of rehabilitation dolosse encompassed the existing units at the shoreward end. A total of 434 42-ton rehabilitation dolosse were placed. Subjection to Hydrograph A displaced three dolosse from the shoreward transition toe. The seaward transition suffered extensive damage during test- ing with 13 units being displaced. Photos 223-225 show the structure after testing with Hydrograph A. Plan 18 was rebuilt using 447 42-ton rehabilita- tion dolosse and subjected to Hydrograph B. The seaward transition again sustained extensive damage and the shoreward transition had moderate damage. Thus, Plan 18 proved to be unacceptable for the 67.5-deg angle of wave attack. Photos 226-228 show the structure after testing with Hydrograph B. 59. Plan 26 (Plate 31 and Photos 229-231) was constructed the same as for the 90-deg angle of wave attack. A total of 410 42-ton dolosse and 135 25-ton armor stone were placed. Plan 26 was subjected to the abbreviated hy- drograph with marginal results. Three dolosse were displaced from the lower shoreward transition toe, and seven or eight units separated from the dolos mat in this area. Two units were displaced from the seaward transition but they did not affect the overall stability of this region. There was consid- erably less sloughing off of the buttressing stone than from the other wave direction as waves tended to push the stone against the dolosse rather than wash it out the dogleg. Photos 232-234 show the structure after testing. The test section was rebuilt and subjected to the abbreviated hydrograph again, this time with satisfactory results. Photos 235-237 show Plan 26 after the repeat test. Plan 26 was rebuilt and subjected to Hydrograph A. A total of 417 42-ton dolosse and 135 25-ton armor stone were placed. There were five dolosse displaced from the shoreward tranSition toe and some sepa- ration of units occurred in this area; however, the region appeared to sta- bilize during testing and the amount of movement was considered acceptable. One unit was washed up on the cap near the center of the rehabilitation area. Photos 238-240 show the structure after testing. Plan 26 then was rebuilt with the same modification to the shoreward transition as for Plan 18. 24 Photos 241-243 and Plate 31 show the modified plan before testing. A total of 434 42-ton dolosse and 135 25-ton stone were placed. The modified plan was subjected to Hydrograph B with satisfactory results. Three dolosse were displaced from the shoreward transition and one from the seaward transition. Photos 244-246 show the test section after testing with Hydrograph B. 25 PART IV: CONCLUSIONS 60. Based on test results and observations presented herein, it is concluded that: Io |p 10 ites 10 [E> Plans 1-6, 9-16, 19-23, 25, and 27 are not acceptable. Plans 7 and 8 had minor damage of the rehabilitation dolos; however, the existing dolosse extending seaward of sta 37+00 were damaged for the selected test conditions. Plan 17 performed satisfactorily when subjected to the abbrevi- ated hydrograph at a 90-deg angle of wave attack; however, it was found that the number of dolosse in the seaward transition could be reduced, thus creating Plan 18. Plan 18 was acceptable for the 90-deg but not the 67.5-deg angle of wave attack. Plan 24 was considered marginal for the 90-deg angle of wave attack. The rock buttress sloughed off during testing and stone was washed down the dogleg creating a risk to the exist- ing tetrapods and leaving the rehabilitation dolosse at the seaward transition toe without protection. Plan 26 was acceptable for both the 90-deg and 67.5-deg angles of wave attack. Modifying the shoreward transition by encom- passing existing units with two rows of rehabilitation dolosse seemed to improve the stability of this region. The end of the trench was referenced to mllw for Plans 18 and 26 to give an indication of constructability. Since the pro- file of the existing material varies and is flat in some places, it is suggested that for construction purposes the end of the trench be referenced to a horizontal distance measured from the outside edge of the cap. The minimum horizontal dis- tances recommended from the model test results are 100 and 35 ft for Plans 18 and 26, respectively. 26 REFERENCES Hales, L. Z. 1985 (Mar). "Water Wave Refraction/Diffraction/Shoaling Inves- tigation, Crescent City, California," Miscellaneous Paper CERC-85-3, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hudson, R. Y. 1975 (Jun). "Reliability of Rubble-Mound Breakwater Stability Models," Miscellaneous Paper H-75-5, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hudson, R. Y., and Jackson, R. A. 1955 (Jun). "Design of Tetrapod Cover Layer for Rubble-Mound Breakwater, Crescent City Harbor, Crescent City, California; Hydraulic Model Investigation," Technical Memorandum 2-413, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. 1956 (Apr). "Stability of Crescent City Harbor Breakwater, Crescent City, California," Miscellaneous Paper 2-171, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Stevens, J. C., et al. 1942. "Hydraulic Models," Manuals on Engineering Practice No. 25, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. 27 n” ct OON AMF WN — E sess mM —- oO Table 1 Abbreviated Hydrograph Step Length ft mllw min 15 Test Wave Period Height sec fats 15 24.8 18 22.5 21 25.4 15 29.0 18 2B) 21 8085 15 29.8 18 29.8 21 32.4 15 31.0 18 Bern 21 33.0 S ie OOANn AUN F WN — swl ft mllw Table 2 Hydrograph A Step Length min 20 Test Wave Period Height sec fate 15 29.0 18 Poll 21 S085 15 24.8 18 225) 21 25.4 15 29.0 18 233, ff 21 30) , 5) 15 29.8 18 29.8 21 32.4 15 311 50) 18 32.1 21 33.0 15 29.8 18 29.8 21 32.4 15 29.0 18 23}. 1 21 30.5 15 24.8 18 225) 21 25.4 Table 3 Hydrograph B Test Wave n cr OON AMF WN — E Step Length min 40 40 40 60 60 60 ute) 40 HO 20 Period Height sec ft 15 29.8 18 29.8 21 32.4 15 31.0 18 35 1) 21 33.0 15 29.8 18 29.8 21 32.4 15 29.0 18 280 lf 21 30.5 15 24.8 18 22.5 21 25.4 15 29.0 18 23301 21 30.5 Pal ee as oO e Zz te © 2 (S ra) < oe re ia = < M < td i iva) e oO (< £ [ows EXISTING STRUCTURE CO8st-1 Sea-side view of existing structure Photo 1. CITY CRESCENT 2 = 4 4 gE < = % < o o eluate } a= PE & 1 et bin a: on } om ‘ on | Seaward oblique view of existing structure Photo 2. 9unjond4s BUT4STX® JO MATA pua puemMeag -¢€ oqoUg if ce : §1809 pAUOLINMIS ONTISIXa -# an tt ~LOgFoud VHF YaLVANVaUe ALD -LNI9STUO Seen aunjonujs ZUTYSTX9 JO META apTs-soqueyH “ft 0F0Ud 2injonu3s BUTYSTX® JO MaTA pua PueMeuoUS *G o40Ug : 91809 2 Toy ts ONILSD *9 070g gunjonujs BuTystxe uT essoTop Jo dn-asoTo “9 0704 9-1909 BLN LS ONIISIXa 194afoud SVHTN UILVANV3ua ALID 1N39S3N9 3s S) ES ae 8 ag me Oo “BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT, PLAN NO-{ BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 1 before wave attack Photo 7. Seaward oblique view of Plan 1 before wave attack Photo 8. YOBIFE SAEM a10JEq | UCTd JO MATA pus preMeag °6 oqoOUd yoeqye AEM adogeq | UeTd JO MATA pus puemasous “OL 090Ud 61809 ONLLSaL 340139 1-ON NW 1d Loanodd @VHau UILVYMNVIN ALIO. LNaOsaaO ydeusoupky paqetasaqqe jo uotyetdwoo uaqje | ueTg Jo MaTA OPTS-eas “|| oOqoUg ©21809 “ONILSAL YaLIV 1 -NWild BB to3rowa ALID — INFDSAND. . . £1905 ONILSIL way = NWI 419aroud HVH3Y YalvMyvaNa ALIO._LNIDSaN9 ydeasoupky paqetasuqqe jo uotyeqtdwoo uaqye | UETd JO M8TA pus pueMeas “¢€1 oQoUg Se41809 ONWSIL yay J ONVId =/ sLOAPOd >< = VHaY Bal vaivauE “ALIO. INFOSauO ydeuSoupAy paqetAeaqqe Jo uoTyzetdwoo uaqge | UeTd JO MATA pus pueMau0Yys “fl O340Ud 921809 ONILSAL Ya } NV Id Logroud GVHIe YaLVMAVINE ALIO ENSOSaYO 3 oO & zZ ta a 2 Qo ma < x= I me a z < a i] ~ °o a z 1. ae = me ns | Re BEFORE TESTING -€081-27 Sea-side view of Plan 2 before wave attack Photo 15. yorqye avem auojeq g ueTd JO MeTA anbtTqo puemeas “g| 040Ud #21809 ONILSAL 308 @ NV1d L9af0ud SVH3Y WaLVMNVSNE ALIO LNBOSTYD yoeqqe OAeM JUOJaq Z@ UPTq JO MATA pua puemeas */| OJo0Ug 621909 ONILSAL. 3N0sa 2. NVI Loapoud = =. @Vuay UILVMAVIYE ALIO: INIOSaHO: yoejje aAeM adogoq Z UETd JO META pus paeMaZoYs “Bl 070Ud 0f1809 ONILS3L 340saa 2 NV Td 193°0ud GVHIN YILYMNVINE ALIO LNIISINO _olTy "CRESCENT 2 8 g | ae < J Ce Sea-side view of Plan 2 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 19. ydeasouphy payetAsaqqe jo uotyatduoo uaqse 2 ueTg JO MOTA enbITqo puemeas ‘oz oj0uUg fae ONiMSaL waLaV L4O'O!*“O'l-= “TMS QVHIY YALVMAV ING ALIO LNIOSIND ydessoupky paqetasaqqe jo uotyetduoo veaye Zz uetg jo MOTA pue pueMess *|2 oJ0Ug ee-909 ONILSSL WILIV. LAQO“0's-= IMS ALIO.- 4NI0SRI9- CITY CRESCENT ee < = Go) ra oe a) & < = x < rea m ra) < =a a me O< Zz aa BEFORE TESTING CO81-35 Sea-side view of Plan 2A before wave attack Photo 22. YORIIE SACM JJOJOq Y~ UETq JO MATA anbt{qo puemeas -€2 oWoUg 98-1809 | ONIISSL Juoda © 8VHIE YIIVMNVaNa ALID LN3989u9 yudeuSoupAy pagetAsuqqe Jo uotzeatTduoo saqge WZ UPTd JO MATA BPTS-eeS “te 010ud LE+B09 ONILSAL YaLdV. Ve NV'Id LOarOud @VHIe YALVMAV ANd ALID. LNAOSAYO ydeusouphy payetasuqqe jo uotqjetduoo JoqyJe Yo UBTd JO MaTA anbITGo puemeas -Gz ojoug Saf4809 ONTISaL wav “V2 Nid fogroud BVHIY UILVMNVIUD. ‘Alio: IN39smH9 ydeaSoupky paqetasuqqe Jo uoTyatduos sweqge ye UETd JO MaTA pua puemeag *9¢ 040Ud 6£19209 ONILSSL waL4V V2 NY1d L939f0Nd G@VHIN NIVMNVINA ALID = LN39S3ND YOe!IIE AEM aJOJEq Gz UPTq JO MATA apts-eag *)2 oqoUg 11800 He ONILSAL avosag 2 NVI k= LOdroud 2 @VHaY WaLVMIvaua ALIO LNGOSauO yoeqqe AEM as0Jeq qz UETd JO MeTA anbtTqo paemeas “g2 0740Ud a erR0d : ONLIS3L 3NO43a 82 NV Id 1oaroud GVHIS YILVMAVIYS ALO" LNIDSIND de UPTd JO UCTAITSUEIZ P4BMEaS UOJ pasn juawedeTd 909 TeToSeds +62 oj0Ug ydeuZouphy peqetaAeuqqe Jo uotzaTduioo saqge gz UeTd JO MATA @PTS-eES “QE 0J0Ud AVHAd. MAIN MAY Jae ALLO LN3OSTNO ydeusoupky paqetasaqqe jo uotyatdwoo ueaje gz uetg jo MATA anbtTqo paemeas “| oJoug preing2 ONS3L. MRI © Ge NE Ad ALIAS INTOSAI ydeasoupky paqyetaAsuqqe jo uotTjetTduoo uweqgje gz UCTd JO MaTA PUS PAEMESS *2e o4oud oF 1809 ONWISSL YaLd¥ G2 NYId LoapOud GVHIN YILVMAY ING A119. LNIISFNO yore BAEM JJOJaq € ULTq JO MATA apts-eas *€€ o4oUg oe POUd : AYA ULV May Iue ALIQ- I NAOSAND r yoeqqe aAeM duogeq € UBT JO MeTA enbTTGo pueMeeS “HE 090Ud yoeqqe saem a JOJeq € UeTq JO MATA pua PueMeas “GE 070Ud AL > = Oo e Zz fd 2) ”n w [24 oO co < x= fa o me =) < g < wy = Eo) e Oo = S i a i) Zz, 5 w — & ° fa e Bie aS A % < Ss 2 ° 6 ~ O Gt = & a < oO z < ~ o. AFTER TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 3A after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 42. ydeusoupXky payetasuqqe jo uotyetdwoo uaqge ye UeTg JO MaTA anbt{TqGo puemeas "€h O40uUg 98-1909. ONILSaL Yay VE_NVId Logaroud a GVHSU YaALVMNVRa B ALIO.- LNIOSaND . . . 4 Ud y £$1809 ONILSSL WF Lav Ve NVid Loaroud YORIIE AEM J4OJEq f UCT JO MATA AaPTS-eag “Gh oj0Ug yoeqqe AAEM auojeq f UeTd JO MaTA anbt~Tgo puemess “9t 090Ud yoeqIe SAEM aJOJeq + UeTg JO MATA pua pueMeas “/ +} oOJoUg CITY CRESCENT : fi 5 : AFTER TESTING of abbreviated hydrograph 1on de view of Plan 4 after complet -Sl Sea Photo 48. ydeusouphy paqetAcuqqe jo uotyetduoo ueqge 4 UeTq JO META anbtTGo puemeas "61 090Ud ONIISSL wats’ PNVAL foaroud © QVHSY UILVANVING ALIO” INFOSIYD AFTER TESTING GS a. (a0) u 00 oO a Uv > <= uo) oO p Cao} “d > o S Q a {a0} GH fe) ‘s) (e} “od pb oO ao Q. & {e) oO SK o p GH a =F s Coy} au GH (e} = oO “4 > U0 S Cd) ne] G a = oO oO YY Photo 50. ‘CRESCENT CITY 9. = Are I ha = = MS < td m Fa) oe 5 So. Oo. BEFORE TESTING COBI- 64 Sea-side view of Plan 5 before wave attack Photo 51. yOeIVe SAEM aUOJEq G UeTg JO MATA anbtTqo puemeas *2G o40uUg ALO LNIISTHD yoeqze SAeM Bu0Jaq G UeTg JO MATA pua puemMeas °€G oJOUg 99-1809 ONILSAL qauosaa S NW Ad Logroud @VHaa WaVMAVINE ALIS INIOSAYO yudeuZouphy peqetasaqqe jo uoTyetduioo uaqge G UBT JO META apTS-BaS “tS 0F0Ud £91809 ONILSAL WaLIV S NV'ld Loaroud GVHIY AaLVMIVING ALIS LNIOSRUD CRESCENT: CITY & Z : £ z i AFTER TESTING COBKES f abbreviated hydrograph 10n oO f Plan 5 after complet ique view o Seaward obl Photo 55. 040Ud ydeaSoupky payetasaqqe jo uotjetduios weqge G UeTd JO MeTA pua paeMess “9G OF 69-1809 ONLISSL UaL4av oS NV1d L93fCHd @VHI8 WALVMNVING ALID. LN396qN9 oS ee oO e Zz 2 Q wy Gy om oO < Ly [a4 me e BS MM < td ry 3) & S) a g oo BEFORE. TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 6 before wave attack Photo 57. CRESCENT CITY : i BEFORE. TESTING COBL7I ne Seaward oblique view of Plan 6 before wave attack Photo 58. E mS “= : BREAKWATER: REHAB | PROJECT PLAN 6 BEFORE TESTING Seaward end view of Plan 6 before wave attack Photo 59. fs] BS > & @ °. & Ze a = oY Qa < feat ee of a =) & a. Sea-side view of Plan 6 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 60. ydeusoupky paqetAeuqqe jo uotyetdwoo uaqye 9 ueTd Jo MaTA anbtTqGo puemeas "19 030Uq ¥L1909 ONWGaL Wai4V oO NV'Id Loaroud SVHAY waLvMdVauE: ALI: LNADSIUD: ydeaSouphy paqetasuqge go uotyeTduioo ueqge g UeTd JO MaTA pua puemMesg “29 070Ud 9L:1909 ONILSAL YILEV 9 NVId Loaroud QVHIY UaLYMvaud ALI” INI9SaNO YOeIIE BAEM auOJaq ), UBT JO MATA APTS-eaS “£9 O4OoUg 9E 1809 © ONILSAL quod L NW‘Td Loaroud. aVHad. YaLVMNVIuE - ALIO INdOSTYO Seaward oblique view of Plan 7 before wave attack Photo 64. 030Ud BAEM adOJaq ), UPTd JO MATA pua puEMeasS Gg yoery4e 824909 ONUSA1 ‘Riong i Nvad “~ Ioarowa ALID. IN305aND oa < = esi a om ad a < = 4 < a6 oa co AFTER TESTING COBL I9 Sea-side view of Plan 7 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 66. ydeusouphy payetAsuqqe jo uortyetduoo uaqje 2, UBTd JO MaTA anbiTqo puemeas "29 OJ0Ud ONILSAL WILa¥ TRV: se CARTON AS aVAsH UILWANY ae Inageu9’ ydeuSoupky peyetasuqqe jo uotjetduos ueqge | UeTd JO MeTA pue PaeMees “Bg OF0Ud 18-1909 ONILSAL YI1dv. L NY Id Log9r Oud G@VHIY WaLVMNVaNe ALI9.. LNIOSAND ydeudoupky paqetasuqqe jo uotyetdwoo uaqze } UBTd JO MATA apTs-eag °69 O40Ug Z8 1809 ONILSAL Yaldav Lvadau L NV'1d- Loaroud GVHIN YaALVMAVANE | ALIO LNIOSTNO ydeiSoupAy payetAeuqqe Jo uotqatduioo ueqge qeedeu | UeTd JO MOTA anbt~Tqo puemeses ‘O/ 090Ud £9 1809 ONILSSL Wav 4v3d3u L NY1d Loaroud @VH3d YaLVMNVada ALIO =LNIOSTNO ydeudouphy paqetAsaqqe Jo uoTyatduoo uaqse yeedeu J ueTg Jo MaTA pus puemess *|) o4oug $9 1809 ONILS3L MALAY: Ly¥adau LoNW1d LO9f0ud QVHIN WaLVANVINa ALD. LNJISTUD CRESGEN FC LRY © < = = < = "4 < a) joa (28) eet ni x Z. < ab BEFORE TESTING COBI- 85 Sea-side view of Plan 8 before wave attack Photo 72. YOeIAe SARM S4OJeq Q UBT JO MATA anbtTqGo puemeas -¢€) oJoUg 98 1809 ONIISaL avodaa @ NW1d Loaroud GVHIu wad VMAVaNe ALLO —IN39SauO yoeqqe OAEM duoJeq g UT JO META pua paeMees “tL 070Ud i yr IS3) Jdod14d @ NW1d GYHIM YGIVMNV IN Ail) END ISAND LIP: Pam ee a & oO = a B r= © BREAKWATER REHA ‘PROJECT AFTER TESTING f abbreviated hydrograph 10n oO de view of Plan 8 after completi -Sl Sea Photo 75. BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT AFTER TESTING cost-89 S a. iss} a 00 e) u no) > fo} no) o ae) Las} “4 > oO ‘= Q a fas) GH (e} Ss ° coal p o = Q. = (e) 3) S o p Ga Can) (oe) S fan) =| jal) SH (e) = Ce) -d > oO 3 ion “4 oa a (e} Uv a X40) = (ao) o n Photo 76. CITY BREAKWATER REHAB re z i o PROJECT AFTER TESTING COB 90. Seaward end view of Plan 8 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph NONE) Te > Es 1S) e ZA tl (=) n f ( oO < a ce m SI = 7 < tf i aa) BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 9 before wave attack Photo 78. yoeq7e OAEM atOJaq 6 UPTg JO MAaTA aenbITqGo puemeas ‘6/ OJ0Ud 26-1909 ONILSaL 240438 SNV1d Loaroud QVHaY WaLYMAVIG “ KLID. LNFOSaYD yoeqqe ahem auojeq 6 UeTd JO META pus puemeas “0g 07F0Ud £6 1209 ONILSAL 380498 6NV1d igaroud GVHIN WILVANVIN ALIO LNIOSTYD > = oO ~ = 3 oO oO =| = i 4 a4 = < g S 4 a Boo fa 3 < oS al ao o& AFTER TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 9 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 81. ydeaZoupky pazetaeaqae jo uotyeatduios uaqje 6 UPTd JO MOTA anbtTqo puemeses “2g 070Ud a 96 1800 ONILSSL WaLAV GNY1d igaroud GVHAY WILVAVINS ALIS LNIISTHO ydeusouphy paqetasaqqe jo uotyetduoo uaqye 6 ueTg JO MATA pus puemess *€Qg o40Ug 96-1809 ONTLSaL way BNV14d © * Aparowa SVHaY WaLvMVaEE ALD LNGOSaNO CITY CRESCENT = c [a4 = = = < ie} cc ca e oO 3] 3 o a. BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 10 before wave attack Photo 84. yYOeIIe SACM S4O0Jaq Q| ULTq JO MATA anbTTqo puemMeas “Gg oj0Ug 961809 ONILSAL auodaa OUNV 1d ALogroud SVHIY VALVANVINS ALO: -LNa9SqNO yoeqqe aAeM au0jeqd OL UBT JO MATA Pua PAEMEES "9g 090Ud 664809 ONILSSL 380438 OINV'Id ioaroud GVHIY UILVMNVIEG ALIS LN3OSAHD ydeusoupky payetasuqqe jo uotyzetdwoo uwaqje QO| UPTq JO MATA apTs-eag “1g 030Ud 0011809 ONILSAL YALIV OP NV Id Loafoud @VHay waLVMAVINd ALIO INFOS udeuSoupAy paqetAsaqqe jo uotTyeTduoo swaqje O| UeTd JO MeTA anbiTqo puemessS gg oO740Ud af sOr-1809 ONILSSL YALA OINW1Id Loaroud G@VHIY WILVAVSNE ALID LN39S3UD EF = > bs 5% = ee fe om g = a3 os PLAN 10 AFTER TESTING 6081102 Seaward end view of Plan 10 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 89. yorqqe AAEM asoJaq || UBT JO META ePTS-EES °06 030Ud th NV1d 4 Loaroud avis YALVMAV INS AKLIO. LNAOSIYO YoeqIe SAEM JUOJaq || ULTq JO MATA anbrTTqo puemeas +16 oJoUg ao po ee ASA as Oe SE. 21. Masa NTS OMe enti MSP BOR < = Cs ox Seaward end view of Plan 11 before wave attack Photo 92. ydeusoupAy payetaAsuqqe jo uotyaeTduiod uaqje {| UeTqd JO MATA aptTs-eas *€6 O40Ug 601-1809 ONILSGL WaLliv 11 NVId 2 iogroda. @VHIY YaLVMNVaNE MID. LNGOSTHO ydeuSouphy paqyetacsuqqe jo uoTyaTduoo ueqse || UPTd JO MeTA anbtTqo puemess “t6 040Ud o1209 ONLSSL Y3L4¥ Wi NW ld Loaroud QVHIY WILVAAVIUE ALIO LN39S389 eeeer tert et yudeuZoupky pagetasuqqe jo uotyetduoo uaqye || UeTd JO MeTA pua PueEMeaS °G6 0 40Ud 4414800 / ONHSAL wala <0 OSV NV LIACOUd GVHAN YaLVMNVANS: ALIO. LNaOSauO udea8oupAy paqetasaqqe T go uotyetduos uaqge qeodeu | | UeTd JO MATA apTs-e98g “96 O I T youd SE, i Po a ©) Es g}}-1809 ONILSAL Yaldv 1) NV'1d Loaroud a@vHau UALVMAVINE ALIO LNAOSavO ydeusoupXhy payetasuqqe jo uotyjatduioo uaqje yeodou || uetTg JO MaTA anbITqo puemess °*/6 o4oug OHAROD ONISSL Yais¥ NwAd “toaroud ; SVHIE BILVAAY INS - ALYS™ LNZISaNo > = o — Zz 3 = Oo BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT AFTER TESTING S ; eaward end view of Plan 11 repeat after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 98. CRESCENT CITY. ey <. ee ea} i & = = 4 < ey a pa] raves Q jz 3 i oe o BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 12 before wave attack Photo 99. yoeqqe aaem ouojeq Z| UeTd JO MOTA anbtTqgo puemees “OO| 030Ud Yoeqze SAEM JUOJOq Z| UCT JO MATA pue pueMeaS *|O| 0O4OUg SNIISAL . qos oh ON Td L93f0Nd QVH38 YsIVMNVauG AIO LNGOSaND udeuSoupAy pagetAeuqqe jo uotyeTduios uaqge Zl UeTg JO MATA apTS-eag *ZO| 030Ud 123-1809 ONILSAL YILIAV Zl. NVId Logroud @VHaY YaLVMVaNa ALIO. LNAOSANO ydeusoupky payetAauqqe jo uotyatduod uaqyje Z| ueTq JO MATA anbtTqo puemeas *€Q| o40uUg szi4900 ONLLSAL 8S1IV @) NVid Loaroud SVHI8 NALVANVANE ALD INIORTUD ydeaZoupky paqetaduqqe jo uotzeTduioo seqge Z| UBT JO MeTA pua pueMeesS “fl OF0Ud £21809 ONILSAL U3LaV 2) NVId © 4oaroud GVHIY WILVAAYIES | cg ‘ee OS 7 8 ce & ae. 9 og a mo e Ps] > z oo Sea-side view of Plan 13 before wave attack Photo 105. yore SAEM dUOJaq €| ueTg JO MATA enbtTqGo puemesg *90| ©OF0Ud 921-1909 ONILSaL TWO.20 el NVId 49af0ud SvH7a WALvAvaae ALID LNI9GTID yoeqqe aAeM auojeaq €| UeTg JO MATA pus pueMeas “JO, O4OUg 981-1800 -DNIIS31 -suor 8) NVIa /AvHay waLvntvaue > MIO “LnaosaHo udeaZoupAy peqetAsuqqe jo uotqaTduioo uaqge €| ueTg JO MATA SpTS-eag “gol 0J0Ud Lé\-1809 ONILSIL YaLAV £) NV 1d Loaroud @VHIY YALVAVaNE ALID LNAOSAND ydessoupAy paqetAeuqqe jo uotyatduioo uaqjye €| ueTg JO MaTA anbITqo puemeas ‘60, 0o40Ug Bat180D, ONILSSL ILIV. O} NVId A9groud: WVH3Y WILVANVaHE AMID INZOSFUS ydea8oupky paqetAeaqqe jo uotzeTduioo uaqgze €| UeTd JO META pue puemeas ‘OlL 090Ud 621-1809 ONLUSAL WILIV el NWId 4oaroud aVHIN YILVMIVSNa ALID LNIOSTID © < ss 2 = aod — < = « tal x ia TESTING BEFORE COBL-130 Sea-side view of Plan 14 before wave attack Photo 111. yorgqe AAEM au0Jeq fl UeTd JO MeTA anbtTqo puemees “Zl| 030Ud ig14go9 ONUSIL JNOITE +i oNW1d Low oud GVHIN WILY MANY ING. AATD ING OSINT Seaward end view of Plan 14 before wave attack Photo 113. ydeaSoupky paqetAauqqe go uotTyatTdwoo uaqge fl UT JO MATA SpTsS-eeS “tL | OF0Ud PANY) £eT-1809 ONILSAL » YaLAV bl =NV'Id LOAFOUd @VHIY YALVMAVAN ALIO LNAOSTYD ydeudoupky payetaouqqe jo uotyzatduoo uaqse fh, UeTd JO MaTA anbTTqo puemeag *G|{| oJ0UgG yelinoo ONILSaL WaLdv *) NVId Logroud @VHIY WILVANVINE ALIO LNIOBINO ydeaZoupky payetAeuqge jo uotqzeTduioo seqge | UBTd JO META pue puemeas “91, 030Ud ONILS9L waL4V +} NV Id 194 4 G@VHIN YILYMNVINA sea AJID. LNDISTNO > e Oo oa Be ve © v7 fad pa oO roa} < = tat o oa Ld — x =. SZ < i ee Ere De © i} beans © ox oo BEFORE TESTING COBIHA136 = Sea-side view of Plan 15 before wave attack Photo 117. yoeq4e AAEM adosaq G| UeTq JO MaTA enbTTqo paemees “gill 070Ud L2h-180) ONIIS31 340j3d @VHIY YILVMAY? ALID LNIOS yoe ye aAem au0jaq G| ueTg JO MATA Pua pueMesS “6|| 040Ug ONILSSL 340s 38 Sl NV Td LOArOud G@VHIY YFLVMNVINE AlI2 . JNFOSTUD ydeaZoupky paqetaeaqge jo uotyzetduioo waqge Gl UeTd JO MOTA aPIs-eaS “Odcl 030Ud 6el- 1809 ONIISAL walav gs} NW1Id Loaroudd @VHIY YaLVYMAVING ALIQ LNZOSANO ydeusoupAy pegetaeuqqe jo uotyatTduioo uaqge G{ ueTq JO MaTA anbt[Tqo puemeas ‘| 2| 030uUg LI meats tine OP 1809 ONiiSaL Yativ a Nv Id Loafodd GVHIE WILY AAV ING ALIO. INT 3989 ydea8oupky paqetAeuqqe jo uoTzeTduioo s9eqgze Gl UeTd JO MOTA pua puemees “Zzl 040Ud Ieingo) ONILSHL waldy Sst NW1d L0G 08d GYHIY YILVMNVaNa ALID INI S989 roa] pS i oe oO fod a Foe wo = 3 Ae es Ye eee ¢ eee bee be Oo es) P & & Oe BEFORE TESTING “COBI1-142 Sea-side view of Plan 16 before wave attack Photo 123. yorqqe aAeM au0seq g| UeTd JO MaTA anbtqTqo puemess ‘t2l 040Ud ONILSS1 340498 9) NW Id Loaroud @VHaY YaLvMdVINA KLI. LN3OSINO CRE Pet <= Fost fe te — & a & Soe es ao aA < w ms a PROJECT TESTING £ BEFOR Seaward end view of Plan 16 before wave attack Photo 125. Sea-side view of Plan 16 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 126. ydeisoupky pajetasuqqe Jo uoTqjaetduiod uaqje 9, UeTg JO MATA enbITqo puemeas ‘)2| o40Ug ydeusoupfh Fe) y pajetAeaqqe go uotTzeTduoo sz9qzJe 9| UBTd JO MoTA pue T PuemMessS “Qcl 0904, d [9-190 oNISa1 BaLdY 9) NVd Loaroud qvHa8 walvanv7aa ALIO LN308389 eS < = Gy om o i) eS < = be ea tl ea rea) fe iD ist Ga a & aay Sea-side view of Plan 17 before wave attack Photo 129. yorqjye aAeM aaojaq | UeTq JO MaTA anbTTqQo pueMeas "OF| OJ0Ud QVHIN> HELPMY IE ALD). Ana ySaeo yoeq4e 9ACM Bu0Jeq /| UBT JO MATA pua puemMeas “| ¢| o4oUg 091-1909 ze ONILSaL 340d9a “Ly NV L9aCOUd GVHIY AILVMNV INE ALV2 © INFJOSIND. udeuSoupAky pagetaAsuqqe jo uotyzatduioo uaqje )| UeTg JO MOTA OPTS-e=aS “Ze, 04OUd 1S1-1809 ONILSGL WaLldV Li NW1d LOafodd @VHaYd YALVMAVAYS ALIO LNIISTYO ydeasoupky paqetaauqqe jo uotyetduoo uaqzje Ll UBTq JO MATA anbtTGo puemeas “EE, oAoUg agre@0o ONIISSL YIL4V OL) NVia Loaroud VAIN USLVMyVauE ALO’ “INGOSTUD ydeusoupAy pazetAsaqqe jo uotyzeTdwoo uaqje L| UeTd JO MOTA pus puemess “El 070Ud £S1-1809 ONILSAL YILAV LY NY1d Loaroud @VHIY UILVMAVINA ALIO _LN3OSIN9 YOeqIE SAEM SUOTEq Ql UETq JO MATA apTs-eas “*GE| oJOUg #911809 ONILSAL a4uOsad 7 81 NWAd Loaroud @VHaY YILvMyvIUE ALIO “LN3OSTHO BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT Seaward oblique view of Plan 18 before wave attack Photo 136. YOe!FIE AEM BIOJEq Ql UETq JO MATA pua pueMeas “J ¢| O4OUg ONITSAL 440999 Bt NW Id LDAP ONd @VHIS YIIVMNWIuG AMID LNA BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT ral = oOo e Zz a i oO TTT AFTER TESTING URS >, ay ~ Fe aw F Sea-side view of Plan 18 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 138. ydeusoupky payetasuqqe jo uotyatdwoo uaqge Ql UBT JO MATA anbrTqo puemeas “GE oQoUg WSIABOD” ONTISSL:. NALsy, St NVAd Ldaroud GVHae WALYANY SNE ALIO); LNAI: ydeusoupAy pagetAsuqqe jo uoTjeTduioo w9qge Ql UPTd JO MOTA pus PAeMEaS 691-1809 ONI1SaL Waliv 6) NV1Id Logroud GVHIN WALYMAVINE ALID LN3OSIN9 CRESCENT. CITY fea Pe Pes ta = (of GJ — << = SZ < td ~ a) fo Oo io] iy o ce Oo. AFTER TESTING CO8I-163 Sea-side view of Plan 18 repeat after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 141. ydeuZoupAy paqetasiqqe jo uotyzaTduioo 4azse qeadei gl ued JO MATA anbtTqo puemeas “2h| 070Ud ¥9)-1809 ONIWSIL YSLiVv 81 NW 1d Loaroud QVHI YILVMAVINa ALIO LNI9Sau9 ydeusoupky paqetasuqqe go uotyatdwoo ueqye yeadei gi ueTg JO MaTA pua pueMeag “Ch, o40Ug ~ 991-1805 ONIISAL Yadav 8) NV Id LaF Oud GVHAN YALYMNVINd ALID IN3Ds8aa9 Pe > = [= ) = 2 rs) a e ge a = ox a < 2 8 oO f 5 w 3 [4 oa AFTER TESTING. Sea-side view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 144. y ydeusoupky jo uoTyetduioo uaqje g, uetTg JO MaTA anbtTqGo PAeEMeSS “GhL o4OUg OL11809. ONIISSL UaLav OW NW Ad LOaroud - SVHIN YALVAAVINS ALIO. ANIOSSY: be E ° o TESTING AFTER Seaward end view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 146. CRESCENT CITY™ Py Fe CS m% & < : 6a Ee a 3 a BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 19 before wave attack Photo 147. : FI z : 5 Z | = < a = BEFORE TESTING CoBl-t73 Seaward oblique view of Plan 19 before wave attack Photo 148. OCIS AEM B10Jaq 6| ULTd JO MATA pua PueMeaS “Gh, OJOUG EECRE(} 61 NWA Lar Oud: GVHaN USLVMNVaNE ALI. LNIO8aud: ydeusoupky payetaeuqqe jo uotqatTduioo 4aqge 6| UBTd JO META OPTS-eaS "QG| 030Ud SLI-1809 ONILSAL waldv 6) NV‘Id LOArOud aVHaN YALVMAVANE ALIO LNAOSaNO ydeuzouphy paqetasuqqe jo uotyetdwoo uaqje 6| UeTq JO MATA anbtTqo puemeas *|G, oj0Ug “9E11909 ONILSAL aaLiv 6 -NV'd j Loaroud ALID LNI0SaND yudeasoupAy pagetAsuqqe jo uoTJeTduoo sa4Je 6| UPTd JO MeTA pus PUEMEES “2G, oj0ud LLI-809 ONILSHL ILIV 6) NV Id LOaroud @VHIY YALVMAVING ALIO . LNIOSINO. ydeidoupky paqetasaqqe jo uoTzeTduiod seqje 6| UeTg JOJ UOTJTSUeIy PueMeaS Jo MATA dnesotj7 °€G, o40ug yorj4e AAEM as0joq OQ UETd JO META SPTS-eES “Gl o90Ud 8L11809 ONILSAL FWOdIE Og NVld LOA Oud @VHIe YAILVMAVAYE ALIO. = LNIOSIYO CITY BREAKWATER, REHAB = rs z o PROJECT PLAN -20 BEFORE TESTING f Plan 20 before wave attack ique view o Seaward obl Photo 155. yoeq4e AAEM dAOJaq OZ UPTd JO MATA pus P4EMESS "9gG| o90Ud o81t809 ONILS3L FdOIFE O@ NV1d Logroud @VHIY YILVMNVING ALID =LNIISINO ydeasoupky paqyetaosuqqe jo uotyeTduoo uaqge QZ UeTg JO MATA APTS-eaS “1G, oj0Ug 181-1809 ONILSAL YaLAV 0¢ NV1d Lodroud @VHIN WILVMIVIUE ALIO LNXOSaNO \ udeusoupAy paqetAsuqqe fo uotjzeTduoo ueqje Oc UPTd JO MATA anbt{Tqo puemess “gG| 040uUd 2914909 ONILSSL WaLIV Of NV1d Loaroud VHA WaLVAAVINT ALIO LNI9SauO ydersoupky paqetAesuqqe jo uotyetduiod uaqje O2 UeTq JO MATA pua puemMeas *6G| 0 J0Ug -B8t1809 ONMSIL WILIy 02 NVAd Logroud GVHIY USLVMNVING ALIS. LNSOSSND CRESCENT CITY re) < = Pa ~ oe eo = & < taj = a) SHeeee wm. ™ = g = Bai ey oO. BEFORE. TESTING CO8I1-184. Sea-side view of Plan 21 before wave attack Photo 160. ios] 3 5 @ oO rs ~ Zz ee A < 8 ° ff * at | Son fae NS 3S =z = < Be oy oy AFTER TESTING Seaward oblique view of Plan 21 before wave attack Photo 161. yoejje aAeM duOJOq |Z UeTq JO MATA Pua PueMeSsS *Zg9| 030Ud 9811809 ONILSSL YILSV 12 NW1d Loaroud GVH3Y YILVMNVANa ALIO LNIOSTUD ydeasoupky paqetAasuqqe jo uotyatduos 4aqse |c@ UPTd JO MATA apts-eag -€9| oW0Ug esise0o -ONLLSal 340s30 12 NV1d° Loaroud 4 @VHIY YILVANVaNS ALIO “LNI9SaNO yudeusoupAy paqetaAsuqqe jo uoltyetduioo uaqge |Z ueTd JO MATA anbtTqo puemeag “fg, OO0Udg 981-1809 ONILSIL 340178 12 NW'Id 1Logfoud @VHI¥ YILVMNVINa ALID 1INI98349 ydeudouphy paqetAeaqqe Jo uotyeTduioo ueqje |Z ueTg JO MATA pua pueMeag *GQ| O30Ug L8}-1809 ONILSSL UILIV. 12 NWId -. . sogroud aVAaY UaLVMNVaN ALO INGoSRID E 2 i -- CRESCENT 5 2 a nN z < Jj a BEFORE TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 22 before wave attack Photo 166. CRESCENT CITY _ Q z | i é 5 E BEFORE TESTING f Plan 22 before wave attack ique view o Seaward obl Photo 167. yoeyje eAeM auojeq Zz UeTd JO MeTA pus puemees “gg| 090Ud o6rig00. ” ONISAL 3¥ONaa '2 NVId Loaroud GYHaY YaLVMAVsNG ~ ALIO LNIOSIND fs} ees ta = = ae oe ae: Be Boe ee fy 5.8 S beg: Qo ms Sz eo < oO. AFTER TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 22 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 169. vans z Ne fees nT SOs agi ie Moe a” a > 4 ty AFTER TESTING 3 a a E Zz z 8 < a q a Ss Photo 170. Seaward oblique view of Plan 22 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph 3 2 a a, 2 z& ee ee os PROJECT. PLAN 22 AFTER TESTING Seaward end view of Plan 22 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 171. 0eqqe yor}qe aaem adojaq €z ueTd JO MATA epTs-ees “~eL| OF0Ud 761-1809 ONILSAL quosad oz NV1d yoaroud avHad WaLvMAV Ida ALIO LNIOSAUO Oe VIE VACM SdOJaq EZ UCTq JO MATA anbTTGo puemeas -€)| ooug 963-1809 ONILSaL 3u0Ige £2--NV1 Logroud GVHIe UaLVMVvaua ALI’ IN30SINO “HLL 090Ud yoryqye aAem asozeq Ez UPTd JO META Pus puemMees 961-1809 ONILSIL JUOIIG £2 NV 1d Logroud @VH3Y YILVMAVINT ALIO. LNIOSINO ydeisoupky paqetaasaqqe jo uotyzetdwoo uaqge €Z ueTg JO MATA apts-eas °GLL oqoug 161-1809 ONILSAL YaLav &¢ NV Id Logroud aVHIY UILVMVaNE ALO ENIOSauO. ydeusoupAy paqyetaAsuqqe jo uoTjzeTdwoo u9aqge = 61-1809 ONILSaL YILIV £z NVId Logroud @VHad YILVMAVINE ALIO LNIOS3NO €zZ UeTq JO MeTA enbTTGo pueMEss “gL oj0Ud yudeusoupAy payetAeuqqe jo uoTyeTduoo uaqje €Z ueTq JO MATA pua pueMeas -°/)| oQoUg 661-1809 ONIISAL Yadav fe NVId Loaroud CRATERS UaLVMNV Sue ALID: LNAISIND yoeqjqe aaem asojeq 2 UPTd JO META apts-eas “gil 070Ud 001809 ONILSAL Fuodgd ve NVId Loaroud qVHay YalvMAVvsda ALIO LNIOSIYO > = ° & z i oC BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT: BEFORE TESTING Seaward oblique view of Plan 24 before wave attack Photo 179. yoryye aaem asogeqd te URTd JO MoTA pus puemees “ORL 0F0Ud Zowig09 ONILS31 Joss ve NV 1d 1ogroud @vHau YILVMAVING ALlo LNIISINO ydeisoupky paqetAsuqqe Jo uoTyeTduoo uaqye fz UeTg JO MATA apTs-eas “1Ql oq0Uug £0dI BOD ONILSAL YaLIVv ve NV Id Loaroud SVHAY UALVMAVade ALID. LNIOSaYNO anbiTqo puemees “Zgl 040Ud ydeuSoupAy paqetaAsaqqe Jo uotyetduoo weqgje te UPTd JO MOTA ONILSAL WaLiV ve NV'Id 1garoud QVHIN WALVMNVINE ALIO LNIOSSUO ydeudoupAy payetasuqqe jo uotjatdwoo uaqje ft¢ UBT JO META pus puemeas ~°€g| oOoUg “9021809 ONILSAL UILaV ve NV 1d Logroud OVHIY YALVMAVad - ALIO” NIST CRESCENT CITY ma < x= e2 ~ ~ [3 & = M < w 4 (ea) AFTER TESTING Sea-side view of Plan 24 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 184. s y ydeudouphy jo uotyetduioo uaqje +2 ueTq Jo MaTA anbt {Go PYeMESS “GQ| oO4OUd OFAROD ONIISAL YaLdV we NVId isaroud ayHad waLVMdVaN AIO LNaQSauo y udeaSouphy go uotyeTdwoo veqge fe UPTd JO MOTA pua puemeas “981 090Ud is ee Zz ace Sea-side view of Plan 24 after cumulative testing of Hydrographs A and B Photo 187. gq pue y sudeaSouphy go ButTqseq eATJeTNUMO 4aqJe te UPTd Jo MaTA anbtTqo paemeas “ggl o40Ud ONIISS1 Y3LIV HdVUDONGAH GB ve NYTd Logroud QVHae YALVANVINE ALIO LNIOSIUD q pue y sydeasouphy jo 3ut4seq aaTJeTNUMO saqse He UeTg JO MeTA pus P4BMEaS “681 040Ug Piaigo9 ONILSAL UaLiv HaVYOONGAN @ VE NVId 19drowa SVHSY YaLveOIVaNE ALID. LNaD6auD yoeqje eAeM auojeq GZ UeTd JO MeTA aptis-eeS “061 090Ud ie 4809 ONILSAL FOsaa sz NV'ld Loaroud GVHIN. UILVANVING ALIO ~LNIOSAYO CRESCENT. CITY 2 = FS a8 &3 =< sz 3 BEFORE: TESTING COB 216 f Plan 25 before wave attack 1que V1lew oO Seaward obl Photo 191. yorqqye aAeM adozaq Gz UeTd JO MeTA pus PAeMeaS "261 Lié 1809 ONILSIL FuOsJae sz NV1d Loaroud GVHIY YILVMAVING ALID LNIOSTND “CRESCENT CITY — - BREAKWATER REHAB: PROJECT 3 os oo > Sea-side view of Plan 25 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 193. ydeuSouphy pagetAeaqqe jo uotyetduioo uaqge G2 ueTd JO MeTA anbtTqo puemeas “t6l 090Ud 6)2-1809 ONIISSL waLIV 9% NV Id Loaroud GVA WALVANVIUE ALIO LNIOSSHO ydeusouphy paqetasuqqe jo uotyzeTduoo Jazze Ge UeTd JO MATA puae PueMeaS “G6, OJOUg 0221900 ONIISaL walay 92 NV'Id _ doarowa “SVHIU WaLvayvaue ALO IN3OSRUO * E o Ee Zz cs g 4 Oo a < = re i os 2 = = is ts) e a 3 [4 oa < Lo mz LS oth N@ Se ze <5 ea a> cre i < Sea-side view of Plan 25 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 196. vy ydeusoupky Jo uotyetduioo uaqge Ge uetg Jo MatA anbtTqo puemeas 62-1809 ONILSSL Yadav V-HdVuooudAn 9G NVId Logaroud SVHIU UaLVANVaNE ALD” LNIDSIUD 2 N a pn = J o Seaward end view of Plan 25 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 198. Sea-side view of Plan 26 before wave attack Photo 199. yoryjye aaem auoseaq gz UeTd JO MATA anbtTqo puemess “00d 070Ud 98e4209 © ONILSSL 3NO4aa 98 NV1d -loaroud SVHTS WALVANVDNG CITY CRESCENT 2 = iw [4 oe ps} & < 2 a PROJECT PLAN 26 BEFORE TESTING Seaward end view of Plan 26 before wave attack Photo 201. > ES Oo = Zz wl oO ” ww (= oO BREAKWATER REHAB PLAN 26 HYDRO-A AFTER TESTING CO8{- 227 Sea-side view of Plan 26 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 202. y ydeudoupky jo uotyatduoo uaqze Je UPTd JO MATA aNbTTGo puemeas -¢€Qz2 o4oUg 922-1909 ONIISSL YILIV. V> ONGAH: 92 NV1d Joaroud SVHSY: WaLVMOVaNE ALIS “LNIOSAUD ©, y ydeuZouphy go uotyeTduoo seqge 92 ueTd JO MATA pus pueMeasS “hO2 0790Ud 622-1809 ONILSAL Y3LI¥ V-OUGAH 92 NV1d Logroud GVHIY WILVMAVINS ALID LNIISAHO s > ee iS) z : 2 : o Si = < a ra) © oN ez a < 3 ee TESTING =) So a =) al = AFTER CO8It- 230 Sea-side view of Plan 26 after cumulative testing of Hydrographs A and B Photo 205. g pue y syudeasoupAy Jo 3ut4se4 aATJeTNuMD Jaqsje gz UPTd JO MaTA anbtTqo puemMeas *90¢ 040Ud 1ez 4809 ONLSSL YaLiV @- ONGAH 92 NVId igaroud GVHIY WALVMNVING ALID LNIOSIIO : oO a : PROJECT PLAN 26 HYDRO-B AFTER < TESTING COBL 232 Photo 207. Seaward end view of Plan 26 after cumulative testing of Hydrographs A and B CITY CRESCENT : : e © Qo. 4a $2 = < Bed oa ° - = i Pa a PG Bae af: " y : “y Wad TESTING B é =) S N 5 z a < a A a o : BEFORE Sea-side view of Plan 27 before wave attack Photo 214. YOIZE SAEM SsOJaq LZ UBT JO MATA anbiTqo puemeas °G,2 oqo0ug yoeqjze aaem asoseq 12 UeTd JO MATA pua puemeas “912 090d 121209 ONLISaL 280179 Lt NV1d 193f 0%d GVH WALVANVaET ALIO LNTOETHD CITY | CRESCENT 3 [4 s < ‘tel a od PROJECT Sea-side view of Plan 27 after completion of abbreviated hydrograph Photo 217. ydeasoupAky paqetasuqqe Jo uoTzeTdwoo ueqge 12 UBTd JO MOTA anbtqTqo puemeses “gle 940Ud ydersoupAy paqetasaqqe Jo uotyetduoo yvaase pz uetg JO MOTA pud pueMeasS “612 OJOUg CRESCENT CITY e a 3 = 3 cs} < = ia m7 [=] 2 —< _— Sa z < < oa 2) fe a [-2} S = a ta =I Ww [= ce) oe is} [-<] o w Pia wo Ea ari ol ag az ae << ie Oo nN oO jo] o 8 before wave attack after modification 67.5-deg angle of wave attack Sea-side view of Plan 1 to shoreward transition Photo 220. ’ CRESCENT. CITY: e a g = a = tl 3 om. & 2 eee ga 2 < nee i} S = a & wy S rs wy a be ae ies fen) i ge az Ze 2< +t o ae a io} 3 ion icat f Plan 18 before wave attack after modif to shoreward transition; 67.5-deg angle of wave attack Seaward obl Photo 221. 1que view o Lg {uotqtsueszz paemesoys 04 apts-eas “222 070d yorqye aAem Jo oTsue goap-G° UOTILOTJT Pou swaqse YOrIVWe SAM auojeq gl UeTd JO MATA pus 992-1909 ONIISIL 0498 9390 9°L9=NIVILLY FAVA JOD TONY 9) NVId Loaroud VIN YILVANVSYE ALIO LNIOSaUD CRESCENT CITY BREAKWATER REHAB ANGLE OF WAVE ATTACK=67,5 DEG AFTER TESTING PLAN 18 CO81-266 ; AP eo XS A wt h 67.5-deg angle of wave attack b) Sea-side view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 223. ANGLE OF WAVE ATTACK=67.5 DEG AFTER TESTING 081-267 PLAN 18 2 < 3 Pa #3 == is a 67.5-deg angle of wave attack ’ Seaward oblique view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph A Photo 224. yoeq ye aaem Jo atsue 3ap-G:)9 $y ydeuZouphy jo uotyzaTduoo Jazse Ql UeTd JO MATA pus pueMeas -Gez oqoug 8938-1809 ONHSIL ULI 930 9°L9=A9VLLV AVM. 40:419NV- 81 NV1d) Lao: SVHIY USIVMNVaNE ALIO. ANa0sau0 CRESCENT CITY » BREAKWATER REHAB PROJECT PLAN 18 AFTER TESTING ANGLE OF WAVE ATTACK=67.5 DEG CO81-269 67.5-deg angle of wave attack . ? Sea-side view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph B Photo 226. 67.5-deg angle of wave attack ° 5) Photo 227. Seaward oblique view of Plan 18 after completion of Hydrograph B ydersorpsH JO wotTgetduoo 1e4ge QT UeTd JO MeTA pue pzremesg “8cc yoeyje oAeM JO etsue Zep-G° 19 mel YOeVIe BAEM JO aTSue Bap-G*)g !yoeWWe SAEM AIOJAaq 92 ULTq JO MATA BpPTs-eag ‘6zz 0j0Ug Ss-1800 ONIISAL JdOsae 949d 9°L9=AOVILY GAVM JO TIONV 9¢ NV Id Loarodd QVHaY YALVMAVSUS | ALIO LNZOSaUO yoeqqe AEM JO aTBSue Bap-G')g !yoeqIWe BAEM BIOJaq QZ UeTG JO MATA anbt{qGo puemess ‘OZ oJoUd ONILSAL J¥O0UI78 990 S°L9=NOVLLY GAYA 40 TIONY 92 NVId Logroud GVH3Y YILVMAVING ALIS =LNI9S949 YORIIE SAM JO aTSue Bap-G')g !yoeIWe AAEM au0Joq gz UeTg JO MATA pud puemeas "| €2 o40Uug L¥e-1809 ONILSAL 34Os9a 930 S*L9=NOVLLY JAVM JO FTONY 92 NV 1d LOaroud GVHIY WALVAYVING ALID . LNJOSIND yorqge eaem jo eTsue sep-G° 19 ‘ydersorpsy peqetasiqqe jo uoTyeTdmoo reqje 9¢ Ueld JO MoTA epts-eeg *2f2 040Ud 872-1809 ONILSAL YaLAV 9390 9°L9=AOVLLY JAVM 40 TIONV 9% NW 1d LOaroud @VHIY YALVMAVINE ALIO LNAOSTYO yoeqye aaem jo atzue 3ap-G°/9 ‘ydeudoupAy pa f qeTAduqqe Jo uotyzetdwoo ueqje gz ueTq JO MaTA anbtTgo puemeag *€€2 O0Ud 62-1809 ONISAL YaLdV 930 S'L9=NIVLLY ZAYM 40 FIONY 9% NV 1d iLgaroud GYHIN WALVANVIYE ALIO = LNIOSIND yorqje aaem Jo atTBue Bap-G°)9 ‘ydeadsoupAy paqetAsuqqe Jo uotyetduoo uaqye gz ueTd JO MOeTA pus pueMeEsS “tEc 090Ud Bo lll 030 9°L9=NOVLIV JAVM. 40 TONY 9@ NV1d Logroud GQVHIY YILVANVING ALIO LNIOSAUO yoeqye aAem jo atsue 3ap-G°/9 ‘ydeusouphy paqetasuqqe Jo uotyatduoo uaqye qyeodau gz ueTg JO MATA apTs-eas “GE2 070Ud 192-1809 ONLISSL WaLiv 930 S°L9=OVLLY JAVA 430 FPONV 92 NV 1d Logroud GVH WILVMAVIG ALID., LNFOSIND 67.5-deg angle of wave attack ? e view of Plan 26 repeat after completion of Seaward obliqu abbreviated hydrograph Photo 236. yoeqqe aAem Jo aTsue Bap-G°/9 ‘ydeusouphy paqetasuqqe Jo uoTyatduioo uaqge qyeadau gz ueTg JO MATA pua pueMeasS “/€2 O4OUg yoeqje aAeM Jo aTsue Bap-G° 19 *V ydeisoupkH Jo uotyeTduioo seqse ge UPd JO MATA apTs-eeg “Bee 090Ud %S92-1800 ONIISEL UILIV 940 9°L9=NOVLLY AVM 40 TIONY 92 NVId Loaroud @VHIN UILVMAVINS ALIO LNIISAND yoeqye evem jo eTsue sep-G')9 ‘y ydergorpéy go uoTyeTduoo 10e47e Qe UeTd JO mMeTA onbT[qo premeeg -6€2 o10Ug 992-1809. ONUISAL BBLS: SIG SLO SVE AMR 40: ZION: se Nya Aaroud AVEI USLVANVSES. ALID: LNZOSRIS aAemM Jo atsue 3ap-G°)9 ‘y udeuzouphy go uoTyatTduos waqje 92 UPTd JO MATA pus pueMesS “Otje 030Ud yoeqze 992-1900 ONLISSL WILIV 990 9°29=WOVLIV JAVA 40 TIONV 92 NVId 4ogroud SVH3Y WALVANVING ALIO LNIOSaHO CRESCENT CITY a 10 ne a io cS) 2 3 ig Sag = Soe mo 4 i of <3 soba SF Sage Fe Za2¢s5 S S2e6 4 Oe << ion icat Sea-side view of Plan 26 before wave attack after modif to shoreward transition; 67.5-deg angle of wave attack Photo 241. yoeqye aaem go atsue sap-G°)9 SuolqTsueiqy PuemMasoYys OF UOTABOTIJTpow waqge yorzqe aAEM s40Jaq Jc URTd JO MOTA anbITqo puemMessS “ete 030Ud 9928-1809 ONILSAL 3N0s98 030 S°L9=NOVLLY JAVA 40 FTONY 92 NVId ivaroud QVH38 HILVANVING AMO LNIOSIU9 yoeq ye aAeM Jo aTBue BZap-G*)g ‘uotytsuesy PuemMauoys 03 UOTIBOTITPOW JeAZe YOeIIe SAM au0Jaq gz UueTg JO M8TA pus pueMeag “Ee o.0Ug 692-1809 ONIISAL avouag Dad SY9=YIVLIV JAVA. 40 2°1ONV: 92 NVId = Loaroud “RVHAY: UaLWASiVaua ALI’ LNIOSaND a 3 iy ee Oo fa = Z = ee ied 5 2 25 PLAN 26 ANGLE OF WAVE ATTACK=67,5 DEG AFTER TESTING C081-260 67.5-deg angle of wave attack ? Sea-side view of Plan 26 after completion of Hydrograph B Photo 244. YOeAIE OACM JO aTBue Bap-G°)g9 $g ydeuSoiphy JO uoTzaTduOD ssqse 92 ueTg Jo MOTA oenbtTqo puemeas ‘Ghz o40Ug 19z-1809 ONLISAL W3LIV 930 9°L9=WOVLIY AVA AQ SONY 92 NVAd- daaroud AVR waveNysud ALIO. Inaoeaud = yorqqe aAem jo aTsue Sap-G°L9 ‘4 ydeuZoupky go uotyaTduioo seqge 9c UPTd JO MoTA pua pueMeas “Otc 990Ud 292-1909 ONILSSL YILAVY 930 9°L9=XOVLLY AVM 40 TONY 92 NVId Loaroud QVHIY WILVANVING AMID LNIOS3N9 = =) =I = FE cs =f] uw > Ww J oc uw = < 5 4 = (= n 4 6 PROTOTYPE TIME, HOURS NUMBERS INDICATE HYDROGRAPH STEP NUMBER TEST CONDITIONS FOR EACH STEP ARE GIVEN IN TABLE 1 ABBREVIATED HYDROGRAPH PLATE 1 S —l el = = Ww a Ww > Ww 4 c Ww re Ww Sy) c wi ll < Ss ay —) ke wn 4 6 PROTOTYPE TIME, HOURS NOTES: NUMBERS INDICATE HYDROGRAPH STEP NUMBER. TEST CONDITIONS FOR EACH STEP ARE GIVEN IN TABLE 3. 16-18 HYDROGRAPH B PLATE 3 1S0G0W Wan AYNLONYLS ONILSIXS Wal pL v9t+9E aa SO10G SO LIWIT SLVINIXOUdd Vv AqgIs vas HIVLLV AAVM 40 MOVLLVY AAVM JTONV 9340-S°29 4O JISNV 930-06 4g!IS YOs¥VH PLATE 4 SECTION A-A SOOO EXISTING MATERIAL SECTION B-B SECTION C-C MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS MODEL PROTOTYPE idly W, = 0.28 LB STONE Ww, = 25 TON STONE @ 165 PCF @ 170 PCF ** W, = 0.13 LB STONE W, = 12 TON STONE @ 165 PCF @ 170 PCF WaSOmb TO OGFsng Has We MOAB IN STONE @ 165 PCF SON @ 100 PGs W, = 42 TON DOLOS * ELEVATIONS IN FEET REFER TO MLLW “sew =O, AG OU POLOS @ 156 PCF ** RANDOM PLACED ARMOR STONE @ 141 PCF *** TWO LAYERS; RANDOM PLACED CROSS-SECTIONS FROM EXISTING STRUCTURE-MODEL PLATE 5 4qgis vas SO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv —*— * AdIS YHOSuVH V-V NOILOAS TIVIGILVN IONILSIXI MITIW L- R-- > 3SSO10d NOILVLITIGVHIY 3SSO100 ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITITVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVYL 4ISSO10G ONILSIXF PLATE 6 dz ‘V2 ‘7 NW1d AqgIs Vas 3SSO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddV ACIS YOSYVH V-V NOILOSS 091 TVIYILVW ONILSIXI MTIW.LF 3SSO10G NOILVLITIGVHIY ISSO10G ONILSIXF NV NOILVLITISWHIY NIFIMLIJ NOILISNVYL VE “ENV 1d VE NV1d HOS SO1OG JO SHSAVT E HLIM GSY3SA090 SVM VaY¥vV G3SHSVC« 3SSO10G SO LINIT ALYWIXOUddv ~~" — GZ+LE | | . \ | Jais vas Ye AqgIS YOsYVH V-V NOILOAS WIy¥ILVN ONILSIXI — [Co MTIW.L-R IN 3SSO10d NOILVLITIGWHIY JSSOT1OG ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIA NOILISNVGL 4ISSO 7100 MTIW ONILSIX ‘Oct PLATE 8 SO10G JO LINIT ALVWIXOUdd Vv —*—*— 3qgis vas Waals YOsuVH V-V NOILOAS 4ISSOTOG NOILVLITIGVHIY FSSO7TOd ONILSIXJI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVEL” 3550704 ONILSIXI” MITTIN dgis vas SO10G JO LIWIT SLYWIXOUddV —*— AqgIS YHOSYVH Vv-V NOILOAS TVIYILVN ONILSIXI 4ISSO100 NOILVLITIGVWHIY 4SSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVWHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVEL PLATE 10 LONV 9 SNV 1d AGIS Vas SO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv —*— + — dvVo 4H 40 39G3 AGISLNO SHL WOUS 00! JONVLSIC VY OL 1NO SO10a ONILSIX3S AHL WOYS GALVAVOXS SVM HON]3YL V Z NW1d HOS « AGIS YOSYVH V-V NOILO3S /091 M cA et IVIYILVW THIN Be. ONILSIXI WM Lo 4ISSO70a NOILVLITIGVHA aoe 4ASSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNV YL ISSO 70d INILSIXA PLATE 11 NOILVAWOX3 HONSUL FS === SO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddY —*—*— AgIs Vas AdIS YOSUVH V-V NOILOAS TVIYIL VW ONILSIXI 4ISSO 7100 NOILVLITIGVHI4 a ae FISSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV oe NOILVLITIFWHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNV AL 3sso10gd / 74 ONILSIXI PLATE 12 AGIS vas NOILVAVOX3 HONJYLSsese $0100 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddvY —-—- — ONILSIX3 WOU LNO SO10G JNO 4O SONVLSIG V 301 HLIM ‘SLINA ONILSIX] SSVdWOOWS] SLINN NOILVLITIGWH3HY » AQIS YOSYVH V-V NOILD3S MTIW ,62- 4ISSO710d NOILVLITISWHIY. 3ISSOTOG ONILSIXI ONY NOILVLITIGWHIY NFIIMLII NOILISNVYL 3SSO100 ONILSIXI“T IW Oct 13 PLATE Ol NV1d SNOILIGNOS AdALOLOUd LN3S3ud TSGOW 431148 OL Q39NG3Y SLINN ONILSIX3 4O JDVYHSAOD «x ONILSIX3 WOYS LNO SO100 ANO SO JONVISIG V FOL HLIM ‘SLINN ONILSIX3 SSVdWOOWA SLINA NOILVLITISVHSY « 4gGIs vas AqIS YOSsYVH V-V NOILOAS TVIYAILVN INILSIXI MTIW 1-H 3SS010a NOILVLITIGVHIY 3SSO100 ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIFMLI NOILISNVYL 4ISSO 710d 9 PLATE 14 LL NW1d AGIs Vas 4d!IS YOSYVH V-V NOILO3S MTIW .62- 4ISSO7T0G NOILVLITIGWHI4: 4ISSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNV EL ISSO 100 ONILSIXA PLATE 15 ‘NMOHD OL pl ‘€L ‘ZL SNW1d dN GNV GAXYVW LNIOd LV ONILYVIS ‘G30V1d ATIWOGNVY 3Y3M SLINN 3OL NOL 8S ‘DNILSIXA WOYS LNO 3SSO100 OML JO SONVLSIC V 301 HLIM ‘SLINN ONILSIX3 SSVWdINOONA SLINA NOILVLITIGWHAY “SLINA NOL 8S ‘SH3SAV1 Z ‘SMOH Z SO LHVLS « SO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv —»—« — 3qis Vas vl NW1d ¥O4 G3aLVAVOXA HONAYL AOL He NMOHS SV G3LWAV9OX3 SVM HONSYL SOL V Ld590X3 EL SV SWVS SHL SVM VL NV 1d «xx SLINA 3OL SH1L HOS G3SN SVM IN3SW39V1d 1VI04dS 1d39DX3 JWVS SHL SVM EL NV Id «« 00+LE AqgIS YOsYVH N | ' S % SY V-V NOILOAS MT IW .62- TV/IYILVW gs ONILSIX4 ISSO 710d NOILVLITIGVHIY ISSOTO0 ONILSIXI GNV NOILVWLITIGWHIY NIIMLIA NOILISNVSL 3Sso10gd M11W ONILSIXI~ ,0Z+ PLATE 16 GLNV1d AGIs v3s NOILVAVWOX3 HONSYLESSE= $O10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddY —-—-— AdIS YOSYVH V-V NOILDAS TIVIGAILVW i APP 4ISSO70G NOILVLITIGVHIY ISSOTOG ONILSIXI GNV NOMLVLITIGVHIY NIFIMLIG NOILISNVYL 4ISSO 70d ONILSIXI@MT IW /0Ct+ PLATE 17 9L NV 1d 4dIS Vas NOILWAVWOX3 HONSYL ESSE SO10Q 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv —*—* 4q1IS YOSYVH V-V NOILOAS TVIYIL VW ONILSIXI 3SSO10G oe we NOILWLITIGWHIY ISSOTOG ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVWHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVYL 3ISSO10d DNILSIX4I~ MT1IW PLATE 18 ZLLNW1d NOILVAVOX3 HONSYLES SE $O100 40 LINIT SLVWIXOUddV—- — AGIs vas AGIS YOSUVH V-V NOILOAS MTIW .6¢- 3SSO10d 3 NOILVLITIGVWHIY 3SSO710G ONILSIXI GNY NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLII NOILISNVYL 3SSO10G PLATE 19 8lL NW1d Ad1IS Vas AgIS YOSYdVH €-4 NOILO3S V-VW NOILO3S PEET¢ INOLS YOWYY NOL-S2 INO 051 ATILVWIXOUddY SI HINFHL AMS SEE PALIT ONILSIXI- Z : MTIW.L-*® 3SSO10G S69 SI JNOLS eS NOILVLITIFGVHIY YOWYV NOL-SZ JO as | 3SSO10G ONILSIXI GNV ve / Se eee SOROUEING NOILVLITISVWHIY NIIMLIIJ NOILISNVYL JOHLONIT S! HINFYL AO HLGIM WAWINIW 4ISSO710d ONILSIXIM 1 IW /0E+ PLATE 20 6L NW1d JGVoIYHVA SV LOV OL HOIHL SY3AV1 € G30V1d JNOLS YHOWHV NOL SZ TWNOILIGGYV 40 LINIT SLVYWIXOUddY —*— *— $O10Q 4O LIWIT ALVWIXOUddV Ags VAS Sy90148 Sse 4qgIS YHOSYVH V-V NOILOAS MTIW .6¢- 4ISSO1OG NOILVLITIGVHIY ao 4ISSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIAIMLIG NOILISNVUL 3SSO10G ) ONILSIX~M 1 IW 0+ PLATE 21 02 NV ld SGOdVHL3L JO LIWIT ALVIIXOUddv —**— OO+Le epee GZ+LE SO10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv¥—-—:— AqGIS Vas S00148 4LAYONOD AdIS YHOSYVH V-V NOILOAS 091 5 SSS ITT XS TV/YAILVW NS ONILSIXI i |= Sf MTIWI-R Fo & | } ; ISSO 700 NOILVLITIGVHIY i... She, FSSO10G ONILSIXI GNV | NOILVLITIGVHIY NIFIMLIG NOILISNVYL i) 3SSO10d ONILSIXa- MTT /OC+ PLATE 22 Lo NW 1d SGOdVYLIL JO LINIT SLVWIXOUddY —- —- — aoe bes) GZ+LE 3SSO100 40 LIWIT SLVWIXOUddyY —-— + — | 4qIS Vas AGIS YOSYVH Y-V NOILOAS (SYFAVT OML) SdOdVYLil — S TVIGILVN INILSIXI SS MTWRF : pol | 3SSO10G ; * NOILVLITIGVHIY 4ISSOTOG ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIFIMLIG NOILISNV YL 4ISSO TOG PLATE 23 co NW 1d $O100 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddv— * —* — 3adis vas S9018 < 4d!iS YHOSuVH V-V NOILOAS ISSO 70d NOILVLITIGWHI4 ISSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIA NOILISNVYEL 4ISSO7O7 INILSIXI PLATE 24 ec NV 1d AQIS Vas $O10G JO LIWID SLVIIXOUddv S9014 SA JdIS YOseUVH TVIYFL VW ONILSIXI S MIM A-F 3Sso70a wa s NOILVLITISVHIY 4SSO100 ONILSIXI ONY NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVYL 4SS010G ONILSIXA PLATE 25 ve NV ld JaQVOIYHVE SV LOV OL HOIHL SYSAV1 2 G3A0V 1d ANOLS NOL SZ TVNOILIGGYV 30 LIWIT SLVWIXOUddvY —*#—* — $0100 SO LIWIT SLVWIXOUddY —*—*— Ad1IS VaS Sy90148 ALSYONO: AGIS YOSYVH V-V NOILOAS M1IW .6c- TVIYILVW Aa ONILSIXI F MTIW .L-* 3SSO710G es NOILVLITIGWHIY JSSOTOO ONILSIXI ONV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLII NOILISNV YL 3SSO10g ONILSIXa7 “IW, 0E+ PLATE 26 GC NV ld NOILVAWOX4 HONSYL AGVOIYYVAE SV LOV OL NOIHL SY3AV1 C GQ30V1d JNOLS HONYYV NOL SZ TWNOILIGGY JO LIWIT SLVYWIXOUddv *-* —*— $O10Q JO LIWIT 3ALVWIXOUdd Vv I AGIs Vas $9018 JLAYONOD, A ch AdIS YOSEYVH V-V NOILOAS TVIYIL VW ONILSIXI 4ISSOTOG NOILVLITIGVHIY 4ISSOTOd ONILSIX4I GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIFMLIG NOILISNVYL 4ISSOTOG /MTTW INILSIXI PLATE 27 NOILVWAWOX3 HONSYL JaVOIYYVE SV LOV OL AOIHL SY3SAV1 2 G30V1d SNOLS YHONYV NOL SZ TVNOILIGGY 40 LIWIT SLVWIXOUddVv SO10d 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOUddVv 9@ NV id 4dIS Vas SH90148 41L3YONO 0-9 NO!LOAS TVIYAILVW JINOLS YONYV NOL-SZ J $$$ OSHIAV IE” —“G=ginQiloas PEELE] JINOLS YONYV NOL-GZ INO |A TILVWIXOUddY SI HINIYL 69 SI INOLS . YOWYV NOL-SZ JO TD YFILIWVIOC FAILIIIII : S070d JNO 4O HLONIT SI HONAGL JO HLGIM WAWINIW AdgIS YHOSYVH V-V NOILOAS TVIYILVN ONILSIXI ISSO 710d NOILVLITIGVHIY FISSOTOd ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIG NOILISNVGL ISSO 700 ONILSIXI~ MTIN PLATE 28 Le NW 1d JQVOIYHVE SV LOV OL NOIHL SY3AV1 2€0390V1d JNOLS HONHV NOL SZ TVNOILIGGY 4O LIWIT ALVWIXOUddV $O10G JO LIWIT SALVWIXOUdd¥ AqIS Vas S9014 N Sars, ws AGIS YOSYVH V-V NOILO3S MT71W 6c- TVIYILVN DNILSIXI = MTIWL- % 3ISSO710gG NOILVLITIGVHIY JISSOTOG ONILSIXI GNV NOILVLITIGVHIY NIIMLIIJ NOILISNVYL 3SSO10G DNILSIXI “TTIW 0G PLATE 29 G3ISIGOW - 8L NV1d 3aqis vas NOILWAWOX3 HONSAYL S$O10G 4O LIWIT SLVWIXOuddv NOILISNVYL GY¥YVMVIS JOLYVLS NOILISNVYL GYVMIYOHS JOLYVILS JdIS YOsEUVH JIOL GYVMIYOHS ONOTV SLINNA INILSIX4 SSVdNWOINF ISSOTOG NOILVLITIGVHIY JO SMO" 2 PLATE 30 GAlsIGOW - 92 NW 1d 00+LE NOILISNV GL G4VMVIS JOLYVLS AgIS Vas $9014 re NOILVAVOX4 HONAYL JQVOIMYVE SV LOV OL MOIH! SYSAV1 @ G30V1d ANOLS YHONWHV NOL SZ TVNOILIGOYV 40 LINIT ALVWIXOUddY — * — * — SO10G 4O LIWIT ALVINIXOUddV ° == Pon x oN NOILISNVYL Ga4VMIYOHS JOLYVILS JOL GYVMIYOHS ONOTV SLINA INILSIXA SSVANOINI ISSOTOG NOILVLITIGVHIY JO SMO" Z 4qIS YOSYVH PLATE 31 moe erty eae <5 r 4 e ve Yai a + _ mate rnc Sgt cows ; C39 o¥4 - 7 29 FS & ge } - a