ahmed_port and harbour engineering

8/9/2019 Ahmed_Port and Harbour Engineering

1/22

SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & INDUSTRIAL SCIENCES

Swinburne course in which you are enrolled:

ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

NAME Ahmed Abu Bakar AL Hiyawi

ID NUMBER 7250924

SUBJECT CODE MRE80004

SUBJECT TITLE Port and Harbour Engineering

ASSIGNMENT No & Title 2

DUE DATE 28 July 2014

DATE submitted BY

STUDENT28 July 2014

CONTACT DETAILSe-mail: [email protected] PHONE: -

Unit/Subject Coordinator to complete:Extension granted Late penalty applies

Date received Received by:

Irregularities and PlagiarismThe Policy of Swinburne University of Technology is to treat as an irregularity, for the purpose of assessmentdiscipline, the use of any means to gain an unfair advantage in any work, the marks for which form part of a finalassessment. When an irregularity is suspected in such a work, the Subject Convener will establish if there is cause torefer the matter to the Examination and Assessment Discipline Panel. Irregularities include plagiarism and receivingundue assistance in preparation of the assessed work. If in doubt please seek advice from your subject coordinator.

Plagiarismis the taking and using as ones own, the thoughts, writings or other work of someone else with intention to deceive

and includes presentation of material from the Internet, published books or periodicals without due acknowledgment.You are encouraged to learn by the understanding and critical evaluation of the works and ideas of others, but you mustacknowledge the sources of these works and ideas if you use them in your own work.

Receiving undue assistance is when some other person contributes their work to an item of assessment that is intended toassess your capability. You are encouraged to collaborate in teams and learn from others, but your challenge in an item ofassessment is to show that you have assimilated this learning.

Students StatementI certify that I have not plagiarised the work of others or received undue assistance in the preparation of thisassignment.

Student Name & Signature Ahmed AL HiyawiDate 28 July 2014

AcknowledgeYES NO Place X in box


2/22

Assignment 2 Ahmed AL Hiyawi (7250924)

2

1. Plan a hydrographical survey of the existing harbor to produce an up-to-date

bathymetry of the area. (hint: what instrumentation? What measurement method?

Etc) (15%)

Coulls (2014) stated that the following information is necessary for hydrographical survey:

Regular depth to seaward of shoreline

Location of coastline High Water and Low Water marks

Location and least depth over shoals reefs, etc.

Location of breakers or tide rips, etc.

Nature of seabeds

Topographic detail Leading lines

Location of all floating navigation marks

Tidal stream measurements

Tidal observation

Sailing directions checked and amended

Record of all sonar sweeping undertaken

Wreck and obstruction details Port information, etc.

There are three specific classes of standards and guidelines that need to be satisfied in all

hydrographic survey to fulfil requirements in order to attain safe marine navigation. Table 1

shows the maximum allowable errors in hydrographical surveys for different types of survey.

Table 1: Maximum allowable errors in hydrographical surveys

Type of survey Class 1 Class 2 Class 3Vertical accuracy 150 mm 300 mm 500 mm

Horizontal positioning 6 m 12 m 100 m

Some of the ways are explained as following. The depth sensors can be divided in two

categories i.e.

Acoustics based

Single beam eco sounder (SBES)

Multi beam eco sounder (MBES)


3/22


3

Side Scan Sonar (SSS)

Non acoustics based

Airborne Laser sounding system

Airborne electromagnetic system Remote sensing

Mechanic system

Single Beam Echo Sounder (SBES)

Single beam echo sounder is one of the oldest types of echo sounder after lead line and

sounding pole, derived from military sonar and it is used by the hydrographic since mid-

1900. SBES necessitates only one transducer that functions as transmission and reception.

The transducer is attached to a vessel and generates an acoustic pulse to the seafloor which

will be bounced back and receive by the transducer. The travel time of sound pulses will be

measured and water depth can be known by basic calculation of travel time and speed of

sound pulse.

To have narrow beam in low frequency, bigger transducers are used. The transducer may

perhaps have narrow beam to concern about high directivity or wide beam if directivity is not

a concern but the detection of the least possible depth or obstacle on the sea floor is a main

concern. SBES only used narrow beam 20to 50, low frequencies and large transducer to get

high resolution mapping. The systems have two main components consist of a surface

processor and transducer head. Soundings were recorded in meters and corrected for the

speed of sound through water as determine by multiple daily measurements of the water

column profile.

Multi Beam Echo Sounder (MBES)

This is a newly new device growing rapidly offers precise and total sea floor exploration

when used with the suitable techniques and providing that the resolution of the method is

suitable for precise detection of navigational hazardous. Normally, the principle of the

operation of multi-beam approach is based on a fan formed transmission pulse directed in the

direction of the seafloor. Due to the reflection of the acoustic energy because of the seabed;

numerous beams are electronically shaped, using signal processing methods, with identified

beam angles. The two-way travel time between transmission and reception is calculated using


4/22


5/22


5

Side Scan Sonar (SSS)

While MBES is good for depth measurement, SSS is good for detecting the feature of

seafloor. The features include:

Towed behind a vesselpositional errors

Speed of advance to attain adequate pings on a target

Nadir blindspot

Height of towfish

SSS produces sound energy that sweeps the floor and the return signal is recorded

continuously to generate a detail picture of seafloor. SSS takes four key tasks for

hydrographical survey

Detection of wrecks and obstructions between sounding lines

Detection of other seafloor features

Identification on mobile areas of seafloor

collecting of seafloor organization data

Airborne Laser Systems (ALS)

Airborne laser sounding is a method for determining the water depth. The characteristics of

this method include:

LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)

Can operate in extreme conditions of salinity and temperature

Sensitive to suspended material and turbidity

Fast, accurate depth survey of up to 65 km2 per hour

High density 100% survey coverage based on 6 x 6m, 5 x 5 m, 4 x 4 m, 3 x 3 m

Self-contained system suitable for deployment to remote areas

Safe charting of complex and hazardous waters.

Cost effective operation

Rapid deployment ability

Choice of Methodology

In order to provide a precise bathymetry data of the present existing harbour, Multibeam

Echo Sounder (MBES) is used for measuring depth resolution and Side scan Sonar (SSS) is


6/22


6

used for detecting and determining materials and characteristics of the seafloors. It is also

important to take into account of the Single Beam Echo Sounding when the project owner

considers more about performing the work in a more economical way. Out of these

instruments, side scan sonar is the best technique to find out the obstructions in the channel

bed for the safe navigation. Because the geometry of the SSS has good shadow casting

capability in compare to the MBES.

2. Assume that the final product of the survey is the bathymetry provided during

lectures:

a. Using the Delft 3D simulations, assess the wave conditions (Hs, Tp, wave direction,

etc) at a few key points inside the harbor. (hint: explain where and why you

selected these key points) (6%)

After completing the hydrographical survey, the preparation of the breakwater is the next

step, if essential, layout to protect the port facilities. According to the provided port position

and DELFT 3D simulations, the position of essential point are presented in figure 2.

Figure 2: Key Point around the Harbour using DELFT 3D simulations (using Number for

better explanations)


7/22


7

Using the above DELFT 3D simulations result with the port facilities location, the key

points are on number 1 to number 5. Point 6 does not really affect the port operation.

b. How does the present breakwater perform? Are extensions required to ensure

better conditions? If so, why? (7%)

The present breakwater is one of the oldest methods and that serves as a temporary and as a

submerged structure. An alternative breakwater extension is necessary to upgrade the present

breakwater structure. The result obtained from DELFT 3D simulations shows that only area

with point 2 and 5 are not actually affected by the wave. While the other area still affected by

the wave, either wave directed toward the area or due to wave refraction. Whereas there is

nothing can be completed for area within point 6, because this area is outside the breakwater

protection.

Breakwater has a significant effect on the coastal processes. So the breakwater requires to be

prolonged in order to protect the port facilities for longer period. Because the wave still pass

through the side of breakwater and in the future it can leads to sedimentation in port area,

changing in environment situation, etc.

c. If extensions are needed, what layout can be suggested and why? What are the wave

conditions inside the harbor with the upgraded breakwater? How does the new

breakwater compare with the original layout? (10%)

Breakwater layouts should be designed in accordance to wave propagation, tidal

hydrodynamics, and sediment transport. To help in arriving at the most economical and

technically feasible layout, one must consider different layouts. Other considerations to be

made are the geometry of the breakwater and its armour. From DELFT 3D simulations we

identified that it is necessary to the extension for breakwater. Hence, the recommended layout

is presented in figure 3.


8/22


9/22


9

3. Design the extension of the break water. What type of armour would you suggest

and why? (12%)

The main objective of the breakwater design is to decide the size and layout of the cross-

section mechanisms. This can be usually accomplished through empirical formulae and other

recommended worldwide guidelines. In an open sea area, it is very difficult to ensure that

vessels are manoeuvred and accommodated safely without destruction from external factors.

According to UNCTA (1985), breakwaters are used to provide calmer water by deflecting,

reflecting and absorbing energy of swells and storm waves coming to the port. Therefore, the

use of breakwater is the only method for a better protection and calmness of port and

harbour.

Wave reflection and diffraction may influence on navigability, and the breakwater itself may

effect streams that may result scour and alter bathymetry, principally at the proceeding end

during assembly. It will increase the quantity of required material or have impact on the

permanency of adjacent constructions. Figure 4 shows the features of conventional break

water.

Figure 4: Conventional break water

Byrne (2014) mentioned some necessary steps to design breakwater. These are described

below:

A preliminary design using a simple formula

One of the available formulas is Hudsons formula which is simple. Therefore Hudsons

Formula is good enough for preliminary design. Hudsons formula is expressed as:


10/22


10

( )

Where,

W = weight of armour unit (Newtons)

Wr = unit weight of armour unit (N/m3)

H = Design wave height at the structure (m)

Sr= specific gravity of armour unit relative to water

Ww= unit weight of water

= Slope of the breakwater face

Kd= stability coefficient which depends on the shape of the armour

A review of available material

Following to preliminary design, the quantity, size and stability of armour material is

determined. It is then time to select the type of armour material to be used for the

construction of breakwater. The challenge for selecting the type of armour is the availability

and cost of the material for a required location. Other factors that need to be taken into

account for selecting the armour material are ease of manufacture, ease of storage without

moving from casting, no pattern placement and preferably single layer over underlayer.

Various types of armour materials can be used:

Tetrapods

Dolos

Sea Bees

Accropodes

Coreloc

Modification if necessary to any of the design criteria

In some conditions, it is suggested to use a lesser number of larger units to make economical.

It will decrease lesser damage during construction time. The design criteria should be

reviewed and modified if alternatives for reducing cost, time and effort can be executed.


11/22


11

Modification of design criteria can be made according to logical explanations and earlier

experiences.

Physical model studies in wave flume

Physical models are created geometrically analogous to the full size assembly to check for

breakwater performance. Since, the greater part of a breakwater is immersed, construction

and assessment is challenging, particularly at irregular seas. Breakwaters in deep water must

be model verified with a suitable sea conditions.

Possible review of the design criteria after tenders

Other factors that can affect the process of designing breakwater should be

considered

Wave-breakwater interaction

The wave climate along the whole length of the breakwater must be checked to observe

whether there is any bathymetry concentrates wave energy anyplace. The breakwater can be

line up to reduce such concentrations depending on the suitability.

Cross-section configuration

- Slope angle

Side slopes are usually as vertical as likely to reduce the volume of core material and to

decrease the reach of cranes working from the crest. The influence to the stability because of

the friction and interlocking increases with the increasing of the angle. However, the

reduction in the gradient-perpendicular indicates most favourable slope angles for supreme

interaction and strength.

- Crest elevation

The altitude of the crest has to be the least possible at which satisfactory overtopping take

place. These have to be established on highest wave run up, with the permission of freeboard

and post-construction settlement.

Since the breakwater using conventional design, the armour that will be used is rock because

rock is common armour material for breakwater and in general the most cost effective

material. Byrne (2014) mentioned that the more efficient method is use rock size for armour


12/22


12

that is bigger than 0.75 breakwaters. Nevertheless this can be changed depends on the

location.

Due to the unavailability of enormous armour rocks for a conservative two layer breakwater,

alternative materials, for example, tetrapod (as shown in figure 5)can also be used. The

tetrapod is a four-legged concrete structure used as armour unit on breakwaters. The shape of

the Tetrapod is useful to disperse the force of arriving waves by permitting water to flow all

over the place rather than against it and to decrease movement by permitting an arbitrary

distribution of tetrapods to equally interlock.

Figure 5: tetrapod blocks

4. Assume that the designed armour will be delivered in 9 months. However, the local

Government requires the port to be operational within the next 2months. What

type of temporary solution for the breakwater would you suggest? (5%)

It is estimated that the construction of designed amour will be completed in 9 months. The

local Government requested the port to operate after 2 months. So other alternative method

need to be used that can fulfil the time requirement and protect the port as well. With such

time constraints, temporary breakwater must be applied. Verhagen et al. (2009) stated thatnowadays three types of temporary breakwater available are: pneumatic breakwater and


13/22


13

hydraulic breakwater, pile breakwater and floating breakwaters. The selected solution for this

issue is floating breakwater as shown in figure 6.

Figure 6: Temporary breakwaters technique

The advantage of floating breakwater is as the name suggested. The floating breakwater

functions to protect the port area similar to conventional breakwater. Moreover, floating

breakwater did not need any foundation for it, which means it is cheaper than conventional

breakwater because it remove the breakwater foundation. Farmer (1999) stated that floating

breakwater also has issue that need to be mentioned. To begin with floating breakwater only

can handle wave height less than 6.5 feet.

Cheng et al. (2013) stated that, this method is achieved by the use of floating structure with

direction towards of wave propagation, connected to seafloors via mooring cables or chains.

The mooring configuration determines and divides the reflective structure into two different

categories:

Rigid floating breakwater: It includes a rectangular floating box that can be made

either from reinforced concrete, steel or scrap ship with a rectangular shape connected

to seafloors via mooring cable or chains, which reduces the wave transmission by

decreasing reflected wave energy when waves travel through the rigid structure.


14/22


14

Flexible floating breakwater: It includes a floating raft and waste tire floating

breakwaters connected to seafloors with mooring systems. This type of breakwater

decreases wave transmission and reduces wave energy by friction between the

flexibly floating elements of breakwater and water and elastic deformation.

5. The existing wharfs were (re)constructed in 1962, using prestressed concrete beams

and reinforced concrete for all other components.

a. You have to assess the extent of deterioration of the structure. Identify the factors

you will consider and approach that you will take in preparing for this assessment

(5%)

Durability of concrete structures in marine environment is a challenging issue because of

aggressiveness of sea water to concrete and reinforcement and long service life anticipated

of marine infrastructure like as harbour and coastal defence constructions. In addition to the

marine exposure conditions in the port, the prevalent weather is characterized by extreme hot

and dry conditions. The dominant mechanism of degradation of marine structures is chloride

induced corrosion which is based on the chloride transport into concrete by diffusion and

initiation of reinforcement corrosion when acute chloride content is surpassed at the steel

exterior.

The chloride induced failure of concrete occurs when C > Ccrit, where C is the chloride

content at the reinforcement surface and Ccrit is the critical (threshold) content. The critical

chloride content is a complex function of concrete properties (pH, water, oxygen, presence of

voids) at the steel/concrete interface. It is realized that there is no single general value of it

but rather a gradual increase of the probability of corrosion with increasing chloride content.

For concrete structures a value of 0.5% chloride ion by mass of cement is considered to be

the mean critical value for the Portland cement concrete.

The wharfs were constructed in 1962 and probably have some deteriorated part. In order to

investigate the deterioration, some factors that need to be assessed including investigation

method, investigation staff skill, nature behaviour (e.g. wave height, rain), etc. The method

to evaluate the wharf deterioration is illustrated below:

Determination of type of structure

Studying the structure details, such as reinforcement bar detail, concrete cover,

etc.


15/22


15

Detect the micro-environment for the wharf, for example, splash zone,

submerged zone, etc.

Create usual development pro-forma plans of individual structural components

Detect site of investigations on the plans

Record deterioration impact for respective location for mapping

Plan inspection technique

Adopt investigation scope, for example, visual inspection, sampling, etc.

Prepare safety plan

Make classification for illustrating and recording the errors

Evaluate remedial selections

b. Outline features/testing techniques, which will form part of your investigation and

the issues that you expect to encounter in determining the remaining life of the

structure. (5%)

To develop a proper maintenance and rehabilitation program for the wharfs, a very thorough

and comprehensive visual survey of their current condition, in terms of extent and severity of

damage, need to be undertaken. This survey should be done in two distinct stages. The first

stage is an initial walk around and slow trips on four-wheel drives around the entire wharf.

Secondly, a comprehensive and detailed survey, wharf by wharf and structural element by

element, has been undertaken by using launches and small boats to be as close to the

structural elements as possible. Realizing the pivotal importance of the visual survey to get an

overview of the magnitude of the problem, this was undertaken in many sessions with a

minimum of two experts and at times with up to six material and structural specialists.

Practically, most visual inspection sessions have been videoed, photographed and marked on

drawings. The wharf structure was supposed to deteriorate, whether it was only one or many

part, since it was there for a long time. Thus the wharf needs to be investigated to determine

the remaining life. The testing methods that can be used in this condition are explained

below:

Walk around Survey

The initial walk around survey required conducted to get an overview of the extent of

degradation and the serviceability conditions of the wharfs and the facilities. No physical

testing needs to be undertaken. The first impression is that the whole infrastructure is in a bad


16/22


16

disrepair. Most structural elements were rampant with extensive and wide cracking,

delaminating, visible corrosion in advanced stages of propagation and even broken

reinforcement.

Detailed visual survey

Visual inspection is the easiest test since this method only assesses the outer part

deterioration or structure part that can be seen by eyes. The main objective of this method is

to decide required future action. However visual inspection has huge downside. First of all, it

cannot determine the deterioration thoroughly and so further testing method is needed. The

next downside is all the findings need to be recorded properly for mapping, included

photographs, video tapes, and sketches.

In order to save time and to improve the value of the visual inspection, and make it as

independent of the observers as possible, the degree of cracking (width and length, visibility),

extent of spalling and the state of rusting and corrosion of elements has been used to

categorize the degree of severity of structural degradation. The classification used in this

investigation is according to the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Guide to damage

assessment. As shown, the four grades of damage are:

Light

Moderate

Severe and

Very severe

Admittedly, these four grades are still qualitative. Nonetheless, in the preliminary sessions

which were attended by all the members of the investigative team, the boundaries and

limitations of the system were well understood. Consequently, the ACI classification system

adopted in this investigation at Port has proven both reliable and satisfactory.

Detailed investigation

Sanjayan & Abdouka (2014) stated thatdDetailed investigation testing methods can be

divided into two categories such as (i) Non-Destructive Test and (ii) Destructive Test. Some

of common used detailed investigation methods are discussed below. The main issue that

usually encountered for marine structure is carbonation and chloride ingress.


17/22


17

Carbonation

Carbonation happens when concrete pH is reducing because carbon dioxide diffuses into

concrete. Since carbonation makes the concrete lowering its pH, the common method to

assess this is carbonation testing. This method is discussed in later.

Chloride ingress

Chloride ingress is the major cases for reinforcement corrosion and concrete durability. Any

concrete that in marine environment is exposed to this problem and the cause can be from

aggregate, sea sand, and/or mixing water.

Carbonation testing

This is one of the Destructive Test methods that commonly used. The procedure includes

taking a part of the structure as sample for testing. Next the sample will be sprayed with

chemical, like phenolphthalein, to see the changing of concrete colour. Corrosion of

reinforcement is initiated when pH is reduced due to carbonation. Corrosion results in

formation of expansive oxides and hydroxides. Expansive reactions result in internal pressure

and cracking and spalling of concrete. Carbonation occurs when carbon dioxide in the

atmosphere diffuses into concrete and reacts to cause reduction of pH level.

Figure 7: Phenolphthalein testing on Cracked Concrete


18/22


18

If the concrete change colour into magenta/purple, it means the concrete has pH above 9.2

which is good. However, if the concrete remain the same colour that means the concrete is

carbonated. This phenomenon is presented in figure 7. Based on the colour changing, the

carbonation penetration can be determined and solution can be provided.

Half-cell potential test

Half-cell potential is included as NDT, but some people also believe it can include as

destructive. The reason this method can be called destructive is drilling the concrete may be

needed to connect the rebar with the cable. The system of reinforcing steel corrosion is one

kind of electro-chemical approach. The characteristics of the reinforcing steel can be

observed by determining its half-cell potential. The more half-cell potential the greater

corrosion risk.

In this method, at first, detect the steel and measure the spacing of bar by a covermeter. The

concrete cover is distant in the vicinity over an appropriate bar and an electrical assembly

prepared to the steel. The reinforcing bar is attached to the half-cell via a digital voltmeter.

Half-cell potential reading is taken over a consistent grid of points to provide a potential map

of the area. When the reading result shows negative value, it means high chance of that area

is corroded. This step will be done repetitively until whole concrete area is tested.

c. Consider that fair amount of deterioration is visible on the reinforced concrete

components. How can the components be restored? (5%)

As can be seen, a rigorous and well-planned testing on all the structural elements of wharfs 2

- 8 at port has been undertaken. In all, about 50 concrete cores of 70 and 100 mm dia. were

extracted from piles, pile caps, beams and slabs. The results of the testing are satisfactory,

and as conclusive as could be. A summary of the results is:

The substrate concrete in most structural elements is still sound and of adequate

compressive strength in the range of 29 to 59 MPa.

The chlorides and sulphates concentration on the skin of all the structural elements are

dangerously high and most cracking, spalling and steel corrosion, which are

widespread, are due to the expansive pressure caused due to chloride, sulphate attack

and salt crystallization and its growth.

Although high, chloride and sulphate levels as seen in the profiles are not dangerously

high beyond 50 mm of the skin concrete. In particular, the present chloride ion


19/22


19

concentration at steel level in all structural elements is not more than 0.4%, by weight

of cement.

Cover to reinforcement, where there is no cracking and spalling, is adequate and still

of good quality concrete. An average value of cover to reinforcement in piles, pile

caps, beams land slabs is 75, 90, 90 and 65 mm, respectively.

On the overall, the age of the wharfs 2 x 8, in tandem with thorough visual inspection

and test data (particularly chloride and sulphate ingress and salt crystallization)

suggest that many parts of the structure are now at a very high risk of corrosion

related damage becoming much more widespread.

Remedial works carried out early, will help arrest the corrosion before this manifests

on a larger scale.

Repairing the concrete

Sanjayan & Abdouka (2013) stated that the repair method is depending on deterioration

condition on the reinforced concrete and also the cost to do it.

Patch repair

Patch repair is a method to take out the deteriorated part of the concrete to replace it with the

new concrete. This method is cheaper compare to gunite application. Another thing is that

patch repair can take concrete part until 30 mm behind the reinforcement, make this suitable

if deterioration already deep inside the concrete. Concrete part, which has been done by the

patch repair, needs to be checked every 7 to 10 years. The reason is when some part is

removed from the original structure, the other part is open to marine environment condition,

and makes it vulnerable to another deterioration such as chloride.

Strategies for minimising the potential of deterioration mechanisms include:

Use of corrosion-resistant steels, such as stainless steel or stainless steel cladding.

Application of sacrificial/nonsacrificial coatings, such as fusion-bonded epoxy

powder

Use of chemical admixtures, such as corrosion inhibitors during the construction

stage.

Cathodic protection, either during construction stage or later.

Provide adequate concrete cover over the embedded steel reinforcement to maintain

passive iron-oxide film around the steel


20/22


20

Use superplasticizers, pozzolanic materials in mixture with water-reducing admixture

which causes reduction in the porosity of the cement paste and then lowers the

concrete permeation by all the destructive representatives from a marine environment.

Ensure proper compaction and curing

Addition of supplementary cementatious materials in cements to provide some

protection from calcium and sodium sulphate attacks


21/22


21

REFERENCE

1. Ahrens, J. P. (1987). Characteristics of reef breakwaters. USA Army Corps of

Engineers. Vicksburg, Tech. Rep. CERC, pp. 87'17.

2. Byrne G. 2014, Breakwater Design, MRE80004: Port and Harbour Engineering,

Learning Materials on Blackboard, Swinburne University of Technology.

3. Burcharth, H. F. and liu, Z. (1990). A general discussion of problems related to the

determination of concrete armour unit stress including specific results related to static

and dynamic stresses in Dolosse. Proc, of the Seminaral Stresses in Concrete Armour

Units, ASCE, Vicksburg, USA.

4. Cheng L. H., Fen C. Y., Jiang W.Y. 2013, Experimental Study On A New Type of

Floating Breakwater, International Conference on Asian Pacific Coats, 24-26

September 2013, Indonesia.

5. Coulls, A 2014, Introduction Hydrographic Surveying, MRE80004: Port and

Harbour Engineering, Learning Materials on Blackboard, Swinburne University of

Technology.

6. Danel, P. (1953) Tetrapods. Proc. Fourth Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., ASCE, Chicago.

7. Dacre M. 2014, Durability and Lifecycle, Corrosion Protection, MRE80004: Port

and Harbour Engineering, Learning Materials on Blackboard, Swinburne Universityof Technology.

8. Farmer, A., 1999. Chapter 1. Introduction and Literature Review.

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-112999-093701/unrestricted/Chapter1.pdf

Accessed 25 July 2014

9. Graav, A. F. F., Van Der Meulen, T., and Debye, D. (1984) Granular filters: Design

criteria. Journal of Waterways. Port, Coastal and Ocean Division, ASCE, 110(1).

10.Hitachi, S. (1994). Case study of breakwater damages - Mutsuogawara Port. Proc. of

Intl. Workshop on Wave Barriers in Deepwaters, PHRI

11.Kondo, H. and Takeda, H. (1983). Wave Dissipating Structures. Morikita Publishing

Co. Ltd.

12.Minikin, R. R. (1950). Winds, Waves and Maritime Structures. Griffin, London, 294

p.
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-112999-093701/unrestricted/Chapter1.pdf%20Accessed%2025%20July%202014http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-112999-093701/unrestricted/Chapter1.pdf%20Accessed%2025%20July%202014http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-112999-093701/unrestricted/Chapter1.pdf%20Accessed%2025%20July%202014http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-112999-093701/unrestricted/Chapter1.pdf%20Accessed%2025%20July%202014


22/22


22

13.Nakada, K, terauchi, K., hishida, H., and umeki, K (1984). Characteristic of low

crown composite breakwaters. Proc. Japanese Conference on Coastal Engineering,

Vol. 31, pp. 532-536,

14.Oumeraci, H. (1994). Scour in front of vertical breakwaters' Review of problems.

Proceeding of International Workshop on Wave Barriers in Deepwaters, PHRI, pp.

281-317.

15.Sanjayan, J. & Abdouka, K., 2014. HES6192 - Infrastructure Deterioration Modelling

Lecture Notes. Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia

16.Takayama, T., and tanimoto, K (1998). Lifetime damage estimation with a new

stability formula for concrete blocks. Rpt. of Port and Harbour Research Institute,

Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 3-32

17.Tanimoto, K and takahashi, S. (1994). Design and construction of caisson

breakwaters-the Japanese experience" Journal of Coastal Engineering, Vol. 22, pp.

57-77.

18.Toffoli, A., (2014). Port and harbour Engineering, Lecture Notes, Swinburne

University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia

ahmed_port and harbour engineering

Documents