126
R.H. Charlier and Chr. P. De Meyer
Earlier, Wiegel (1964) presented relations between the slope of the beach face as
a function of the grain size (see Fig. 24). For that purpose he made a distinction
between exposed, moderately and protected beaches.
Sunamura and Horikawa (1974) related the occurrence of erosion or of beach
profiles to wave steepness, grain size and slope of the profile, for which they
found the following relation •
Ho/Lo = C (tan fj)-0.27 (DscJLo)0.67
(64)
where •
C = constant
tan~ = profile slope.
.
i
O
Lm-~
o z
%I "(~
/
{~EF,NI ]rloN SKETCH ~/~ .q
o,
/,.,7
//)
J
I0
I 0
Og
0~,
0,;
~
y/w
/
¢
C
),
/
NOTE
(a) f~r re(l, benehis
¢~a~"ve utv~a'd
~) for ms L be, acJa is
of m~iform slol~
@ for n~l, bca¢ll is
ca~nv=t upwKd
02
O
Fig. 25 : Dimensionless profile shape in surf zone for diflbrent values ofm
For model experiments this represents the initial slope, while for field
observations the average slope between shoreline and 20 m (64 ft.) depth is used.
R.H. Charlier and Chr. P. De Meyer
Earlier, Wiegel (1964) presented relations between the slope of the beach face as
a function of the grain size (see Fig. 24). For that purpose he made a distinction
between exposed, moderately and protected beaches.
Sunamura and Horikawa (1974) related the occurrence of erosion or of beach
profiles to wave steepness, grain size and slope of the profile, for which they
found the following relation •
Ho/Lo = C (tan fj)-0.27 (DscJLo)0.67
(64)
where •
C = constant
tan~ = profile slope.
.
i
O
Lm-~
o z
%I "(~
/
{~EF,NI ]rloN SKETCH ~/~ .q
o,
/,.,7
//)
J
I0
I 0
Og
0~,
0,;
~
y/w
/
¢
C
),
/
NOTE
(a) f~r re(l, benehis
¢~a~"ve utv~a'd
~) for ms L be, acJa is
of m~iform slol~
@ for n~l, bca¢ll is
ca~nv=t upwKd
02
O
Fig. 25 : Dimensionless profile shape in surf zone for diflbrent values ofm
For model experiments this represents the initial slope, while for field
observations the average slope between shoreline and 20 m (64 ft.) depth is used.
