All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval systems,
transmitted in any form or by any means, electric, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Original Japanese language edition published by the Japan Ports and Harbours Association.
Printed in Japan
PREFACE
Preface
This book is a translation of the major portion of the Technical Standards and Commentaries of Port
and Harbour Facilities in Japan (1999 edition) published by the Japan Port and Harbour Association,
stipulated by the Ordinance of the Minister of Transport, which was issued in April 1999. The translation
covers about two thirds of the Japanese edition.
Japanese islands have a long extension of coastline, measuring about 34,000 km, for the total land area
of some 380,000 square kilometers. Throughout her history, Japan has depended on the ports and harbors
on daily living and prosperity of people there. Japan did not develop extensive inland canal systems as
found in the European Continent because of its mountainous geography, but rather produced many harbors
and havens along its coastline in the past. Today, the number of officially designated commercial ports and
harbors amounts to about 1,100 and the number of fishing ports exceeds 3,000.
After 220 years of isolation from the world civilization from the 17th to 19th centuries, Japan began to
modernize its society and civilization rapidly after the Meiji revolution in 1868. Modern technology of port
and harbor engineering has been introduced by distinguished engineers from abroad and learned by many
ambitious and capable young engineers in Japan. Ports of Yokohama, Kobe, and others began to
accommodate large oceangoing vessels in the late 19th century as the Japanese economy had shown a
rapid growth.
Japanese engineers had drafted an engineering manual on design and construction of port and harbor
facilities as early as in 1943. The manual was revised in 1959 with inclusion of new technology such as
those of coastal engineering and geotechnical engineering, which were developed during the Second
World War or just before it. The Japanese economy that was utterly destroyed by the war had begun to
rebuild itself rapidly after the 1950s. There were so many demands for the expansion of port and harbor
facilities throughout Japan. Engineers were urged to design and construct facilities after facilities. Japan
has built the breakwaters and the quays with the rate of about 20,000 meters each per year throughout the
1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.
Such a feat of port development was made possible with provision of sound engineering manuals. The
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (formerly the Ministry of Transport up to January 2001)
which was responsible for port development and operation, revised the basic law on ports and harbors in
1974 so as to take responsibility for provision of technical standards for design, construction, and
maintenance of port and harbor facilities. The first official technical standards and commentaries for port
and harbor facilities were issued in 1979, and published by the Japan Port and Harbour Association for
general use. The technical standards were prepared by a technical committee composed of government
engineers within the former Ministry of Transport, including members of the Port and Harbour Research
Institute and several District Port Construction Bureaus that were responsible for design and construction
in the field. Its English version was published by the Overseas Coastal Area Development Institute in
1980, but it introduced only the skeleton of the Japanese version without giving the details.
The Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbor Facilities in Japan have been revised
in 1988 and 1999, each time incorporating new technological developments. The present English
translation endeavors to introduce the newest edition of 1999 to the port and harbor engineers overseas. It
is a direct translation of essential parts of Japanese edition. Many phrases and expressions reflect the
customary, regulatory writings in Japanese, which are often awkward in English. Some sentences after
translation may not be fluent enough and give troubles for decipher. The editors in charge of translation
request the readers for patience and generosity in their efforts for understanding Japanese technology in
port and harbor engineering.
With the globalization in every aspect of human activities, indigenous practices and customs are forced
to comply with the world standards. Technology by definition is supposed to be universal. Nevertheless,
each country has developed its own specialty to suit its local conditions. The overseas readers may find
some of Japanese technical standards strange and difficult for adoption for their usage. Such conflicts in
technology are the starting points for mutual understanding and further developments in the future. The
editors wish wholeheartedly this English version of Japanese technical standards be welcomed by the
overseas colleagues and serve for the advancement of port and harbor technology in the world.
January 2002
i
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
ii
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
Preface
Part I General
Chapter 1 General Rules .................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Scope of Application .............................................................................................................................1
1.2 Definitions ...............................................................................................................................................2
1.3 Usage of SI Units ...................................................................................................................................2
Chapter 2 Datum Level for Construction Work .........................................................................................................4
Chapter 3 Maintenance ....................................................................................................................................................5
iii
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
iv
CONTENTS
v
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
vi
CONTENTS
Part V Foundations
Chapter 1 General ......................................................................................................................................................... 273
Chapter 2 Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations ........................................................................................ 274
2.1 General ............................................................................................................................................... 274
2.2 Bearing Capacity of Foundation on Sandy Ground ..................................................................... 274
2.3 Bearing Capacity of Foundation on Clayey Ground .................................................................... 275
2.4 Bearing Capacity of Multilayered Ground ..................................................................................... 276
2.5 Bearing Capacity for Eccentric and Inclined Loads ..................................................................... 277
Chapter 3 Bearing Capacity of Deep Foundations ............................................................................................. 280
3.1 General ............................................................................................................................................... 280
3.2 Vertical Bearing Capacity................................................................................................................. 280
3.3 Lateral Bearing Capacity .................................................................................................................. 281
Chapter 4 Bearing Capacity of Pile Foundations ................................................................................................ 284
4.1 Allowable Axial Bearing Capacity of Piles ..................................................................................... 284
4.1.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 284
4.1.2 Standard Allowable Axial Bearing Capacity............................................................................ 284
4.1.3 Ultimate Axial Bearing Capacity of Single Piles...................................................................... 285
4.1.4 Estimation of Ultimate Axial Bearing Capacity by Loading Tests ........................................... 285
4.1.5 Estimation of Ultimate Axial Bearing Capacity by Static Bearing Capacity Formulas ............ 286
4.1.6 Examination of Compressive Stress of Pile Materials ............................................................ 288
4.1.7 Decrease of Bearing Capacity Due to Joints .......................................................................... 288
4.1.8 Decrease of Bearing Capacity Due to Slenderness Ratio ...................................................... 288
4.1.9 Bearing Capacity of Pile Group .............................................................................................. 288
4.1.10 Examination of Negative Skin Friction .................................................................................... 290
4.1.11 Examination of Settlement of Piles ......................................................................................... 291
4.2 Allowable Pulling Resistance of Piles ............................................................................................ 291
4.2.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 291
4.2.2 Standard Allowable Pulling Resistance .................................................................................. 292
4.2.3 Maximum Pulling Resistance of Single Pile............................................................................ 292
4.2.4 Examination of Tensile Stress of Pile Materials...................................................................... 293
4.2.5 Matters to Be Considered for Obtaining Allowable Pulling Resistance of Piles...................... 293
4.3 Allowable Lateral Bearing Capacity of Piles ................................................................................. 293
4.3.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 293
4.3.2 Estimation of Allowable Lateral Bearing Capacity of Piles ..................................................... 295
4.3.3 Estimation of Pile Behavior Using Loading Tests ................................................................... 295
4.3.4 Estimation of Pile Behavior Using Analytical Methods ........................................................... 295
4.3.5 Consideration of Pile Group Action......................................................................................... 301
4.3.6 Lateral Bearing Capacity of Coupled Piles ............................................................................. 301
4.4 Pile Design in General ...................................................................................................................... 304
4.4.1 Load Sharing .......................................................................................................................... 304
4.4.2 Load Distribution..................................................................................................................... 305
4.4.3 Distance between Centers of Piles......................................................................................... 305
4.4.4 Allowable Stresses for Pile Materials...................................................................................... 305
4.5 Detailed Design ................................................................................................................................. 306
4.5.1 Examination of Loads during Construction ............................................................................. 306
4.5.2 Design of Joints between Piles and Structure ........................................................................ 307
4.5.3 Joints of Piles.......................................................................................................................... 308
4.5.4 Change of Plate Thickness or Materials of Steel Pipe Piles................................................... 308
4.5.5 Other Points for Caution in Design ......................................................................................... 308
Chapter 5 Settlement of Foundations ..................................................................................................................... 310
5.1 Stress in Soil Mass ........................................................................................................................... 310
5.2 Immediate Settlement....................................................................................................................... 310
viii
CONTENTS
ix
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
x
CONTENTS
xi
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
xii
CONTENTS
xv
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
17.3.2 External Forces Acting on Sheet Pile Wall with Batter Anchor Piles ...................................... 513
17.3.3 Calculation of Horizontal and Vertical Forces Acting on Connecting Point ............................ 513
17.3.4 Determination of Cross Sections of Sheet Pile and Batter Anchor Pile.................................. 513
17.3.5 Determination of Embedded Lengths of Sheet Pile and Batter Anchor Pile........................... 513
17.3.6 Detailed Design ...................................................................................................................... 513
17.4 Sheet Pile Quaywall with Batter Piles in Front ............................................................................. 514
17.4.1 Principle of Design.................................................................................................................. 514
17.4.2 Layout and Dimensions .......................................................................................................... 515
17.4.3 Design of Sheet Pile Wall ....................................................................................................... 515
17.4.4 Design of OpenType Superstructure ..................................................................................... 515
17.4.5 Embedded Length .................................................................................................................. 516
17.4.6 Detailed Design ...................................................................................................................... 516
17.5 Double Sheet Pile Quaywall ............................................................................................................ 516
17.5.1 Principle of Design.................................................................................................................. 516
17.5.2 External Forces Acting on Double Sheet Pile Quaywall ......................................................... 517
17.5.3 Design of Double Sheet Pile Quaywall ................................................................................... 517
Chapter 18 Transitional Parts of Quaywalls ............................................................................................................ 519
18.1 Principle of Design ............................................................................................................................ 519
18.2 Transitional Part Where Frontal Water Depth Varies .................................................................. 519
18.3 Transitional Part Where Quaywalls of Different Type Are Connected ..................................... 519
18.4 Outward Projecting Corner .............................................................................................................. 519
Chapter 19 Ancillary Facilities ...................................................................................................................................... 520
19.1 General ............................................................................................................................................... 520
19.2 Mooring Equipment ........................................................................................................................... 520
19.3 Mooring Posts, Bollards, and Mooring Rings ............................................................................... 520
19.3.1
General ................................................................................................................................... 520
19.3.2
Arrangement of Mooring Posts, Bollards and Mooring Rings................................................. 521
19.3.3
Tractive Force of Vessel ......................................................................................................... 521
19.3.4
Structure ................................................................................................................................. 522
19.4 Fender System .................................................................................................................................. 522
19.4.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 522
19.4.2 Arrangement of Fenders......................................................................................................... 523
19.4.3 Berthing Energy of Vessel ...................................................................................................... 523
19.4.4 Selection of Fender................................................................................................................. 523
19.5 Safety Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 525
19.5.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 525
19.5.2 Skirt Guard.............................................................................................................................. 525
19.5.3 Fence and Rope ..................................................................................................................... 525
19.5.4 Signs or Notices...................................................................................................................... 525
19.5.5 Curbing ................................................................................................................................... 525
19.5.6 Fire Fighting Equipment and Alarm Systems ......................................................................... 525
19.6 Service Facilities ............................................................................................................................... 525
19.6.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 525
19.6.2 Lighting Facilities .................................................................................................................... 525
19.6.3 Facilities for Passenger Embarkation and Disembarkation .................................................... 525
19.6.4 Vehicle Ramp ......................................................................................................................... 526
19.6.5 Water Supply Facilities ........................................................................................................... 526
19.6.6 Drainage Facilities .................................................................................................................. 526
19.6.7 Fueling and Electric Power Supply Facilities .......................................................................... 526
19.6.8 Signs or Notices...................................................................................................................... 527
19.7 Stairways and Ladders ..................................................................................................................... 527
19.8 Lifesaving Facilities ........................................................................................................................... 527
19.9 Curbing ............................................................................................................................................... 527
19.10 Vehicle Ramp..................................................................................................................................... 527
19.11 Signs, Notices and Protective Fences ........................................................................................... 527
19.11.1 General ................................................................................................................................... 527
19.11.2 Provision of Signs ................................................................................................................... 527
19.11.3 Types and Location of Signs .................................................................................................. 528
19.11.4 Position of Sign....................................................................................................................... 528
19.11.5 Structure of Sign ..................................................................................................................... 529
19.11.6 Materials ................................................................................................................................. 530
19.11.7 Maintenance and Management .............................................................................................. 530
19.11.8 Protective Fences ................................................................................................................... 530
19.11.9 Barricades............................................................................................................................... 531
xvi
CONTENTS
xvii
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
xviii
CONTENTS
Part XI Marinas
Chapter 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................589
Chapter 2 Main Dimensions of Target Boats ........................................................................................................590
Chapter 3 Navigation Channels and Basins..........................................................................................................591
3.1 General................................................................................................................................................591
3.2 Navigation Channels .........................................................................................................................591
3.3 Mooring Basins ..................................................................................................................................591
Chapter 4 Protective Facilities ...................................................................................................................................592
Chapter 5 Mooring Facilities .......................................................................................................................................593
5.1 General................................................................................................................................................593
5.2 Design Conditions for Mooring Facilities .......................................................................................593
5.3 Floating Piers .....................................................................................................................................595
5.3.1 General ...................................................................................................................................595
5.3.2 Structure..................................................................................................................................595
5.3.3 Examination of Safety .............................................................................................................595
5.3.4 Structural Design.....................................................................................................................596
5.3.5 Mooring Method ......................................................................................................................596
5.3.6 Access Bridges .......................................................................................................................596
5.4 Ancillary Facilities ..............................................................................................................................597
5.5 Lifting / Lowering Frame Facilities ..................................................................................................597
Chapter 6 Facilities for Ship Services......................................................................................................................598
6.1 General................................................................................................................................................598
6.2 Land Storage Facilities .....................................................................................................................598
Chapter 7 Land Traffic Facilities................................................................................................................................599
INDEX
xix
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
xx
Part I General
PART I GENERAL
Part I General
[Commentary]
(1) The Ministerial Ordinance and the Notification (hereafter collectively referred to as the Technical Standards)
apply not to the port and harbor facilities stipulated in Article 2 of the “Port and Harbour Law”, but rather to
the port and harbor facilities stipulated in Article 19 of the Port and Harbour Law Enforcement Order.
Accordingly the Technical Standards also apply to facilities like navigation channels, basins, protective
facilities and mooring facilities of the marinas and privately owned ports, which are found in outside of the
legally designated port areas.
(2) Since the Technical Standards covers a wide rage of facilities, there will be cases where the items shown in the
Technical Standards may be inadequate for dealing with planning, designing, constructing, maintaining or
repairing of a particular individual structure of a port or harbor. There is also possibility that new items may be
added in the future in line with technical developments or innovations. With regard to matters for which there
are no stipulations in the Technical Standards, appropriate methods other than those mentioned in the Technical
Standards may be adopted, after confirming the safety of a structure in consideration using appropriate methods
such as model tests or trustworthy numerical calculations (following the main items of the Technical Standards).
(3) Figure C 1.1.1 shows the statutory structure of the Technical Standards.
Port and Harbour Law Port and Harbour Law Port and Harbour Law
[Article 562] Enforcement Order Enforcement Regulations
(technical standards for [Article 19] [Article 28]
port and harbour facilities) (stipulation of facilities covered) (stipulation of facilities excluded
from coverage)
Port and Harbour Law Enforcement Order Port and Harbour Law Enforcement
Regulations
The Technical Standards
The Ministerial Ordinance
The Notification
Fig. C 1.1.1 Statutory Structure of the Technical Standards for Port and Harbour Facilities
(4) This document is intended to help individuals concerned with correct interpretation of the Technical Standards
and to facilitate right application of the Ministerial Ordinance and the Notification. This document is made up of
the main items, along with reference sections marked Commentary and Technical Notes, which supplement
the main items. The texts in large letters are the main items that describe the parts of the Notification and the
basic items that must be obeyed, regarding the items related to the Notification. The sections marked
Commentary mainly give the background to and the basis for the Notification, etc. The sections marked
Technical Notes provide investigation methods and/or standards that will be of reference value, when executing
actual design works, specific examples of structures, and other related materials.
(5) Design methods can be broadly classified into the methods that use the safety factors and the methods that use
the indices based on probability theory, according to the way of judging the safety of structures.
A safety factor is not an index that represents the degree of safety quantitatively. Rather, it is determined
through experience to compensate for the uncertainty in a variety of factors. In this document, the safety factors
indicate values that are considered by experience to be sufficiently safe under standard conditions. Depending
on the conditions, it may be acceptable to lower the values of safety factors, but when doing so it is necessary to
make a decision using prudent judgement based on sound reasoning.
In the case that the probability distributions of loads and structure strengths can be adequately approximated,
it is possible to use a reliability design method. Unlike the more traditional design methods in which safety
factors are used, a reliability design method makes it possible to gain a quantitative understanding of the
1
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
likelihood of the failure of structure in question and then to keep the likelihood below a certain allowable value.
With a reliability design method, design is carried out by using the partial safety factors and reliability indices.
Formally speaking, the limit state design method can be classified as one form of reliability design method.
1.2 Definitions
The terms used in the Notification are based on the terminology used in the Ministerial Ordinance; in
addition, the meanings of the following terms as stipulated in the law or notification are cited.
(1) Dangerous articles: This term refers to those that are designated in the Notification stipulating the
“Types of Hazardous Goods” for the “Port Regulation Law Enforcement Regulations” (Ministry
of Transport Notification No. 547, 1979).
(2) Datum level for construction work: This is the standard water level used when constructing,
improving or maintaining port and harbor facilities, and is equal to the chart datum level (specifically
the chart datum for which the height is determined based on the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the
“Law for Hydrographic Activities” (Law No. 102, 1950)). However, in the case of port and harbor
facilities in lakes and rivers for which there is little tidal influence, in order to ensure the safe use of
the port or harbor in question, the datum level for construction work shall be determined while
considering the conditions of extremely low water level that may occur during a drought season.
[Commentary]
In addition to the terms defined above, the meanings of the following terms are listed below.
(1) Superlarge vessel: A cargo ship with a deadweight tonnage of 100,000 t or more, except in the case of LPG
carriers and LNG carriers, in which case the gross tonnage is 25,000 t or more.
(2) Passenger ship: A vessel with a capacity of 13 or more passengers.
(3) Pleasure boat: A yacht, motorboat or other vessel used for sport or recreation.
2
PART I GENERAL
3
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
The datum level for port and harbor construction work is the standard water level that shall form the basis
for the planning, design, and construction of facilities. The chart datum level shall be used as the datum
level for construction work.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Chart Datum Level
The chart datum level is set as the level below the mean sea level by the amount equal to or approximately
equivalent to the sum of the amplitueds of the four major tidal constituents (M2, S2, K1, and O1 tides), which are
obtained from the harmonic analysis of tidal observation data. Here M2 is the principal lunar semidiurnal tide,
S2 is the principal solar semidiurnal tide, K1 is the lunisolar diurnal tide, and O1 is the principal lunar diurnal
tide.
Note that the heights of rocks or land marks shown on the nautical charts are the elevation above the mean
sea level, which is the longterm average of the hourly sea surface height at the place in question. (In the case
that the observation period is short, however, corrections for seasonal fluctuations should be made when
determining the mean sea level.) The difference in height between the chart datum level and the mean sea level
is referred to as Z0.
(2) International Marine Chart Datum
The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) has decided to adopt the Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT)
as the international marine chart datum, and issued a recommendation to this effect to the Hydrographic
Departments in various countries throughout the world in June 1997. The LAT is defined as the lowest sea level
that is assumed to occur under the combination of average weather conditions and generally conceivable
astronomical conditions. In actual practice, tide levels for at least 19 years are calculated using harmonic
constants obtained from at least one year’s worth of observations, and then the lowest water level is taken as the
LAT.
However, in the case of Japan, the chart datum level is obtained using the old method described in (1) above
(approximate lowest water level). There will be no switchover to the LAT in the near future in Japan, but it is
planned to meet the IHO recommendation by stating the difference between the LAT and the chart datum level
in tide tables published by the Hydrographic Department of Maritime Safety Agency, Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, and Transport, Japan.
4
PART I GENERAL
Chapter 3 Maintenance
In order to maintain the functions of port and harbor facilities at a satisfactory service level and to prevent
deterioration in the safety of such facilities, comprehensive maintenance including inspections,
evaluations, repairs, etc. shall be carried out, in line with the specific characteristics of the port or harbor in
question.
[Commentary]
(1) “Maintenance” refers to a system consisting of a series of linked activities involving the efficient detection of
changes in the state of serviceability of the facilities and the execution of effective measures such as rational
evaluation, repair, and reinforcement.
(2) Port and harbor facilities must generally remain in service for long periods of time, during which the functions
demanded of the facilities must be maintained. It is thus essential not only to give due consideration when
initially designing the structures in question, but also to carry out proper maintenance after the facilities have
been put into service.
(3) A whole variety of data concerning maintenance (specifically, inspections, checks, evaluations, repair,
reinforcement work, etc.) must be recorded and stored in a standard format. Maintenance data kept in good
systematic order is the basic information necessary for carrying out appropriate evaluation of the level of
soundness of the facilities in question, and executing their maintenance and repairs. At the same time the
maintenace data is useful when taking measures against the deterioration of the facilities as a whole and when
investigating the possibility in the life cycle cost reduction of the facilities.
(4) When designing a structure, it is necessary to give due consideration to the system of future maintenance and to
select the types of structures and the materials used so that future maintenance will be easily executed, while
reflecting this aspect in the detailed design.•
[Technical Notes]
(1) The concepts of the terms relating to maintenance are as follows:
(2) With regard to the procedure for maintenance, it is a good idea to draw up a maintenance plan for each structure
while considering factors like the structural form, the tendency to deteriorate and the degree of importance, and
then to implement maintenance work based on this plan.
(3) For basic and common matters concerning maintenance, refer to the “Manual for Maintenance and Repair of
Port and Harbor Structures”.
5
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
6
Part II Design Conditions
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Chapter 1 General
In designing port and harbor facilities, the design conditions shall be chosen from the items listed below by
taking into consideration the natural, service and construction conditions, the characteristics of materials,
the environmental impacts, and the social requirements for the facilities.
(1) Ship dimensions
(2) External forces produced by ships
(3) Winds and wind pressure
(4) Waves and wave force
(5) Tide and extraordinary sea levels
(6) Currents and current force
(7) External forces acting on floating structures and their motions
(8) Estuarine hydraulics and littoral drift
(9) Subsoil
(10) Earthquakes and seismic force
(11) Liquefaction
(12) Earth pressure and water pressure
(13) Deadweight and surcharge
(14) Coefficient of friction
(15) Other necessary design conditions
[Commentary]
The design conditions should be determined carefully, because they exercise great influence upon the safety,
functions, and construction cost of the facilities. The design conditions listed above are just those that have a large
influence on port and harbor facilities. They are generally determined according to the results of surveys and tests.
Thus, the design conditions should be precisely determined upon full understanding of the methods and results of
such investigations and tests. In the case of temporary structures, the design conditions may be determined while
considering also the length of service life.
[Technical Notes]
(1) In designing port and harbor facilities, the following matters should be taken into consideration.
(a) Functions of the facilities
Since facilities often have multiple functions, care should be exercised so that all functions of the facilities will
be exploited fully.
(b) Importance of the facilities
The degree of importance of the facilities should be considered in order to design the facilities by taking
appropriate account of safety and broad economic implications. The design criteria influenced by importance
of facilities are those of environmental conditions, design seismic coefficient, lifetime, loads, safety factor,
etc. In determining the degree of importance of the facilities, the following criteria should be taken into
consideration.
• Influence upon human lives and property if the facilities are damaged.
• Impact on society and its economy if the facilities are damaged.
• Influence upon other facilities if the facilities are damaged.
• Replaceability of the facilities.
(c) Lifetime
The length of lifetime should be taken into account in determining the structure and materials of the facilities
and also in determining the necessity for and extent of the improvement of the existing facilities. Lifetime of
the facilities should be determined by examinig the following:
• Operational function of the facilities
The number of years until the facilities can no longer be usable due to the occurrence of problems in terms
of the function of the facilities, for example the water depth of a mooring basin becoming insufficient owing
to the increase in vessel size.
• Economic viewpoint of the facilities
The number of years until the facilities become economically uncompetitive with other newer facilities
(unless some kind of improvements are carried out).
7
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Reference]
1) Borgman, L. E.: “Risk criteria”, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 89, No. WW3, 1963, pp.135.
8
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Chapter 2 Vessels
2.1 Dimensions of Target Vessel (Notification Article 21)
The principal dimensions of the target vessel shall be set using the following method:
(1) In the case that the target vessel can be identified, use the principal dimensions of that vessel.
(2) In the case that the target vessel cannot be identified, use appropriate principal dimensions determined
by statistical methods.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Article 1, Clause 2 of the Ministerial Ordinance stipulates that the “target vessel” is the vessel that has the
largest gross tonnage out of those that are expected to use the port or harbor facilities in question. Accordingly,
in the case that the target vessel can be identified, the principal dimensions of this vessel should be used.
(2) In the case that the target vessel cannot be identified in advance, such as in the case of port and harbor facilities
for public use, the principal dimensions of the target vessel may be determined by referring to Table T 2.1.1. In
this table, the tonnages (usually either gross or deadweight tonnage) are used as representative indicators.
(3) Table T 2.1.1 lists the “principal dimensions of vessels for the case that the target vessel cannot be identified”
by tonnage level. These values have been obtained through methods such as statistical analysis 1),2), and they
mainly represent the 75% cover ratio values for each tonnage of vessels. Accordingly, for any given tonnage,
there will be some vessels that have principal dimensions that exceed the values in the table. There will also be
vessels that have a tonnage greater than that of the target vessel listed in the table, but still have principal
dimensions smaller than those of the target vessel.
(4) Table T 2.1.1 has been obtained using the data from “Lloyd’s Maritime Information June ’95” and “Nihon
Senpaku Meisaisho” (“Detailed List of Japanese Vessels”; 1995 edition). The definitions of principal
dimensions in the table are shown in Fig. T 2.1.1.
(5) Since the principal dimensions of long distance ferries that sail over 300km tend to have different characteristics
from those of shorttomedium distance ferries, the principal dimensions are listed separately for “long distance
ferries” and “shorttomedium distance ferries.”
(6) Since the principal dimensions of Japanese passenger ships tend to have different characteristics from those of
foreign passenger ships, the principal dimensions are listed separately for “Japanese passenger ships” and
“foreign passenger ships”.
(7) The mast height varies considerably even for vessels of the same type with the same tonnage, and so when
designing facilities like bridges that pass over navigation routes, it is necessary to carry out a survey on the mast
heights of the target vessels.
(8) In the case that the target vessel is known to be a small cargo ship but it is not possible to identify precisely the
demensions of the ship in advance, the principal dimensions of “small cargo ships” can be obtained by referring
to Table T 2.1.2. The values in Table T 2.1.2 have been obtained using the same kind of procedure as those in
Table T 2.1.1, but in the case of such small vessels there are large variations in the principal dimensions and so
particular care should be exercised when using Table T 2.1.2.
(9) Tonnage
The definitions of the various types of tonnage are as follows:
(a) Gross tonnage
The measurement tonnage of sealed compartments of a vessel, as stipulated in the “Law Concerning the
Measurement of the Tonnage of Ships”. The “gross tonnage” is used as an indicator that represents the size
of a vessel in Japan’s maritime systems. Note however that there is also the “international gross tonnage”,
which, in line with the provisions in treaties etc., is also used as an indicator that represents the size of a vessel,
but mainly for vessels that make international sailings. The values of the “gross tonnage” and the
“international gross tonnage” can differ from one another; the relationship between the two is stipulated in
Article 35 of the “Enforcement Regulations for the Law Concerning the Measurement of the Tonnage of
Ships” (Ministerial Ordinance No. 47, 1981).
(b) Deadweight tonnage
The maximum weight, expressed in tons, of cargo that can be loaded onto a vessel.
(c) Displacement tonnage
The amount of water, expressed in tons, displaced by a vessel when it is floating at rest.
(10) For the sake of consistency, equation (2.1.1) shows the relationship between the deadweight tonnage (DWT) and
the gross tonnage (GT) for the types of vessels that use the deadweight tonnage as the representative indicator 1).
For each type of vessels, the equation may be applied if the tonnage is within the range shown in Table T 2.1.1.
9
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
64748
Container ships: GT = 0.880DWT
Oil tankers: GT = 0.553DWT (2.1.1)
Rollon/rolloff vessels: GT = 0.808DWT
where
GT ： gross tonnage
DWT ： deadweight tonnage
(11) Tables T2.1.3 to T2.1.6 list the frequency distribution of the principal dimensions of general cargo ships, bulk
cargo carriers, container ships, and oil tankers, which were analyzed by the Systems Laboratory of Port and
Harbour Research Institute (PHRI) using the data from “Lloyd’s Maritime Informations Services (June ’98)”.
Length overall
Moulded depth
Full load draft
Table T 2.1.1 Principal Dimensions of Vessels for the Case That the Target Vessel Cannot Be Identified
1. Cargo ships
Deadweight tonnage (DWT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
1,000 ton 67 m 10.9 m 3.9 m
2,000 83 13.1 4.9
3,000 94 14.6 5.6
5,000 109 16.8 6.5
10,000 137 19.9 8.2
12,000 144 21.0 8.6
18,000 161 23.6 9.6
30,000 185 27.5 11.0
40,000 200 29.9 11.8
55,000 218 32.3 12.9
70,000 233 32.3 13.7
90,000 249 38.1 14.7
100,000 256 39.3 15.1
150,000 286 44.3 16.9
2. Container ships
Deadweight tonnage (DWT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
30,000 ton 218 m 30.2 m 11.1 m
40,000 244 32.3 12.2
50,000 266 32.3 13.0
60,000 286 36.5 13.8
10
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
3. Ferries
3A Shorttomedium distance ferries (sailing distance less than 300km)
Gross tonnage (GT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
400 ton 50 m 11.8 m 3.0 m
700 63 13.5 3.4
1,000 72 14.7 3.7
2,500 104 18.3 4.6
5,000 136 21.6 5.3
10,000 148 23.0 5.7
Gross tonnage (GT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
6,000 ton 142 m 22.3 m 6.0 m
10,000 167 25.2 6.4
13,000 185 27.3 6.8
16,000 192 28.2 6.8
20,000 192 28.2 6.8
23,000 200 28.2 7.2
4. Rollon/rolloff vessels
Deadweight tonnage (DWT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
400 ton 75 m 13.6 m 11.1 m
1,500 97 16.4 4.7
2,500 115 18.5 5.5
4,000 134 20.7 6.3
6,000 154 22.9 7.0
10,000 182 25.9 7.4
5. Passenger ships
5A Japanese passenger ships
Gross tonnage (GT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
2,000 ton 83 m 15.6 m 4.0 m
4,000 107 18.5 4.9
7,000 130 21.2 5.7
10,000 147 23.2 6.6
20,000 188 27.5 6.6
30,000 217 30.4 6.6
Gross tonnage (GT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
20,000 ton 180 m 25.7 m 8.0 m
30,000 207 28.4 8.0
50,000 248 32.3 8.0
70,000 278 35.2 8.0
Gross tonnage (GT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
500 ton 70 m 11.8 m 3.8 m
1,500 94 15.7 5.0
3,000 114 18.8 5.8
5,000 130 21.5 6.6
12,000 165 27.0 8.0
18,000 184 30.0 8.8
25,000 200 32.3 9.5
11
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
7. Oil tankers
Deadweight tonnage (DWT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
1,000 ton 61 m 10.2 m 4.0 m
2,000 76 12.6 4.9
3,000 87 14.3 5.5
5,000 102 16.8 6.4
10,000 127 20.8 7.9
15,000 144 23.6 8.9
20,000 158 25.8 9.6
30,000 180 29.2 10.9
50,000 211 32.3 12.6
70,000 235 38.0 13.9
90,000 254 41.1 15.0
Deadweight tonnage (DWT) Length overall (L) Molded breadth (B) Full load draft (d)
500 ton 51 m 9.0 m 3.3 m
700 57 9.5 3.4
12
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
13
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
unknown
14
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
15
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) The following loads acting on mooring facilities should be considered when a vessel is berthing or moored:
a) Loads caused by berthing of a vessel
b) Loads caused by motions of a moored vessel
When designing mooring facilities, the berthing force must be considered first. Then the impact forces and
tractive forces on the mooring facilities due to the motions of the moored vessel, which are caused by the wave
force, wind force and current force, should be considered. In particular, for the cases of the mooring facilities in
the ports and harbors that face out onto the open sea with longperiod waves expected to come in, of those
installed in the open sea or harbor entrances such as offshore terminals, and of those in the harbors where vessels
seek refuge during storms, the influence of the wave force acting on a vessel is large and so due consideration
must be given to the wave force.
(2) As a general rule, the berthing forces acting on the mooring facilities should be calculated based on the berthing
energy of the vessel and using the loaddeflection characteristics of the fenders.
(3) As a general rule, the tractive forces and impact forces generated by the motions of a moored vessel should be
obtained by carrying out a numerical simulation of vessel motions taking into account the wave force acting on
the vessel, the wind force, the current force, and the loaddeflection characteristics of the mooring system.
2.2.2 Berthing
[Commentary]
In addition to the kinetic energy method mentioned above, there are also other methods of estimating the berthing
energy of a vessel: for example, statistical methods, methods using hydraulic model experiments, and methods using
fluid dynamics models 3). However, with these alternative methods, the data necessary for design are insufficient and
the values of the various constants used in the calculations may not be sufficiently well known. Thus, the kinetic
energy method is generally used.
[Technical Notes]
(1) If it is assumed that a berthing vessel moves only in the abeam direction, then the kinetic energy E s is equal to
( M s V 2) ¤ 2 . However, when a vessel is berthing at a dolphin, a quaywall, or a berthing beam equipped with
fenders, the energy absorbed by the fenders (i.e., the berthing energy E f of the vessel) will become E s ´ f
considering the various influencing factors, where f = C e ´ C m ´ C s ´ C c .
(2) The vessel mass M s is taken to be the displacement tonnage (DT) of the target vessel. In the case that the target
vessel cannot be identified, equation (2.2.2) 1) may be used to give the relationship between the deadweight
tonnage (DWT) or the gross tonnage (GT) and the displacement tonnage (DT).
16
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Cargo ships (less than 10,000DWT)： log (DT) ＝ 0.550 ＋ 0.899 log (DWT)
64444744448
Cargo ships (10,000DWT or more)： log (DT) ＝ 0.511 ＋ 0.913 log (DWT)
Container ships： log (DT) ＝ 0.365 ＋ 0.953 log (DWT)
Ferries (long distance)： log (DT) ＝ 1.388 ＋ 0.683 log (GT)
Ferries (shorttomedium distance)： log (DT) ＝ 0.506 ＋ 0.904 log (GT)
(2.2.2)
Rollon/rolloff vessels： log (DT) ＝ 0.657 ＋ 0.909 log (DWT)
Passenger ships (Japanese)： log (DT) ＝ 0.026 ＋ 0.981 log (GT)
Passenger ships (foreign)： log (DT) ＝ 0.341 ＋ 0.891 log (GT)
Car carriers： log (DT) ＝ 1.915 ＋ 0.588 log (GT)
Oil tankers： log (DT) ＝ 0.332 ＋ 0.956 log (DWT)
where
DT： displacement tonnage (amount of water, in tons, displaced by the vessel when fully loaded)
GT： gross tonnage
DWT： deadweight tonnage
(3) The softness factor C s represents the ratio of the remaining amount of the berthing energy after energy
absorption due to deformation of the shell plating of the vessel to the initial berthing energy. It is generally
assumed that no energy is absorbed in this way and so the value of C s is often given as 1.0.
(4) When a vessel berths, the mass of water between the vessel and the mooring facilities resists to move out and
acts just as if a cushion is placed in this space. The energy that must be absorbed by the fenders is thus reduced.
This effect is considered when determining the berth configuration factor C c . It is thought that the effect
depends on things like the berthing angle, the shape of the vessel’s shell plating, the underkeel clearance, and
the berthing velocity, but little research has been carried out to determine it.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Observing the way in which large cargo ships and large oil tankers make berthing, one notices that such vessels
come to a temporary standstill, lined up parallel to the quaywall at a certain distance away from it. They are then
gently pushed by several tugboats until they come into contact with the quay. When there is a strong wind
blowing toward the quay, such vessels may berth while actually being pulled outwards by the tugboats. When
such a berthing method is adopted, it is common to set the berthing velocity to 10 ~ 15 cm/s based on past design
examples.
(2) Special vessels such as ferries, rollon/rolloff vessels, and small cargo ships berth under their own power
without assistance of tugboats. If there is a ramp at the bow or stern of such a vessel, the vessel may line up
perpendicular to the quay. In these cases, a berthing method different from that for larger vessels described in (1)
may be used. It is thus necessary to determine berthing velocities carefully based on actualy measured values,
paying attention to the type of berthing method employed by the target vessel.
(3) Figure T 2.2.1 shows the relationship between the vessel handling conditions and berthing velocity by vessel
size 4); it has been prepared based on the data collected through experience. This figure shows that the larger the
vessel, the lower the berthing velocity becomes; moreover, the berthing velocity must be set high if the mooring
facilities is not sheltered by breakwaters etc.
(4) According to the results of surveys on berthing velocity 5),6), the berthing velocity is usually less than 10 cm/s for
general cargo ships, but there are a few cases where it is over 10 cm/s (see Fig. T 2.2.2). The berthing velocity
only occasionally exceeds 10 cm/s for large oil tankers that use offshore terminals (see Fig. T 2.2.3). Even for
ferries which berth under their own power, the majority berth at the velocity of less than 10 cm/s. Nevertheless,
there are a few cases in which the berthing velocity is over 15 cm/s and so due care must be taken when
designing ferry quays (see Fig. T 2.2.4). It was also clear from the abovementioned survey results that the
degree to which a vessel is loaded up has a considerable influence on the berthing velocity. In other words, if a
vessel is fully loaded, meaning that the underkeel clearance is small, then the berthing velocity tends to be
lower, whereas if it is lightly loaded, meaning that the underkeel clearance is large, then the berthing velocity
tends to be higher.
17
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Difficult
exposed
Fig. T 2.2.1 Relationship between Vessel Handling Conditions and Berthing Velocity by Vessel Size 4)
Fig. T 2.2.2 Berthing Velocity and Displacement Tonnage for General Cargo Ships 5)
Berthing velocity (cm/s)
Fig. T 2.2.3 Berthing Velocity and Displacement Tonnage for Large Oil Tankers 6)
Stern berthing
Bow berthing
Berthing velocity (cm/s)
Fig. T 2.2.4 Berthing Velocity and Displacement Tonnage for Longitudinal Berthing of Ferries 5)
18
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
According to the survey by Moriya et al., the average berthing velocities for cargo ships, container ships, and
pure car carriers are as listed in Table T 2.2.1. The relationship between the deadweight tonnage and berthing
velocity is shown in Fig. T 2.2.5. This survey also shows that the larger the vessel, the lower the berthing
velocity tends to be. The highest berthing velocities observed were about 15 cm/s for vessels under 10,000 DWT
and about 10 cm/s for vessels of 10,000 DWT or over.
N=738
Poisson distribution m = 3
Poisson distribution m = 4
Weibull distribution N
Normal distribution
Cargo ships
Container ships
Pure car carriers
V (cm/s)
(5) Figure T 2.2.6 shows a berthing velocity frequency distribution obtained from actual measurement records at
offshore terminals used by large oil tankers of around 200,000 DWT. It can be seen that the highest measured
berthing velocity was 13 cm/s. If the data are assumed to follow a Weibull distribution, then the probability of
the berthing velocity below the value 13 cm/s would be 99.6%. The mean µ is 4.41 cm/s and the standard
deviation s is 2.08 cm/s. Application of the Weibull distribution yields the probability density function f ( V ) as
expressed in equation (2.2.3):
V
f ( V ) =  exp ( V 1.25 ) (2.2.3)
0.8
where
V： berthing velocity (cm/s)
From this equation, the probability of the berthing velocity exceeding 14.5 cm/s becomes 1/1000. The offshore
terminals where the berthing velocity measurements were taken had a design berthing velocity of either 15 cm/s
or 20 cm/s 7).
(6) Small vessels such as small cargo ships and fishing boats come to berths by controlling their positions under
their own power without assistance of tugboats. Consequently, the berthing velocity is generally higher than that
for larger vessels, and in some cases it can even exceed 30 cm/s. For small vessels in particular, it is necessary to
carefully determine the berthing velocity based on actually measured values etc.
(7) In cases where cautious berthing methods such as those described in (1) are not used, or in the case of berthing
of small or mediumsized vessels under influence of currents, it is necessary to determine the berthing velocity
based on actual measurement data etc., considering the ship drift velocity by currents.
(8) When designing mooring facilities that may be used by fishing boats, it is recommended to carry out design
works based on the design standards for fishing port facilities and actual states of usage.
19
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Technical Notes]
(1) When a vessel is in the middle of berthing operation, it is not aligned perfectly along the face line of the berth.
This means that after it comes into contact with the mooring facilities (fenders), it starts yawing and rolling. This
results in some of the vessel’s kinetic energy being used up. The amount of energy used up by rolling is small
compared with that by yawing and can be ignored. Equation (2.2.4) thus only considers the amount of energy
used up by yawing.
(2) The radious of gyration r relative to Lpp is a function of the block coefficient C b of the vessel and can be
obtained from Fig. T 2.2.7 8). Alternatively, one may use the linear approximation shown in equation (2.2.5) .
r = ( 0.19C b + 0.11 )L pp (2.2.5)
where
r： radius of gyration; this is related to the moment of inertia I z around the vertical axis of the vessel by
the relationship Iz = M s r 2
L pp： length between perpendiculars (m)
C b： block coefficient; C b = Ñ /( L pp Bd) ( Ñ : Volume of water displaced by the vessel (m3), B: moulded
breadth (m), d: draft (m))
(3) As sketched in Fig. T 2.2.8, when a vessel comes into contact with the fenders F1 and F2 with the point of the
vessel closest to the quaywall being the point P, the distance l from the point of contact to the center of gravity of
the vessel as measured parallel to the mooring facilities is given by equation (2.2.6) or (2.2.7); l is taken to be
L 1 when k ＜ 0.5 and L 2 when k ＞ 0.5. When k = 0.5, l is taken as whichever of L 1 or L 2 that gives the higher
value of C e in equation (2.2.4).
keLpp cos θ
F1
eLpp cos θ
P A
A
F2
Radius of gyration in the longitudinal direction (r)
Length between perpendiculars (Lpp)
B
Lpp
αLpp
B G
Block coefficient Cb
Fig. T 2.2.7 Relationship between the Radius of Gyration Fig. T 2.2.8 Vessel Berthing
around the Vertical Axis and the Block
Coefficient (Myers, 1969) 7)
20
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
where
L 1： distance from the point of contact to the center of gravity of the vessel as measured parallel to the
mooring facilities when the vessel makes contact with fender F1
L 2： distance from the point of contact to the center of gravity of the vessel as measured parallel to the
mooring facilities when the vessel makes contact with fender F2
q： berthing angle (the value of q is set as a design condition; it is usually set somewhere in the range
0 ~ 10º)
e： ratio of the distance between the fenders, as measured in the longitudinal direction of the vessel, to the
length between perpendiculars
a： ratio of the length of the parallel side of the vessel at the height of the point of contact with the fender to
the length between perpendiculars; this varies according to factors like the type of vessel, and the block
coefficient etc., but is generally in the range 1/3 ~ 1/2.
k： parameter that represents the relative location of the point where the vessel comes closest to the mooring
facilities between the fenders F1 and F2 ; k varies between 0 and 1, but it is generally taken at k = 0.5.
d
C m = 1 +  ´ 
2C b B
(2.2.8)
Ñ
C b = 
L pp Bd
where Cb,Ñ, Lpp, B, and d represent the following:
C b： block coefficient
Ñ： volume of water displaced by the vessel (m3)
L pp： length between perpendiculars (m)
B： moulded breadth (m)
d： full load draft (m)
[Technical Notes]
(1) When a vessel berths, the vessel (which has mass M s ) and the water mass surrounding the vessel (which has
mass M w ) both decelerate. Accordingly, the inertial force corresponding to the water mass is added to that of the
vessel itself. The virtual coefficient is thus defined as in equation (2.2.9).
Ms + M w
C m =  (2.2.9)
Ms
where
C m： virtual mass factor
M s： mass of vessel (t)
M w： mass of the water surrounding the vessel (added mass) (t)
Ueda 8) proposed equation (2.2.8) based on the results of model experiments and field observations. The second
term in equation (2.2.8) corresponds to M w ¤ M s in equation (2.2.9).
(2) As a general rule, the actual values of the target vessel are used for the length between perpendiculars ( L pp ), the
moulded breadth (B), and the full load draft (d). But when one of the standard ship sizes is used, one may use the
principal dimensions given in 2.1 Dimensions of the Target Vessel. Regression equations have been proposed
for the relationships between the deadweight tonnage, the moulded breadth and the full load draft 1). It is also
possible to use equations (2.2.10), which give the relationship between the deadweight tonnage (DWT) or the
gross tonnage (GT) and the length between perpendiculars for different types of vessel 1).
64444744448
Cargo ships (less than 10,000 DWT)： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.867 ＋ 0.310 log (DWT)
Cargo ships (10,000 DWT or more)： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.964 ＋ 0.285 log (DWT)
Container ships： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.516 ＋ 0.401 log (DWT)
Ferries (long distance, 13,000 GT or less)： log (Lpp) ＝ log (94.6 ＋ 0.00596GT)
Ferries (shorttomedium distance, 6,000 t or less)： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.613 ＋ 0.401 log (GT)
(2.2.10)
Rollon/rolloff vessels： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.840 ＋ 0.349 log (DWT)
Passenger ships (Japanese)： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.679 ＋ 0.359 log (GT)
Passenger ships (foreign)： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.787 ＋ 0.330 log (GT)
Car carriers： log (Lpp) ＝ 1.046 ＋ 0.280 log (GT)
Oil tankers： log (Lpp) ＝ 0.793 ＋ 0.322 log (DWT)
21
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
(3) The volume of water displaced by the vessel Ñ is determined by dividing the displacement tonnage DT by the
density of seawater (1.03 t/m3)
[Commentary]
(1) Vessels moored at mooring facilities situated in the open sea or near to harbor entrances, or at mooring facilities
inside harbors for which longperiod waves are expected to come in, along with vessels moored during stormy
weather, are liable to be moved under the influence of loads due to waves, winds, currents, etc. In some cases,
the kinetic energy due to such motions can exceed the berthing energy. In such cases, it is thus advisable to give
full consideration to the tractive forces and impact forces caused by the motions of vessels when designing
bollards and fenders 10).
(2) As a general rule, the external forces generated by the motions of a vessel should be obtained by carrying out a
numerical simulation of vessel motions, based on the factors such as the wave force acting on the vessel, the
wind force, the current force due to currents, and the loaddeflection characteristics of the mooring system.
[Technical Notes]
(1) As a general rule, the motions of a moored vessel should be analyzed through numerical simulation, with
consideration given to the random variations of the loads and the nonlinearity of the loaddeflection
characteristics of the mooring system. However, when such a numerical simulation of vessel motions is not
possible, or when the vessel is moored at a system that is considered to be moreorless symmetrical, one may
obtain the displacement of and loads on the mooring system either by using frequency response analysis for
regular waves or by referring to results of an motion analysis on a floating body moored at a system that has
loaddeflection characteristics of bilinear nature 11).
(2) The total wave force acting on the hull of a vessel is analyzed by dividing it into the wave exciting force due to
incident waves and the radiation force that is generated as the vessel moves. The wave exciting force due to
incident waves is the wave force calculated for the case that motions of the vessel are restrained. The radiation
force is the wave force exerted on the hull when the vessel undergoes a motion of unit amplitude for each mode
of motions. The radiation force can be expressed as the summation of a term that is proportional to the
acceleration of the vessel and a term that is proportional to the velocity. Specifically, the former can be expressed
as an added mass divided by acceleration, while the latter can be expressed as a damping coefficient divided by
velocity 12). In addition, a nonlinear fluid dynamic force that is proportional to the square of the wave height acts
on the vessel (see 8.2 External Forces Acting on Floating Body).
(3) For vessels that have a block coefficient of 0.7 ~ 0.8 such as large oil tankers, the ship hull can be represented
with an elliptical cylinder, allowing an approximate evaluation of the wave force 13).
(4) For boxshaped vessels such as working craft, the wave force can be obtained by taking the vessel to be either a
floating body with a rectangular cross section or a floating body of a rectangular prism.
[Commentary]
The wave force acting on a moored vessel is calculated using an appropriate method, for example the strip method,
the source distribution technique, the boundary element method, or the finite element method; the most common
method used for vessels is the strip method.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Wave Force by the Strip Method 11), 12)
(a) Wave force of regular waves acting on the hull
The wave force acting on the hull is taken to be the summation of the FroudeKriloff force and the force by the
waves that are reflected by the hull (diffraction force).
22
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Commentary]
It is desirable to determine the wind load acting on a moored vessel while considering the temporal fluctuation of the
wind velocity and the characteristics of the drag coefficients, which depend on the crosssectional form of the vessel.
[Technical Notes]
(1) The wind load acting on a vessel should be determined from equations (2.2.11) ~ (2.2.13), using the drag
coefficients C X and C Y in the X and Y directions and the pressure moment coefficient C M about the midship.
1
R X =  r a U 2 A T C X (2.2.11)
2
1
R Y =  r a U 2 A L C Y (2.2.12)
2
1
R M =  r a U 2 A L L pp C M (2.2.13)
2
where
C X： drag coefficient in the X direction (from the front of the vessel)
C Y： drag coefficient in the Y direction (from the side of the vessel)
C M： pressure moment coefficient about the midship
R X： X component of the wind force (kN)
R Y： Y component of the wind force (kN)
R M： moment of the wind load about the midship (kN•m)
r a： density of air; r a = 1.23 ´ 10 3 (t/m3)
U： wind velocity (m/s)
A T： front projected area above the water surface (m2)
A L： side projected area above the water surface (m2)
L pp： length between perpendiculars (m)
(2) It is desirable to determine the wind force coefficients C X , C Y , and C M through wind tunnel tests or water tank
tests on a target vessel. Since such experiments require time and cost, it is acceptable to use the calculation
equations for wind force coefficients 14),15) that are based on wind tunnel tests or water tank tests that have been
carried out in the past.
(3) The maximum wind velocity (10minute average wind velocity) should be used as the wind velocity U.
(4) For the front projected area above the water surface and the side projected area above the water surface, it is
desirable to use the values for the target vessel. For standard vessel sizes, one may refer to regression
equations 1).
(5) Since the wind velocity varies both in time and in space, the wind velocity should be treated as fluctuating in the
23
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
analysis of the motions of a moored vessel. Davenport 16) and Hino have proposed the frequency spectra for the
time fluctuations of the wind velocity. The frequency spectra proposed by Davenport and Hino are given by
equations (2.2.14) and (2.2.15), respectively.
64748
2 X2
f S u ( f ) = 4K r U10 

(1 + X2 )4 ¤ 3 (2.2.14)
X = 1200f / U 10
2 5 ¤ 6
64748
K r U10 ì f 2ü
S u ( f ) = 2.856  í 1 + æ ö ý
b î è bø
þ (2.2.15)
æ U 10 aö z 2m a 1
b = 1.169 ´ 10 3 ç ÷ æ ö
è K r ø è 10ø
where
S u ( f )： frequency spectrum of wind velocity (m2•s)
U 10： average wind velocity at the standard height 10 m (m/s)
K r： friction coefficient for the surface defined with the wind velocity at the standard height; over the
ocean, it is considered that K r = 0.003 is appropriate.
a： exponent when the vertical profile of the wind velocity is expressed by a power law [ U µ ( z ¤ 10 ) a ]
z： height above the surface of the ground or ocean (m)
m： correction factor relating to the stability of the atmosphere; m is taken to be 2 in the case of a storm.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Current Pressure Force Due to Currents Coming onto the Bow of Vessel
The current pressure force on the vessel due to currents coming onto the bow of a vessel may be calculated using
equation (2.2.16).
R f = 0.0014SV 2 (2.2.16)
where
R f： current pressure force (kN)
S： wetted surface area (m2)
V： flow velocity (m/s)
(2) Current Pressure Force Due to Currents Coming onto the Side of Vessel
The current pressure force due to a current coming onto the side of a vessel may be calculated using equation
(2.2.17).
R = 0.5r 0 CV 2 B (2.2.17)
where
R： current pressure force (kN)
r 0： density of seawater (t/m3) (standard value: r 0 = 1.03 t/m3)
C： current pressure coefficient
V： flow velocity (m/s)
B： side projected area of hull below the waterline (m2)
(3) The current pressure force due to tidal currents can in principle be divided into frictional resistance and pressure
resistance. It is thought that the resistance to currents coming onto the bow of a vessel is predominantly
frictional resistance, whereas the resistance to currents coming onto the side of a vessel is predominantly
pressure resistance. However, in practice it is difficult to rigorously separate the two resistances and investigate
them individually. Equation (2.2.16) is a simplification of the following Froude equation with r w = 1.03,
t = 15ºC and l = 0.14:
24
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
1.5
7.0
[Technical Notes]
The loaddeflection characteristics of a mooring system (mooring ropes, fenders, etc.) is generally nonlinear.
Moreover, with regard to the loaddeflection characteristics of a fender, they may show hysteresis, and so it is
desirable to model these characteristics appropriately before carrying out the motion analysis of a moored vessel.
2.2.4 Tractive Force Acting on Mooring Post and Bollard (Notification Article 79)
(1) It shall be standard to take the values listed in Table 2.2.1 as the tractive forces of vessels acting on
mooring posts and bollards.
(2) In the case of a mooring post, it shall be standard to assume that the tractive force stipulated in (1) acts
horizontally and a tractive force equal to one half of this acts upwards simultaneously.
(3) In the case of a bollard, it shall be standard to assume that the tractive force stipulated in (1) acts in all
directions.
Table 2.2.1 Tractive Forces of Vessels (Notification Article 79, Appended Table 12)
25
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) “Mooring posts” are installed away from the waterline, either on or near to the mooring facilities, close to the
both ends of a berth so that they may be used for mooring a vessel in a storm. “Bollards”, on the other hand, are
installed close to the waterline of the mooring facilities so that they may be used for mooring, berthing, or
unberthing a vessel in normal conditions.
(2) Regarding the layout and names of mooring ropes to moor a vessel, see Part Ⅷ , 2.1 Length and Water Depth
of Berths.
(3) Regarding the layout and structure of mooring posts and bollards, see Part Ⅷ , 19.3 Mooring Posts, Bollards,
and Mooring Rings.
[Technical Notes]
(1) It is desirable to calculate the tractive force acting on a mooring post and a bollard based on the breaking
strength of the mooring ropes possessed by a vessel arriving at the berth, the meteorological and oceanographic
conditions at the place where the mooring facilities are installed, and the dimensions of vessels, and if necessary
also considering the force due to a berthing vessel, the wind pressure on a moored vessel, and the force due to
motions of a vessel 9), 11). Alternatively, it is also possible to determine the tractive force acting on a mooring
post and a bollard in accordance with (2) ~ (6) below.
(2) In the case that the gross tonnage of a vessel exceeds 5,000 tons and there is no risk of more than one mooring
rope being attached to a bollard that is used for spring lines at the middle of mooring facilities for which the
vessel’s berth is fixed, the tractive force acting on a bollard may be taken as one half of the value listed in Table
2.2.1.
(3) The tractive force due to a vessel whose gross tonnage is no more than 200 tons or greater than 100,000 tons
(i.e., a vessel that is not covered in Table 2.2.1) should be calculated by considering the meteorological and
oceanographic conditions, the structure of the mooring facilities, past measurement data on tractive force, etc.
The tractive force on mooring facilities at which vessels are moored even in rough weather or mooring facilities
that are installed in waters with severe meteorological / oceanographic conditions should also be calculated by
considering these conditions.
(4) The tractive force acting on a mooring post has been determined based on the wind pressure acting on a vessel in
such a way that a lightly loaded vessel should be able to moor safely even when the wind velocity is 25 ~ 30
m/s, with the assumption that the mooring posts are installed at the place away from the wharf waterline by the
amount of vessel’s width and that the breast lines are pulled in a direction 45º to the vessel’s longitudinal
axis 17),18). The tractive force so obtained corresponds to the breaking strength of one to two mooring ropes,
where the breaking strength of a mooring rope is evaluated according to the “Steel Ship Regulations” by the
Nippon Kaiji Kyokai. For a small vessel of gross tonnage up to 1,000 tons, the mooring posts can withstand the
tractive force under the wind velocity of up to 35 m/s.
The tractive force acting on a bollard has been determined based on the wind pressure acting on a vessel in
such a way that even a lightly loaded vessel should be able to moor using only bollards in a wind of velocity up to
15 m/s, with the assumption that the ropes at the bow and stern are pulled in a direction at least 25º to the vessel’s
axis. The tractive force so obtained corresponds to the breaking strength of one mooring rope for a vessel of
gross tonnage up to 5,000 tons and two mooring ropes for a vessel of gross tonnage over 5,000 tons, where the
breaking strength of a mooring rope is evaluated according to the “Steel Ship Regulations” by the Nippon Kaiji
Kyokai.
The tractive force for a bollard that is used for spring lines and is installed at the middle of a berth, for which
the vessel’s berthing position is fixed, corresponds to the breaking strength of one mooring rope, where the
breaking strength of a mooring rope is evaluated according to the “Steel Ship Regulations” by the Nippon Kaiji
Kyokai. Note however that, although there are stipulations concerning synthetic fiber ropes in the “Steel Ship
Regulations” by the Nippon Kaiji Kyokai with regard to nylon ropes and type B vinylon ropes (both of which
are types of synthetic fiber rope), the required safety factor has been set large owing to the factors such that there
is little data on the past usage of such ropes and their abrasion resistance is low, and so both the required rope
diameter and the breaking strength are large. Accordingly, in the case of berths for which the mooring vessels
use only nylon ropes or type B vinylon ropes, it is not possible to apply the stipulations in (2) above.
In the abovementioned tractive force calculations, in addition to the wind pressure, it has been assumed that
there are tidal currents of 2 kt in the longitudinal direction and 0.6 kt in the transverse direction.
(5) When determining the tractive force from a small vessel of gross tonnage no more than 200 tons, it is desirable
to consider the type of vessel, the berthing situation, the structure of the mooring facilities, etc. During actual
26
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
design of mooring posts and bollards for vessels of gross tonnage no more than 200 tons, it is standard to take
the tractive force acting on a mooring posts to be 150 kN and the tractive force acting on a bollard to be 50 kN.
(6) When calculating the tractive force in the case of vessels such as ferries, container ships, or passenger ships,
caution should be exercised in using Table 2.2.1, because the wind pressurereceiving areas of such vessels are
large.
[References]
1) Yasuhiro AKAKURA, Hironao TAKAHASHI, Takashi NAKAMOTO: “Statistical analysis of ship dimensions for the size of
design ship”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 910, 1998 (in Japanese).
2) Yasuhiro AKAKURA and Hironao TAKAHASHI: “Ship dimensions of design ship under given confidence limits”, Technical
Note of P.H.R.I., September 1998.
3) PIANC: “Report of the International Commission for Improving the Design of Fender Systems”, Supplement to Bulletine No.
45, 1984.
4) Baker, A. L. L.: “The impact of ships when berthing”, Proc. Int’l Navig. Congr. (PIANC), Rome, Sect II, Quest. 2, 1953, pp.
111142.
5) Masahito MIZOGUCHI, Tanekiyo NAKAYAMA: “Studies on the berthing velocity, energy of the ships”, Tech. Note of
PHRI, No. 170, 1973 (in Japanese).
6) Hirokane OTANI, Shigeru UEDA, Tatsuru ICHIKAWA, Kensei SUGIHARA: “A study on the berthing impact of the big
tanker”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 176, 1974 (in Japanese).
7) Shigeru UEDA: “Study on berthing impact force of very large crude oil carriers”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 20, No. 2, 1981, pp.
169209 (in Japanese).
8) Myers, J.: “Handbook of Ocean and Underwater Engineering”, McGrawHill, New York, 1969.
9) Shigeru UEDA, Eijiro OOI: “On the design of fending systems for mooring facilities in a port”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 596,
1987 (in Japanese).
10) Shigeru UEDA, Satoru SHIRAISHI: “On the design of fenders based on the ship oscillations moored to quaywalls”, Tech.
Note of PHRI, No. 729, 1992 (in Japanese).
11) Shigeru UEDA: “Analytical method of motions moored to quaywalls and the applications”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 504,
1984 (in Japanese).
12) Shigeru UEDA, Satoru SHIRAISI: “Method and its evaluation for computation of moored ship’s motions”, Rept. of PHRI,
Vol. 22, No. 4, 1983 pp. 181218 (in Japanese).
13) Yoshimi GODA, Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Tadashi SASADA: “Theoretical and experimental investigation of wave forces
on a fixed vessel approximated with an elliptic cylinder”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1994, pp. 2374 (in Japanese).
14) R. M. Isherwood: “Wind resistance of merchant ships”, Bulliten of the Royal Inst. Naval Architects, 1972, pp. 327338.
15) Shigeru UEDA, Satoru SHIRAISHI, Kouhei ASANO, Hiroyuki OSHIMA: “Proposal of equation of wind force coefficient
and evaluation of the effect to motions of moored ships”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 760, 1993 (in Japanese).
16) Davenport, A. G.: “Gust loading factors”, Proc. of ASCE, ST3, 1967, pp. 1134.
17) Hirofumi INAGAKI, Koichi YAMAGUCHI, Takeo KATAYAMA: “Standardization of mooring posts and bollards for
wharf”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 102, 1970 (in Japanese).
18) Iaso FUKUDA, Tadahiko YAGYU: “Tractive force on mooring posts and bollards”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 427, 1982 (in
Japanese).
27
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
The effects that meteorological factors exert on the design of port and harbor facilities are as follows:
(1) Air pressure and its distribution are the factors that govern the generations of winds and storm surge.
(2) Wind is a factor that governs the generations of waves and storm surge, it exerts external forces on port and
harbor facilities and moored vessels in the form of wind pressure, and it can disrupt port and harbor works such
as cargo handling.
(3) Rainfall is a factor that determines the required capacity of drainage facilities in ports and harbors, and rain can
also disrupt port and harbor works such as cargo handling.
(4) Fog is a factor that is an impediment to the navigation of vessels when they are entering or leaving a harbor, and
also decreases the productivity of port and harbor facilities.
(5) In some cases, snow load is considered as a static load acting on port and harbor facilities.
(6) Air temperature affects the stress distribution within structures of port and harbor facilities and may lead to the
occurrence of thermal stress in these structures.
[Technical Notes]
(1) In calculations concerning the generation of storm surge or waves due to a typhoon, it is common to assume that
the air pressure distribution follows either Fujita’s equation (3.1.1) or Myers’ equation (3.1.2); the constants in
the chosen equation are determined based on actual air pressure measurements in the region of typhoons.
Dp
p = p ¥  (Fujita’ formula) (3.1.1)
1 + (r ¤ r0 )2
r0
p = p c + Dp exp æ ö (Myers’ formula) (3.1.2)
è rø
where
p： air pressure at a distance r from the center of typhoon (hPa)
r： distance from the center of typhoon (km)
p c： air pressure at the center of typhoon (hPa)
r 0： estimated distance from the center of typhoon to the point where the wind velocity is maximum (km)
Dp： air pressure drop at the center of typhoon (hPa); Dp = p ¥ p c
p ¥： air pressure at r = ¥ (hPa); p ¥ = p c + Dp
The size of a typhoon varies with time, and so r 0 and Dp must be determined as the functions of time.
(2) With regard to wind, see 3.2 Wind.
(3) Rain is generally divided into the rain of thunderstorms that have heavy rainfall in a short period of time and the
rain that continues for a prolonged period of time (rain by a typhoon is a representative example of the latter).
When designing drainage facilities, it is necessary to determine the intensity of rainfall both for the case where
the amount of runoff increases very rapidly and for the case where the runoff continues for a prolonged period.
In the case of sewage planning whereby the intensity of rainfall during a thunderstorm is a problem, Sherman’s
formula or Talbot’s formula is used.
a
R = n (Sherman’s formula) (3.1.3)
t
a
R =  (Talbot’s formula) (3.1.4)
t+b
where
R： intensity of rainfall (mm/h)
t： duration of rainfall (min)
a, b, n: constants
(4) With regard to snow load acting upon port and harbor facilities, see 15.3.4 Snow Load.
28
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Gradient Winds
(a) The velocity of the gradient wind can be expressed as a function of pressure gradient, radius of curvature of
isobars, latitude, and air density as in equation (3.2.1).
æ ¶ p ¤ ¶r ö
Vg = rw sin f ç 1 + 1 + 
÷ (3.2.1)
è r a rw 2 sin 2 fø
where
Vg ： velocity of gradient wind (cm/s); in the case of an anticyclone, equation (3.2.1) gives a negative value
¶p and so the absolute value should be taken.
： pressure gradient (taken to be positive for a cyclone, negative for an anticyclone) (g/cm2/s2)
¶r
r： radius of curvature of isobars (cm)
w： angular velocity of Earth's rotation ( s 1 ); w = 7.29 ´ 10 5 ¤ s
f： latitude (º)
ra： density of air (g/cm3)
Before performing the calculation, measurement units should first be converted into the CGS units listed
above. Note that 1º of latitude corresponds to a distance of approximately 1.11 × 10 7 cm, and an air pressure
of 1.0 hPa is 10 3 g/cm/s2.
(b) A gradient wind for which the isobars are straight lines (i.e., their radius of curvature in equation (3.2.1) is
infinite) is called the geostrophic wind. In this case, the wind velocity is V = ( ¶ p ¤ ¶r ) ¤ ( 2r a rw sin f ) .
(2) The actual sea surface wind velocity is generally lower than the value obtained from the gradient wind equation.
Moreover, although the direction of a gradient wind is parallel to the isobars in theory, the sea surface wind
blows at a certain angle a to the isobars as sketched in Fig. T 3.2.2. In the northern hemisphere, the wind
around a cyclone blows in a counterclockwise direction and inwards, whereas the wind around an anticyclone
blows in a clockwise direction and outwards. It is known that the relationship between the velocity of gradient
winds and that of the actual sea surface wind varies with the latitude. The relationship under the average
conditions is summarized in Table T 3.2.1. However, this is no more than a guideline; when estimating sea
surface winds, it is necessary to make appropriate corrections by comparing estimations with actual
measurements taken along the coast and values that have been reported by vessels out at sea (the latter are
written on weather charts).
(3) When selecting the design wind velocity for the wind that acts directly on port and harbor facilities and moored
vessels, one should estimate the extreme distribution of the wind velocity based on actual measurement data
taken over a long period (at least 30 years as a general rule) and then use the wind velocity corresponding to the
required return period.
It is standard to take the wind parameters to be the direction and velocity, with the wind direction being
represented using the sixteenpoints bearing system and the wind velocity by the mean wind velocity over 10
minutes.
29
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
In the Meteorological Agency’s Technical Observation Notes No. 34, the expected wind velocities with the
return periods of 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 years for 141 government meteorological offices have been
estimated from the tenminute mean wind velocity data of about 35 years, under the assumption that wind
velocity follows a double exponential distribution. For locations with topographical conditions different from
that of the nearest among the abovementioned meteorological offices, one should conduct observations for at
least one year and then conduct a comparative investigation on topographical effects in order to make it possible
to use the aforementioned estimation results.
(4) Regarding the wind velocity used in estimating storm surges and waves, it is standard to use the value at a height
of 10 m above sea level. The wind velocities obtained at government meteorological offices are the values for a
height of approximately 10 m above the ground level. Accordingly, when attempting to use such observed
values to estimate sea surface winds, in the case that the elevations of the structural members are considerably
different from 10 m, it is necessary to correct the wind velocity with respect to the height. The vertical profile of
the wind velocity is generally represented with a power law, and so in current design calculations for all kinds of
structures, a power law is simply used: i.e.,
h n
U h = U 0 æè öø (3.2.2)
h0
where
U h： wind velocity at height h (m/s)
U 0： wind velocity at height h 0 (m/s)
The value of the exponent varies with the situation with regard to the roughness near to the surface of the ground
and the stability of the atmosphere. In structural calculations on land, a value of n = 1/10 ~ 1/4 is used, and it is
common to use a value of n ≧ 1/7 out to sea.
Statistical data on wind velocity usually consider the tenminute mean wind velocity. However, for some
structures the mean wind velocity over a shorter time period or the maximum instantaneous wind velocity may
be used, in which case it is necessary to gain an understanding of the relationship between the mean wind
velocity over a certain time period and the maximum wind velocity, and also the characteristics of the gust
factor.
[Technical Notes]
(1) When calculating the wind pressure acting on a moored vessel, one should refer to 2.2.3 [3] Wind Load Acting
on a Vessel.
(2) In the case that there are no statutory stipulations concerning the wind pressure acting on a structure, the wind
pressure may be calculated using equation (3.3.1).
p = cq (3.3.1)
where
p： wind pressure (N/m2)
q： velocity pressure (N/m2)
c： wind pressure coefficient
Equation (3.3.1) expresses the wind pressure, i.e., the force due to the wind per unit area subjected to the wind
force. The total force due to the wind acting on a member or structure is thus the wind pressure as given by
equation (3.3.1) multiplied by the area of that member or structure affected by the wind in a plane perpendicular
to the direction in which the wind acts.
The velocity pressure q is defined as in equation (3.3.2).
1
q =  r a U 2 (3.3.2)
2
where
q： velocity pressure (N/m2)
r a： density of air (kg/m3) r a = 1.23 kg/m3
U： design wind velocity (m/s)
The design wind velocity should be taken at 1.2 to 1.5 times the standard wind velocity (tenminute mean wind
velocity at a height of 10 m). This is because the maximum instantaneous wind velocity is about 1.2 to 1.5 times
the tenminute mean wind velocity.
The wind pressure coefficient varies depending on the conditions such as the shape of the member or
structure, the wind direction, and the Reynolds number. With the exception of cases where it is determined by
means of the wind tunnel experiments, it may be set by referring to the Article 87 of the “Enforcement Order
30
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
of the Building Standard Law” (Government Ordinance No. 338, 1950) or the “Crane Structure Standards”
(Ministry of Labor Notification). With regard to wind direction, it is generally required to consider the wind
direction that is most unfavorable to the structure, with the exception of cases where it has been verified that
there exists an overwhelmingly prevailing direction of winds.
31
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Chapter 4 Waves
4.1 General
4.1.1 Procedure for Determining the Waves Used in Design (Notification Article 4, Clause 1)
The waves used in the investigation of the stability of protective harbor facilities and other port and harbor
facilities, as well as the examination of the degree of calmness of navigation channels and basins shall be
set using wave data obtained from either actual wave measurements or wave hindcasting. Wave
characteristics shall be obtained by carrying out necessary statistical processing and by analyzing wave
transformations owing to sea bottom topography and others. It shall be standard to carry out the wave
hindcasting using a method that is based on an appropriate equation for representing the relationship
between the wind velocity and the wave spectrum or the significant wave parameters.
[Commentary]
The size and structural form of facilities are determined
by the factors such as the height and period of the waves
Wave data
1) Actual measurement data
that act on them. The setting of the wave conditions to be 2) Hindcasting values
used in design should thus be carried out carefully. The
setting of wave conditions should be carried out
separately for “ordinary waves” (i.e., waves that occur in Statistical analysis
ordinary conditions: these are required when estimating
the harbor calmness or the net working rate of cargo
1) Ordinary waves
2) Storm waves
handling) and “storm waves” (i.e., waves that occur in
storm conditions: these are required when estimating the Wave occurrence rate of
wave force acting on structures). deepwater waves Design deepwater waves
The waves that are obtained by statistically process
ing data based on either actual measurements or hindcast
ing are generally deepwater waves that are unaffected by Wave transformation Wave transformation
the sea bottom topography. Deepwater waves propagate
towards the coast, and once the waves reach to the water
Wave occurrence rate Parameters of design waves
depth about one half the wavelength, they start to experi at the place of interest 1) Significant wave
ence the effects of topography and transform with the 2) Highest wave
result of wave height change. “Wave transformation”
includes refraction, diffraction, reflection, shoaling, and
breaking. In order to determine the wave conditions at the
1) Harbor calmness 1) Wave force acting
2) Net working rate, on structures
place where wave data is needed (for instance the place number of working days 2) Amount of waves
where a structure of interest is located), it is necessary to 3) Transport energy of overtopping at seawall
give appropriate consideration to such wave transforma incoming waves and revetments
tions by means of numerical calculations or model exper 4) Others 3) Others
iments.
In the abovementioned procedure for setting the Fig. T 4.1.1 Procedure for Setting
wave conditions to be used in design, it is necessary to the Waves to Be
give sufficient consideration to the irregularity of the Used in Design
waves and to treat the waves as being of random nature
as much as possible.
[Technical Notes]
A sample procedure for setting the wave conditions to be used in design is shown in Fig. T 4.1.1.
[Commentary]
The waves used in the design of structures are generally “significant waves”. The significant wave is a hypothetical
wave that is a statistical indicator of an irregular wave group. Significant waves have the dimensions that are
approximately equal to the values from visual wave observations, and so they are used in wave hindcasting. It is also
known that the period of a significant wave is approximately equal to the period at the peak of the wave spectrum.
Because of such advantages, significant waves have been commonly used to represent wave groups. Nevertheless,
depending on the purpose, it may be necessary to convert significant waves into other waves such as highest waves
and highest onetenth waves.
32
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Definitions of Wave Parameters
(a) Significant wave (significant wave height H1/3 and significant wave period T1/3)
The waves in a wave group are rearranged in the order of their heights and the highest onethird are selected;
the significant wave is then the hypothetical wave whose height and period are the mean height and period of
the selected waves.
(b) Highest wave (highest wave height Hmax and highest wave period Tmax)
The highest wave in a wave group.
(c) Highest onetenth wave (H1/10, T1/10)
The wave whose height and period are equal to the mean height and period of the highest onetenth of the
waves in a wave group.
(d) Mean wave (mean wave height H , mean period T )
The wave whose height and period are equal to the mean height and period of all of the waves in a wave
group.
(e) Deepwater waves (deepwater wave height H0 and deepwater wave period T0)
The waves at a place where the water depth is at least one half of the wavelength; the wave parameters are
expressed with those of the significant wave at this place.
(f) Equivalent deepwater wave height (H0¢)
A hypothetical wave height that has been corrected for the effects of planar topographic changes such as
refraction and diffraction; it is expressed with the significant wave height.
(2) Maximum Wave
The largest significant wave within a series of significant wave data that was observed during a certain period
(for example, one day, one month, or one year) is called the “maximum wave”. In order to clearly specify the
length of the observation period, it is advisable to refer to the maximum wave such as the “maximum significant
wave over a period of one day (or one month, one year, etc.)”. Moreover, when one wishes to clearly state that
one is referring to the significant wave for the largest wave that occurred during a stormy weather, the term
“peak wave” is used (see 4.4 Statistical Processing of Wave Observation and Hindcasted Data). The
“maximum wave height” is the maximum value of the significant wave height during a certain period; this is
different from the definition of the “highest wave height”.
(3) Significance of Equivalent Deepwater Waves
The wave height at a certain place in the field is determined as the result of transformations by shoaling and
breaking, which depend on the water depth at that place, and those by diffraction and refraction, which depend
on the planar topographical conditions at that place. However, in hydraulic model experiments on the
transformation or overtopping of waves in a twodimensional channel or in twodimensional analysis by wave
transformation theory, planar topographical changes are not taken into consideration. When applying the results
of a twodimensional model experiment or a theoretical calculation to the field, it is thus necessary to
incorporate in advance the special conditions of the place in question, namely the effects of planar topographical
changes (specifically the effects of diffraction and refraction), into the deepwater waves for the place in
question, thus adjusting the deepwater waves into a form whereby they correspond to the deepwater incident
wave height used for the experiment or theoretical calculation. The deepwater wave height obtained by
correcting the effects of diffraction and refraction with their coefficients is called the “equivalent deepwater
wave height”.
The equivalent deepwater wave height at the place for which design is being carried out is given as follows:
H0 ¢ = Kd Kr H0 (4.1.1)
where
Kr： refraction coefficient for the place in question (see 4.5.2 Wave Refraction)
Kd： diffraction coefficient for the place in question (see 4.5.3 Wave Diffraction)
33
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Technical Notes]
(1) Small Amplitude Wave Theory
The fundamental properties of waves are expressed as the functions of the wave height, period, and water depth.
Various characteristics of shallow water waves as obtained as a first approximation by small amplitude wave
theory are listed below. Note that, with regard to the coordinates, the positive x direction is taken in the direction
of wave travel and the positive z direction vertically upwards with z = 0 corresponding to the still water level.
The water depth h is assumed to be constant and wave characteristics are assumed to be uniform in the
transverse direction (y direction).
(a) Surface elevation (displacement from still water level) (m)
H 2p 2p
h ( x ,t ) =  sin æ x tö (4.1.2)
2 èL T ø
where
h： surface elevation (m)
H： wave height (m)
L： wavelength (m)
T： period (s)
(b) Wavelength (m)
gT 2 2ph
L =  tanh  (4.1.3)
2p L
where
h： water depth (m)
g： gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
(c) Wave velocity (m/s)
gT 2ph gL
C =  tanh  =  tanh 2ph
 (4.1.4)
2p L 2p L
(d) Water particle velocity (m/s)
cosh 2p (z + h)
644474448

pH L 2p 2p
u =   sin æ x tö
T 2ph èL T ø
sinh 
L
(4.1.5)
2p ( z + h )
cosh 
pH L 2p 2p
w =   cos æ x tö
T 2ph è L T ø
sinh 
L
where
u： component of water particle velocity in the x direction (m/s)
w： component of water particle velocity in the z direction (m/s)
(e) Water particle acceleration (m/s)
2p ( z + h )
644474448
cos h 
du 2p 2 H L 2p 2p
 =   cos æ x tö
dt T 2 2ph è L T ø
sinh 
L (4.1.6)
2p ( z + h )
cos h 
dw 2p 2 H L 2p 2p
 =   sin æ x tö
dt T 2 2ph è L T ø
sinh 
L
where
du
： component of water particle acceleration in the x direction (m/s2)
dt
dw
： component of water particle acceleration in the z direction (m/s2)
dt
34
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
L = T gh (m) (4.1.13)
C = CG = gh (m/s)
35
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
pH H 1 ¤ 2 z + h 3 i cos h [ ( 2p ( z + h ) ) ¤ L ]
u max ( z ) =  1 + a æ ö æ ö  (4.1.14)
T è hø è h ø sinh [ ( 2ph ) ¤ L ]
where the coefficient a is given as listed in Table T 4.1.2.
Table T 4.1.2 Coefficient a for Calculation of Maximum Horizontal Water Particle Velocity
h/L a h/L a
0.03 1.50 0.2 0.68
0.05 1.50 0.3 0.49
0.07 1.43 0.5 0.25
0.10 1.25 0.7 0.27
0.14 0.97
36
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Commentary]
The assumption behind the theory of Rayleigh distribution is a precondition that the wave energy is concentrated in
an extremely narrow band around a certain frequency. Problems thus remain with regard to its applicability to ocean
waves for which the frequency band is broad. Nevertheless, it has been pointed out that, so long as the waves are
defined by the zeroupcrossing method, the Rayleigh distribution can be applied to ocean waves as an acceptable
approximation.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Expression of Rayleigh Distribution
The Rayleigh distribution is given by the following equation:
pH ì p H 2ü
p ( H ¤ H ) =   exp í  æ ö ý (4.1.15)
2H è ø
î 4 H þ
where
p(H/H)： probability density function of wave heights
H ： mean wave height (m)
According to the Rayleigh distribution, the highest onetenth wave height H1/10, the significant wave height
H 1 ¤ 3 , and the mean wave height H are related to one another by the following equations:
678
H 1 ¤ 10 = 1.27H 1 ¤ 3 (4.1.16)
H 1 ¤ 3 = 1.60H
On average, these relationships agree well with the results of wave observations in situ.
The highest wave height Hmax is difficult to determine precisely as will be discussed in (2) below, but in
general it may be fixed as in the following relationship:
H max = ( 1.6 ～ 2.0 )H 1 ¤ 3 (4.1.17)
It should be noted however that as waves approach the coast, waves with the heights greater than the breaking
limit begin to break and that their heights are reduced. Thus it is not possible to use the Rayleigh distribution for
the wave heights within the breaker zone.
(2) Occurrence Probability of the Highest Wave Height
The highest wave height Hmax is a statistical quantity that cannot be determined precisely; it is only possible to
give its occurrence probability. If the wave height is assumed to follow a Rayleigh distribution, then the
expected value Hmax of Hmax , when a large number of samples each composed of N waves are ensembled, is
given as follows:
0.5772
H max = 0.706 æ l n N + ö H 1 ¤ 3 (4.1.20)
è 2 l n Nø
It should be noted, however, that when Hmax is obtained for each of a large number of samples each containing
N waves, there will be a considerable number of cases in which Hmax exceeds Hmax. Thus a simple use of Hmax
as the design wave might place structures on a risky side. One can thus envisage the method in which a wave
height (Hmax)m with m = 0.05 or 0.1 is used, where (Hmax)m is set such that the probability of the value of Hmax
exceeding (Hmax)m is m (i.e., the significance level is m). The value of (Hmax)m for a given significance level m is
given by the following equation:
N
( H max ) m = 0.706H 1 ¤ 3 l n æ ö (4.1.21)
è l n [ 1 ¤ ( 1 m ) ]ø
37
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Table T 4.1.4 lists the values obtained from this equation. Because Hmax is not a definite value but rather a
probabilistic variable, the value of Hmax / H1/3 varies greatly with N and m. However, considering the facts that the
wave height only approximately follows a Rayleigh distribution and that the wave pressure formula has been derived
while containing a certain scatter of experimental data, it is appropriate to use Hmax = (1.6 ~ 2.0) H1/3 by neglecting
the very small or large values in the table.
Table T 4.1.4 Relationship between Highest Wave Height Hmax and Significant Wave Height H1/3
[Technical Notes]
(1) General Form of Wave Spectrum
The general form of the wave spectrum is usually represented as in the following equation:
S ( f, q ) = S ( f )G ( f, q ) (4.1.22)
where
f： frequency
q： azimuth from the principal direction of the wave
S(f,q)： directional spectrum
In the above, S(f) is a function that represents the distribution of the wave energy with respect to frequency; it is
called the “frequency spectrum”. G(f,q) is a function that represents the distribution of the wave energy with
respect to direction; it is called the “directional spreading function”.
The functions expressed in the following equations may be used for S(f) and G(f,q). The frequency spectrum
of equation (4.1.23) is called the BretschneiderMitsuyasu spectrum, while equation (4.1.24) is called the
Mitsuyasu type spreading function.
2 4 5 4
S ( f ) = 0.257H 1 ¤ 3 T1 ¤ 3 f exp [ 1.03 ( T1 ¤ 3 f ) ] (4.1.23)
q
G ( f, q ) = G 0 cos 2S  (4.1.24)
2
i
where qmax and qmin are respectively the maximum and minimum angles of deviation from the principal
direction.
The term S in equation (4.1.24) is a parameter that represents the degree of directional spreading of wave
energy. It is given by the following formulas:
f 2.5
64748
where fm is the frequency at which the spectrum peak appears. It may be represented in terms of the significant
wave period T1/3 as in the following equation:
f m = 1 ¤ ( 1.05T 1 ¤ 3 ) (4.1.27)
If the units of H1/3 and T1/3 are meters and seconds respectively, then the units of S(f,q) are m2•s.
38
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
S max
(αp)0
h/L0
The peak frequency for equation (4.1.28) is about 8% lower than that for equation (4.1.23), the spectral density
at the peak is about 18% higher, and overall the spectrum is shifted towards the low frequency side. At the very
least, it is advisable to use the spectral form expressed by equation (4.1.28) for the target spectrum in hydraulic
model experiments.
(5) Relationship between Wave Spectrum and Typical Values of Wave Characteristics
(a) Wave spectrum and typical value of wave height
If the probability density function for the occurrence of a wave height H is assumed to follow the Rayleigh
distribution, then the relationship between the mean wave height H and the zeroth moment of the wave
39
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
spectrum m0 is given by equation (4.1.30), where the nth moment of the wave spectrum is defined as in
equation (4.1.29).
¥
mn = ò0 f n S ( f ) df (4.1.29)
Using the relationship H1/3 = 1.60 H , one arrives at the following relationship between the significant wave
height and the spectrum.
H 1 ¤ 3 ≒ 4.0 m 0 (4.1.31)
According to the results of actual observations, it is often the case that the best relationship is
H 1 ¤ 3 = 3.8 m 0 . In the case of wave data from the shallow waters where the wave height is large, the waves
are highly nonlinear and so the relationship H 1 ¤ 3 = 4.0 m 0 is satisfied. In either case, there is a very strong
correlation between H 1 ¤ 3 and m0. It is thus acceptable to use equation (4.1.31) and calculate the significant
wave height from the spectrum.
(b) Wave spectrum and typical value of period
When waves are defined using the zeroupcrossing Mean ; 0.832
method, the mean period Tz is given by the following N = 171 data Standard deviation ; 0.072
Tz = m0 ¤ m2 (4.1.32)
[Commentary]
(1) As for actual measurement data, a relatively long period of measurements (10 years or more) is desirable.
However, when there is a lack of such actual measurement data, hindcasted values that have been obtained using
at least about 30 years’ worth of meteorological data should be used, with these being corrected by means of the
available data of actual wave measurement.
(2) When hindcasted values obtained from meteorological data are corrected using actual measurement data, it is
necessary that the measurement data should cover the period of 3 years at the minimum and contain a
considerable number of cases of large storms. However, if waves were recorded during an extraordinary weather
that only occurs once every a few tens of years and the values for these waves exceed all the hindcasted values,
the observed values may be used to obtain the design deepwater waves.
40
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
(3) If there is absolutely no actual measurement data at the site of interest, or if the only measurement data available
is for extremely limited conditions, measurement data for a neighboring place with similar natural conditions
may be used. In this case, NOWPHAS (Nationwide Ocean Wave Information Network for Ports and Harbors)
data may be used.
(4) If it is known that an extraordinary storm event occurred in the area before the period for which wave
hindcasting using meteorological data is carried out (for example, in a previous decade), the record of such an
event should be taken into consideration.
(5) When hindcasted values for a hypothetical typhoon are used, it is advisable to sufficiently investigate the
magnitudes of past typhoons and the courses that they followed, and to even include an investigation on the
occurrence probability of such a typhoon.
(6) When estimating deepwater waves using actual measurement data, it is neccessary to take into account the fact
that the measured wave height has been affected by refraction and shoaling. Thus the wave height of the
deepwater waves should be corrected by dividing the measured height by the refraction coefficient and the
shoaling coefficient. In this case, it is also necessary to consider changes in the wave direction.
(7) If the significant wave height obtained from actual measurement data is more than one half of the water depth at
the measurement location, it is considered that this wave record has been affected by wave breaking. With such
wave data, the parameters of the deepwater waves should be estimated by means of wave hindcasting. Note
however that, with regard to the hindcasted deepwater waves, significant waves for the measurement location
should be estimated as described in 4.5 Transformations of Waves, and a comparison with the actual
measurement data should be carried out.
(8) It is advisable to determine the deepwater waves that will be used in design with consideration of the encounter
probability based on the return period and the lifetime of the structure in question. However, the way in which
the encounter probability is interpreted will depend on the functions, importance and return on investment of the
structure, and other factors, and so it is not possible to determine it for the general case. It must therefore be
determined independently for each individual case by the judgement of the engineer in charge. Here, the
“encounter probability” means the probability that waves with a height larger than the return wave height for a
given return period occurs at least once during the lifetime of the structure in question.
(9) When determing the deepwater waves that will be used in design, it is necessary to examine the external forces
on and past damage of existing structures adjacent to the structure under design.
(10) It is standard to set deepwater wave parameters separately for each direction of the sixteenpoint bearings,
although the directions for which the wave height is small and their effects on the structure are readily judged as
negligible may be excluded. The wave direction hereby refers to the direction of the irregular wave component
that has the highest energy density, in other words, the principal direction. Since the wave force acting on the
structure in question will not change greatly when the wave direction changes by only a few degrees, it is
acceptable in design to represent the wave direction using the sixteenpoint bearing system.
[Technical Notes]
The parameters of the design waves are determined according to the following procedures:
(1) The effects of wave transformation such as refraction, diffraction, shoaling, and breaking are applied to the
deepwater waves determined by following 4.2.1 Principles for Determining the Deepwater Waves Used in
Design, in order to determine the parameters of the design waves at the design location.
(2) If the location in question is subject to special conditions (for example, disturbances from externally reflected
waves or an increase in wave height due to concave corners), these should also be taken into account.
(3) The wave force and other wave actions on the structure in question such as overtopping are determined for the
waves obtained above.
(4) According to the various conditions related to wave actions, there can be cases where the wave force becomes
largest when the water level is low, and so investigations should be carried out for all conceivable water levels.
(5) The above calculations are carried out for each possible direction in which the deepwater waves may come in.
The deepwater waves for which the wave action is largest or for which the effects on the structure in question or
facilities in the hinterland are most unfavorable are chosen as the design waves.
41
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) Wave hindcasting should be made in the following two steps:
(a) Setting of the wind field
(b) Calculation of wave development and attenuation.
(2) The field where waves are generated and developed is called the fetch (or wind field), and it is characterized by
four parameters: wind velocity, wind direction, fetch length, and wind duration. Where the wind field is set, the
wave development and attenuation should be calculated by using the most appropriate hindcasting method for
the wind field conditions.
[Technical Notes]
The wind field is to be set according to the following procedures:
(a) Collection of surface weather charts and meteorological data.
(b) Determination of the duration of hindcasting for each case.
(c) Calculation of gradient winds from the surface weather charts.
(d) Estimation of the sea surface winds by empirical formulas and data of measurement.
(e) Preparation of the wind field chart.
[Commentary]
The reliability of the results of the wave hindcast should be examined through the comparison with the wave
measurement data.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Spectral Methods
(a) General
Spectral methods can be classified into the spectral component methods that have been developed by
assuming that the components of the spectrum for each frequency and direction develop independently until
some equilibrium state is reached 6),7), and the parameteric methods that are based on the idea that the
development and decay of a wave spectrum can be described by a certain small number of parameters 8),9),10).
With the former, the development of waves is described in terms of the influx of energy from the wind into the
component waves that make up the spectrum and the weak nonlinear interaction between component waves.
With the latter, development of waves are treated as the overall result of strong nonlinear effects and a kind of
similarity mechanism is assumed with introduction of a few parameters. Calculations are carried out by
formulating and solving the equations that govern the development and transformation processes of waves
using the parameters.
The accuracy of wave hindcasting by spectral methods has not been sufficiently investigated yet. However,
since the accuracy of wave hindcasting depends greatly on the accuracy of estimating ocean winds, at present
it is reasonable to believe that the accuracy of spectral methods is comparable to that of significant wave
methods. Nevertheless, it should be noted that even for the same wave hindcasting model, results can vary by
10 ~ 20% due to differences in the matters like the calculation mesh, the boundary conditions or empirical
constants. Accordingly, it is necessary to investigate the validity and accuracy of hindcasted results by
comparing them with observation values (examples of such comparisons are given in references 6)~11)). In
particular, an equilibrium spectral form is assigned as the limit of wave development in the current spectral
methods. It is thought that the accuracy of the supposed equilibrium spectrum itself affects the results greatly,
and so it is a good idea to investigate the accuracy with regard to the functional forms of frequency spectrum
or the directional spectrum. This is because the significant wave height is proportional to the square root of the
integral of the directional spectrum, meaning that the calculation is such that the significant wave height does
not change very much even if the spectral form itself changes somewhat, and so it is considered that the most
rigorous way of carrying out evaluation is to examine the spectral form.
The spectral methods have the following advantages over the significant wave methods.
42
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
① The effects of the variations of wind speed and direction on wave development are physically well
described.
② Appropriate estimation results on wave heights and periods are obtained even when the wind field moves
together with wave propagation.
③ Wind waves and swell mixed sea conditions can be reproduced in one calculation.
Accordingly, if the results of hindcasting using a significant wave method seem dubious, it is a good idea to
make hindcasting again using a spectral method. Incidentally, spectral methods have been researched and
developed while primarily focusing on deepwater waves. There are only a few studies concerning shallow
water waves, namely Collins 12), Cavaleri 13), Golding 14) and Yamaguchi et al.
(b) Details 6),7)
Wave forecasting methods by mean of wave spectrum have been developed by many researchers since the
1960s. Those developed by Japanese reserchers include Inoue’s model 6), Isozaki and Uji’s MRI model 7), and
Yamaguchi and Tsuchiya’s model. The basis of these models is the following energy balance equation:
¶
E ( f, q, t, x ) = C G ( f ) ÑE ( f, q, t, x ) + a ( f, U ) + b ( f, U )E ( F, q, t, x ) + F 3 + F 4 + F 5 (4.3.1)
¶t
where
E ( F, q, t, x )： energy density of a twodimensional wave spectrum
a ( f, U )： linear amplifying factor in Phillips’ resonance theory 15)
b ( f, U )： exponential amplifying factor in Miles’ theory 16)
F 3： energy dissipated due to wave breaking
F 4： energy loss due to internal friction during wave propagations etc.
F 5： energy exchange due to the nonlinear interaction between component waves
f, q： component wave frequency and angle
t： time
x： position vector
C G ( f )： group velocity vector
U： wind velocity
Ñ： differential operator
(2) Significant Wave Methods
(a) SMB method
① General 19),20)
The SMB method is used when the wind field is stationary. The height and period of deepwater
significant waves are estimated from the wind velocity and wind duration in the fetch and the fetch length
using Fig. T 4.3.1. Of the wave height obtained from the wind velocity and that from the wind duration,
the lower one is adopted as the hindcasted value; likewise for the period. Figure T 4.3.1 has been drawn
based on the relationships by equations (4.3.2), (4.3.3) and (4.3.4), which were rewritten by Wilson 21) in
1965.
gH 1 ¤ 3 1

2
 = 0.30 1 2 (4.3.2)
U ì æ gFö
1 ¤ 2ü
í 1 + 0.004 è 2ø ý
î U þ
gT 1 ¤ 3 1
 = 1.37 1 5 (4.3.3)
2pU ì æ gFö ü
1¤3
í 1 + 0.008 è 2ø ý
î U þ
F dF F dF
t = ò 0 CG
i = ò 0 gT

i
1 ¤ 3 ¤ 4p
(4.3.4)
where
H 1 ¤ 3： significant wave height (m)
T 1 ¤ 3： significant wave period (s)
U： wind velocity at 10 m above sea surface (m/s).
F： fetch length (m)
g： acceleration of gravity (m/s2) (= 9.81 m/s2)
t： minimum duration (hr)
43
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wind Speed
Fetch
H 1 3 (m) T 1 3 (s) t (h) ( H 1 3 T 1 3 ) 2 = const.
Fig. T  4.3.1 Wave Forecasting Diagram by the SMB Method
where
F eff： effective fetch length (km)
F i： distance to opposite shore in the ith direction (km)
q i： angle between the direction of Fi and the predominant wind direction (º)
T 1 ¤ 3 = 3.86 H 1 ¤ 3 (4.3.6)
where
H 1 ¤ 3： significant wave height (m)
T 1 ¤ 3： significant wave period (s)
44
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
In the SakamotoIjima method, the ideas in Wilson’s method for deep water waves have been incorporated
into the case for shallow water waves, resulting in an H1/3tFCG graph such as shown in Fig. T 4.3.3. With
use of such a graph it possible to carry out the hindcasting of shallow water waves in a variable fetch.
Fig. T 4.3.3 H1/3FCG Graph for Shallow Water Waves (SakamotoIjima Method)
45
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
Swell hindcasting methods include the Bretschneider method 24), the PNJ method 5), and spectral methods. With the
Bretschneider method, the wave height and period of swell are hindcasted from the parameters of the significant
wave. With the PNJ method, the swell parameters are obtained by estimating the effects of the velocity dispersion
and directional spreading of spectral components. With spectral methods as mentioned above, numerical calculations
are used; generally, no distinction is made between waves and swell in the generating area, with calculations for the
component waves at all of the different frequencies being carried out simultaneously, and the results being the
significant wave parameters for the combination of wind waves and swell. If a significant wave method is used in the
hindcasting of waves in the generating area, it is necessary to hindcast swell, in which case it is standard to use the
Bretschneider method, which is relatively simple and easy to use. Note however that the amount of reliable
observation data that has been obtained for swell is insufficient, and so the hindcasting accuracy is lower than that for
waves in the generating area. Accordingly, it is necessary to treat swell hindcast values as representing no more than
approximate values, and it is advisable to use them only after carrying out a comparative investigation with actual
measurement data.
[Technical Notes]
In the Bretschneider method, swell hindcasting is carried out by using Fig. T 4.3.4.
The term Fmin in the diagram is the minimum fetch length, D is the decay distance of the swell, HF and TF are the
height and period of the significant wave at the end of the fetch respectively, and HD and TD are the height and period
of the significant wave at the swell hindcasting point respectively. If the significant wave height and period are
determined by the wind velocity and the fetch length in the SMB method, the minimum fetch length Fmin is equal to
the actual fetch length. If the wave development is governed by the wind duration, then Fmin is the fetch length
corresponding to that wind duration and wind velocity.
The time t required for waves to propagate over the decay distance D is calculated from the following equation:
D 4pD
t =  =  (4.3.7)
C GD gT D
where
C GD：group velocity corresponding to T D (m/s)
46
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Commentary]
(1) The wave distribution characteristics for ordinary conditions are expressed separately for each wave direction as
a joint distribution of wave height and period. Observation data are often available for the wave height and the
period, and so it is standard to use such data. If observation data are not available, then hindcast data is used.
Since waves in ordinary conditions are often affected by the local wind, it is necessary to gain a sufficient
understanding of the local wind characteristics. There is generally not much observation data available for the
wave direction, and so it is standard to use hindcasting. It is necessary to give sufficient consideration to the
effects of swell.
(2) It is standard to represent the height of waves used in the design of protective facilities as the “return wave
height” for the return period of the “peak waves” using data over a long time period (at least 30 years as a
general rule). Since there are only a few places at which observation data extending over such a prolonged time
duration are available, generally hindcast data must be used.
(3) The peak waves, basic data for estimating the return wave height, are the wave (generally the significant wave)
at the time for which the wave height becomes largest during the process of wave development and decay under
a certain meteorological condition. It is thought that sampled peak waves are mutually independent in statistical
sense. When estimating the return wave height, it is possible to use the time series of data for which the peak
waves exceed a certain threshold value during the period in question. Alternatively, it is possible to obtain the
maximum value of the “peak waves” for each year, and then use the data as the annual maximum wave. In either
case, the theoretical distribution function of the return wave height is not known, and so one should try to fit
several distribution functions such as the those of the Gumbel distribution and the Weibull distribution, find the
functional form that best fits the data, and then extrapolate it in order to estimate the return wave heights for a
number of different return periods (say 50 years, 100 years, etc.). The accuracy of the resulting estimated values
depends largely on the reliability of the data used rather than on the statistical processing method. When drawing
up the data set of peak waves using wave hindcasting, it is thus necessary to take due care in appropriately
selecting the hindcasting method and to closely inspect the hindcasted results.
(4) With regard to the wave period corresponding to the return wave height, the relationship between the wave
height and the wave period is plotted for the data of peak waves (which have been used in estimating the return
wave height), and then the wave period is determined appropriately based on the correlation between the two.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Estimation of Return Wave Height
During statistical processing, the wave heights are Table T 4.4.1 Parameters Used in Calculating the
rearranged in the descending order, and the probability of Probability not Exceeding a Certain Wave Height
each value of wave height not being exceeded is
calculated. If there are N data and the mth largest wave Distribution function a b
height is denoted with xm,N, then the probability P that the Gumbel distribution 0.44 0.12
wave height does not exceed xm,N is calculated using the Weibull distribution (k = 0.75) 0.54 0.64
following equation: “ (k = 0.85) 0.51 0.59
“ (k = 1.0) 0.48 0.53
ma “ (k = 1.1) 0.46 0.50
P [ H ≦ x m, N ] = 1  (4.4.1)
N+b “ (k = 1.25) 0.44 0.47
“ (k = 1.5) 0.42 0.42
The values used for a and b in this equation depend on the “ (k = 2.0) 0.39 0.37
distribution function. Specifically, values such as those in
Table T 4.4.1 are used. The values used for the Gumbel
distribution were determined by Gringorten 25) in such a way as to minimize the effects of statistical scatter in
the data. The values used for the Weibull distribution were determined by Petruaskas and Aagaard 26) using the
same principle.
It is commented that the Thomas plot often used in hydrology corresponds to the case a = 0, b = 1, and the
Hazen plot corresponds to the case a = 0.5, b = 0.
The distribution functions used in hydrology include the Gumbel distribution (double exponential
distribution), the logarithmic extreme value distribution, and the normal distribution (in the last case, the data
must first be transformed appropriately). Since the data on peak wave heights have not been accumulated over a
prolonged period of time, it is not well known which distribution function is most suitable.
47
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Following Petruaskas and Aagaard, we thus introduce the method whereby one tries fitting eight distribution
functions, namely the Gumbel distribution function (equation (4.4.2)) and the Weibull distribution function
(equation (4.4.3)) with k = 0.75, 0.85, 1.0, 1.1, 1.25, 1.5 and 2.0; the distribution function that best fits the data
on any particular data set is then selected as the extreme distribution for that data set.
ì xB ü
P [ H ≦ x ] = exp exp í æ ö ý (Gumbel distribution) (4.4.2)
è A ø
î þ
ì x B kü
P [ H ≦x ] = 1 exp í æ ö ý (Weibull distribution) (4.4.3)
è A ø
î þ
In order to fit the data to the distribution function, the “nonexceedance probability” (probability not exceeding a
certain wave height) P is transformed into the variable r v ( = ( x B ) ¤ A ) using equation (4.4.4) or (4.4.5).
If the data fit equation (4.4.2) or (4.4.3) perfectly, then there will be a linear relationship between x and r v .
Accordingly, the data are assumed to follow the linear relationship shown in equation (4.4.6). The parameters A
and B are determined using the method of least squares, thus giving an equation for estimating the return wave
height.
x = A^ r v + B^ (4.4.6)
where A^ and B^ are the estimated values of the parameters A and B in equation (4.4.2) or (4.4.3), respectively.
The return period Rp of the wave height H is related to the nonexceedance probability P (H ≦ x) as in the
following:
Rp = K 1
 
·
N 1 P ( H≦ £ x)
or (4.4.7)
K
P ( H ≦ x ) = 1 
NRp
where
K： number of years during the period for which analysis was carried out
N： number of data of peak waves
(2) Candidate Distribution Functions and Rejection Eriteria
Goda has proposed the following method 51) ~ 53), which is a revised version of the method introduced above.
(a) Addition of the FisherTippett type II distribution to the candidate distributions
The FisherTippett type II distribution is given by the following equation.
k
P [ H ≦x ] = exp [ { 1 + ( x B ) ¤ ( kA ) } ] (4.4.8)
The following nine functions are employed as the candidate functions to be tried for fitting: the Gumbel
distribution function (equation (4.4.2)), the Weibull distribution function (equation (4.4.3)) with k = 0.75, 1.0,
1.4 and 2.0 (four preset values), and the FisherTippett type II distribution function with k = 2.5, 3.33, 5.0 and
10.0 (four preset values).
In place of the values listed in Table T 4.4.1, the following equations are used for a and b in equation
(4.4.1):
For the Gumbel distribution,
a ＝ 0.44, b ＝ 0.12 (4.4.9)
For the Weibull distribution,
a = 0.20 + 0.27 k (4.4.10)
b = 0.20 + 0.23 k
For the FisherTippett type II distribution,
a = 0.44 + 0.52 ¤ k (4.4.11)
b = 0.12 0.11 ¤ k
48
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Refraction Calculations for Regular Waves
(a) Refraction phenomenon and refraction coefficient (see Fig. T 4.5.1)
If waves are obliquely incident on a straight boundary where the water depth changes from h1 to h2, waves are
refracted at the boundary due to the change in wave velocity caused by the change in water depth. Suppose
that the distance between wave rays changes from b1 to b2 as a result. If the change in the wave ray width is
not so large, it can be assumed that no wave energy flux cuts across the wave ray and flows out. If other
sources of energy loss such as the friction along the sea bottom are ignored, then the continuity in the flux of
energy transport results in the change of the wave height H1 at water depth h1 to the wave height H2 at water
depth h2 as given by the following equation:
H2 C G1 b 1
 =   (4.5.1)
H1 C G2 b 2
where
CG1 , CG2： group velocities at water depths h1 and h2, respectively (m/s)
b1 , b2： distances between wave rays at water depths h1 and h2, respectively (m)
In the equation, b 1 ¤ b 2 represents the change in wave height
due to refraction, while C G1 ¤ C G2 represents the change in
wave height due to the change in water depth. Using the shoaling
coefficient (see 4.5.5 Wave Shoaling), C G1 ¤ C G2 can be
water depth h1
represented as C G1 ¤ C G2 = K s2 ¤ K s1 , where Ks1 and Ks2 are
the shoaling coefficients at water depths h1 and h2, respectively. water depth h2
49
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Fig. T 4.5.3 Graph Showing the Change in the Wave Direction of Regular Waves
at Coast with Straight, Parallel Depth Contours
with straight, parallel depth contours, it can be seen that there is only a little difference between regular waves
and irregular waves in this case. This means that when the topography of a coastline is monotonous to the extent
that the depth contours are considered to be straight and parallel to the shoreline, the difference between the
results of refraction calculations for regular waves and irregular waves is usually only slight, and so the results
of refraction calculations using regular waves can be used as a good approximation.
(3) Refraction Calculations for Irregular Waves
(a) Calculation methods
Refraction calculation methods for irregular waves include the following: ① the component wave method,
whereby the directional wave spectrum is divided into an appropriate number of component waves, a
refraction calculation is performed for each component wave, and then the refraction coefficient for the
irregular wave is evaluated by making a weighted average of the component wave energies; ② methods in
which the wave energy balance equation 28) or the mildslope wave equation is solved directly using a
computer with finite difference schemes. As with the component wave method, the energy balance equation is
derived by assuming that wave energy does not cut across wave rays and flow out. This means that the
technique is basically the same in both cases. However, with the energy balance equation method, refraction
within a small but finite region is calculated, meaning that the refraction coefficient does not become infinite
even at a point in which two regular wave rays may converge. On the other hand, the mildslope wave
equation method is a strictly analytical method, but it is difficult to apply it to a large region. When
determining the refraction coefficient for irregular waves, it is acceptable to use the component wave method,
which involves the linear superposition of refraction coefficients for regular waves and is thus simple and
convenient. However, when intersections of wave rays occur during a refraction calculation for a component
wave, the energy balance equation method may be used for practical purposes with the exception of the case
that the degree of intersection is large.
(b) Effects of diffraction
When deepwater waves have been diffracted by an island or a headland, the wave spectrum becomes generally
different from a standard form that has been assumed initially. Thus it is necessary to use the spectral form
after diffraction when performing the refraction calculation.
(c) Diagrams of the refraction coefficient and angle for irregular waves at a coast with straight, parallel depth
contours
Figures T 4.5.4 and T 4.5.5 show the refraction coefficient Kr and the principal wave direction ap,
respectively, for irregular waves at a coast with straight, parallel depth contours, with the principal direction of
deepwater waves (ap)0 as the parameter. The direction (ap)0 is expressed as the angle between the wave
direction and the line normal to the boundary of deepwater. Smax is the maximum value of the parameter that
expresses the degree of directional spreading of wave energy (see 4.1.3 [3] Wave Spectrum).
51
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Fig. T 4.5.5 Change Due to Refraction in the Principal Direction ap of Irregular Waves
at Coast with Straight, Parallel Depth Contours
(4) At places where the water depth is no more than about one half of the deepwater wave height, waves exhibit the
characteristics of flow rather than those of undulations. This means that refraction calculations for wave
directions and refraction coefficients can only be applied to the water where the depth is at least one half of the
deepwater wave height.
[1] Diffraction
The wave height in regions in which waves are anticipated to be greatly affected by the phenomenon of
diffraction caused by obstacles such as breakwaters or islands shall be calculated using an appropriate
method.
[Commentary]
Diffraction is a phenomenon whereby waves wheel into a region that is screened by something like a breakwater. It is
the most important phenomenon when determining the wave height in a harbor. The irregularity of waves should be
considered in a diffraction calculation. For a harbor within which the water depth is assumed uniform, the diffraction
diagrams for irregular waves with regard to a semiinfinite breakwater or a straight breakwater that has just one
opening have been prepared. The ratio of the wave height after diffraction to the incident wave height is called the
diffraction coefficient Kd. In other words, the diffraction coefficient Kd is given by the following equation:
Kd = Hd ¤ Hi (4.5.10)
where
Hi： incident wave height outside harbor
Hd： height of wave in harbor after diffraction
Diffraction diagrams and diffraction calculation methods assume that the water depth within the harbor is uniform. If
there are large variations in water depth within the harbor, the errors will become large, in which case it is advisable
to investigate the wave height in the harbor by means of either hydraulic scale model tests or else numerical
calculation methods that also take refraction into account.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Diffraction Diagrams for Irregular Waves
Figures T 4.5.6 (a) ~ (c) show the diffraction diagrams by a semiinfinite breakwater for irregular waves with
the directional spreading parameter Smax = 10, 25, and 75. Figures T 4.5.6 (a) ~ (l) show the diffraction
diagrams through an opening of B/L = 1, 2, 4, and 8 for irregular waves with Smax = 10, 25, and 75.
52
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.6(a) Diffraction Diagram by Semiinfinite Breakwaters (θ= 90º) for Smax = 10
53
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.6(b) Diffraction Diagram by Semiinfinite Breakwaters (θ= 90º) for Smax = 25
54
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.6(c) Diffraction Diagram by Semiinfinite Breakwaters (θ= 90º) for Smax = 75
55
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(a) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 1.0) for Smax = 10
56
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(b) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 1.0) for Smax = 25
57
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(c) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 1.0) for Smax = 75
58
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(d) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 2.0) for Smax = 10
59
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(e) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 2.0) for Smax = 25
60
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(f) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 2.0) for Smax = 75
61
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(g) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 4.0) for Smax = 10
62
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(h) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 4.0) for Smax = 25
63
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(i) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 4.0) for Smax = 75
64
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(j) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 8.0) for Smax = 10
65
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(k) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 8.0) for Smax = 25
66
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Wave direction
Wave direction
Fig. T  4.5.7(ll) Diffraction Diagram by Breakwaters with an Opening (B/L= 8.0) for Smax = 75
67
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
(a) Smax = 25
Note: Angle in the parentheses is the angle of deflection relative to the angle of incidence
68
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
incident waves. The errors in this approximate method are largest around the opening in the breakwater; in
terms of the diffraction coefficient, the maximum error may amount to around 0.1 in the absolute value.
(3) Method for Determining Diffraction Coefficient in a Harbor
The diffraction coefficient within a complex shape of harbor is generally estimated by numerical computation
with a computer. Diffraction calculation methods include Takayama’s method, which involves linear super
position of analytical solutions for detached breakwaters, and calculation methods that use the Green functions.
(4) Directional Spreading Method
When the length of an island or the width of the entrance of a bay is at least ten times the wavelength of the
incident waves, there will not be a large difference between the wave height estimate by the direct diffraction
calculation and the estimate using the amount of directional wave energy that arrives directly at the point of
interest behind the island or in the bay; the latter is called the directional spreading method. However, if the
point of interest is just behind an island or headland, the effects of diffracted waves will be large, and so the
directional spreading method cannot be applied.
(5) Studies Using Hydraulic Model Experiments
Thanks to improvements in multidirectional random wave generating devices, it is easy to reproduce waves that
have directional spreading in the laboratory nowadays, meaning that diffraction experiments can be carried out
relatively easily. When carrying out a model experiment, an opening in the harbor model is set up within the
effective wave making zone, and the wave height is simultaneously measured at a number of points within the
harbor. The diffraction coefficient is obtained by dividing the significant wave height in the harbor by the
significant wave height at the harbor entrance averaged over at least two observation points.
[Commentary]
(1) When the water depth within a harbor is made moreorless uniform by say dredging (this is often the case with
large harbors), the refraction of waves after diffraction can be ignored. In order to determine the wave height in
the harbor in this case, it is acceptable to first carry out a calculation considering only refraction and breaking
from the deepwater wave hindcasting point to the harbor entrance. Next, a diffraction calculation for the area
within the harbor is carried out, taking the incident wave height to be equal to the calculated wave height at the
harbor entrance. In this case, the wave height at a point of interest within the harbor is expressed using the
following equation:
H = Kd Kr Ks H0 (4.5.12)
where
Kd： diffraction coefficient at the point of interest within a harbor
Kr： refraction coefficient at the harbor entrance
Ks： shoaling coefficient at the harbor entrance (see 4.5.5 Wave Shoaling)
H0： deepwater wave height
The energy balance equation method or the improved energy balance equation method in which a term
representing dissipation due to wave breaking is added is appropriate as the refraction calculation method for the
open sea. Takayama’s harbor calmness calculation method, whereby diffraction solutions for detached
breakwaters are superimposed in order to obtain the change in the wave height of irregular waves within the
harbor due to diffraction and reflection, can be used for the diffraction calculation for the area within the harbor,
provided there are no complex topographic variations within the harbor.
(2) When there are large variations in water depth even at places screened by a breakwater (this is often the case
with relatively small harbors and coastal areas), it is necessary to simultaneously consider both diffraction and
refraction within the harbor. If ignoring wave reflection and just investigating the approximate change in wave
height, it is possible to carry out refraction and diffraction calculations separately, and then estimate the change
in wave height by multiplying together the refraction and diffraction coefficients obtained.
Calculation methods that allow simultaneous consideration of refraction and diffraction of irregular waves
include a method that uses timedependent mildslope irregular wave equations, a method in which the
Boussinesq equation is solved using the finite difference method 29), and the multicomponent coupling method
of Nadaoka et al. There are also literatures in which other calculation methods are explained.
69
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[1] General
In the design of port and harbor facilities, investigations shall be carried out onto the effects of reflected
waves from neighboring structures on the facilities in question and also the effects of wave reflection from
the facilities in question on neighboring areas.
[Commentary]
It is necessary to take note of the fact that waves reflected from port and harbor facilities can exercise a large
influence on the navigation of vessels and cargo handling. For example, waves reflected from vertical breakwaters
can cause disturbances in navigation channels, and multiplereflected waves from quaywalls can cause agitations
within harbors.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Composition of Reflected Waves and Incident Waves
The wave height Hs when incident waves and waves reflected from a number of reflective boundaries coexist (a
train of incident waves and those of reflected waves from reflective boundaries are termed the “wave groups”)
can be calculated using the following equation:
2 2 2
Hs = H 1 + H2 + ¼ + Hn (4.5.13)
where
Hs: significant wave height when all of the wave groups are taken together
H1, H2, ¼ Hn: significant wave heights of wave groups
Note however that, if the wave action varies with the wave direction, the differences in the wave directions of
various wave groups must be considered. The calculated wave height is valid for places that are at least about
0.7 wavelengths away from a reflecting boundary.
Regarding the diffraction and/or refraction of waves for which wave direction is an important factor, the
significant wave height is determined separately for each wave group by carrying out whatever calculation is
necessary for that wave group, when the wave directions of various wave groups differ. Then the composite
wave height is calculated by putting these significant wave heights into equation (4.5.13). An acceptable
alternative is to determine the spectrum for each wave group, add these spectra together in order to calculate the
spectral form when the wave groups coexist, and then perform direct diffraction and/or refraction calculations
using this spectrum.
(2) Composition of Periods
The significant wave height to be used in calculating the wave force when two wave groups of different periods
are superimposed may be determined by the energy composition method (i.e., equation (4.5.13)). The significant
wave period T1/3 may be determined using the following equation 30):
2 2
( H 1 ¤ 3 ) I + ( H 1 ¤ 3 )II
T 1 ¤ 3 = k 
2 2 2 2
 (4.5.14)
( H 1 ¤ 3 ) I ¤ ( T 1 ¤ 3 ) I + ( H 1 ¤ 3 )II ¤ ( T 1 ¤ 3 )II
where
70
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Approximate Values for Reflection Coefficient
It is desirable to evaluate the value of reflection coefficient by means of field observations. However, when it is
difficult to carry out observation or when the structure in question has not yet been constructed, it is standard to
estimate reflection coefficient by referring to the results of hydraulic model experiments. In this case, it is
desirable to use irregular waves as the test waves. The method by Goda et al. 31) may be used for the analysis of
irregular wave test data.
71
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
The following is a list of approximate values for the reflection coefficients of several types of structures.
Upright wall: 0.7 ~ 1.0
(0.7 is for the case of a low crown with much overtopping)
Submerged upright breakwater: 0.5 ~ 0.7
Rubble mound: 0.3 ~ 0.6
Precast wavedissipating concrete blocks: 0.3 ~ 0.5
Upright waveabsorbing structure: 0.3 ~ 0.6
Natural beach: 0.05 ~ 0.2
With the exception of the upright wall, the lower limits in the above ranges of reflection coefficient correspond
to the case of steep waves and the upper limits to waves with low steepness. It should be noted, however, that
with the upright waveabsorbing structure, the reflection coefficient varies with the wavelength, and the shape
and dimensions of the structure.
[3] Transformation of Waves at Concave Corners, near the Heads of Breakwaters, and around
Detached Breakwaters
Around the concave corners of structures, near the heads of breakwaters, and around detached
breakwaters, the wave height becomes larger than the normal value of standing waves owing to the effects
of diffraction and reflection. This increase in wave height shall be investigated thoroughly. Moreover, the
irregularity of waves shall be considered in the analysis.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Influence of Wave Irregularity
When the wave height distribution near a concave corner or the head of a breakwater is calculated for regular
waves, a distributional form with large undulations is obtained. However, when wave irregularity is incorporated
into the calculation, the undulated form of the distribution becomes smoothed out, excluding the region within
one wavelength of a concave corner, and the peak value of the wave height becomes smaller. Calculation using
regular waves thus overestimates the increase in the wave height around concave corners and the heads of
breakwaters.
(2) Graphs for Calculating Wave Height Distribution around a Concave Corner
Wave height distributions for irregular waves near a concave corner are shown in Fig. T 4.5.10. This figure
exhibits the form of the distribution of the maximum value of the wave height, as obtained from numerical
calculations for each principal wave direction. It has been assumed that waves are completely reflected by the
breakwater. In the diagram, Kd is the ratio of the wave height at the front face of the main breakwater to the wave
height of the incident waves. The irregular waves used in the calculation has a spectral form with Smax = 75,
which implies a narrow directional spreading. The long dashdot line in each graph shows the distribution of the
maximum value of the wave height at each point as obtained using an approximate calculation. The length l1 is
that of the main breakwater, l2 is that of the wing breakwater, and b is the angle between the main breakwater
and the wing breakwater. This figure may be used to calculate the wave height distribution near a concave
corner. When it is not easy to use the calculation program, the approximate calculation method may be used.
(3) WaveHeightReducing Effects of WaveAbsorbing Work
When a waveabsorbing work is installed in order to suppress the increase in wave height around a concave
corner and if the waveabsorbing work is such that the reflection coefficient of the breakwater becomes no more
than 0.4, it is quite acceptable to ignore the increase in wave height due to the presence of concave corner.
However, this is only the case when the waveabsorbing work extends along the whole of the breakwater. If the
breakwater is long, one cannot expect the waveabsorbing work to be very effective unless it is installed along
the entire length of the breakwater, because the effect of waves reflected from the wing breakwater extend even
to places at a considerable distance away from the concave corner. The same can be said for the influence of the
main breakwater on the wing breakwater.
72
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Computer method
Approximate solution method
Computer method
Approximate solution method
Fig. T 4.5.10 Distribution of the Maximum Value of the Wave Height around Concave Corner 32)
73
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
90°
75°
60°
45°
α=30°
α
x
x (m)
[Commentary]
Shoaling is one of the important factors that lead to changing of the wave height in coastal waters. It exemplifies the
fact that the wave height in shallow waters is also governed by the water depth and the wave period. Figure T 4.5.13
has been drawn up based on Shuto’s nonlinear long wave theory. It includes the linearized solution by the small
amplitude wave theory and enables the estimation of the shoaling coefficient from deep to shallow waters. In the
diagram, Ks is the shoaling coefficient, H0¢ is the equivalent deepwater wave height, H is the wave height at water
depth h, and L0 is the wavelength in deepwater.
74
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
2%
dec
ay
line
0
0 0
0 0
[Commentary]
After the height of waves has increased owing to shoaling, waves break at a certain water depth and the wave height
decreases rapidly. This phenomenon is called the wave breaking. It is an important factor to be considered when
determining the wave conditions exercising on maritime structures. For regular waves, the place at which waves
break is always the same: this is referred to as the “wave breaking point”. For irregular waves, the location of wave
breaking depends on the height and period of individual waves, and wave breaking thus occurs over a certain
distance: this area is referred to as the “breaker zone”.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Change in Wave Height Due to Wave Breaking
The change in wave height due to wave breaking may be determined using Figs. T 4.5.14 (a) ~ (e) or Figs. T
4.5.15 (a) ~ (e). These figures show the change in wave height for irregular waves as calculated by Goda 35), 44)
using a theoretical model of wave breaking. For the region to the right of the dashdot line on each graph, the
change in wave height is calculated using the shoaling coefficient (see 4.5.5 Wave Shoaling). For the region to
the left of this dashdot line, the change in wave height due to wave breaking dominates, and so the wave height
must be determined using this graph. As for the bottom slope, it is appropriate to use the mean bottom slope over
the region where the water depth to equivalent deepwater wave height ratio h/H0¢ is in the range of 1.5 to 2.5.
(2) Scope of Application of Graphs of Wave Height Change
At places where the water depth is no more than about one half of the equivalent deepwater wave height, a major
portion of wave energy is converted to the energy of oscillating flows rather than to that of water level
undulation. Therefore, when calculating the wave force acting on a structure in a very shallow water, it is
desirable to use the wave height at the place where the water depth is one half of the equivalent deepwater wave
height, if the facilities in question are highly important.
75
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
0 0
e
y lin
deca
0 0 0
2%
e
y lin
deca
0
2%
00
h / H ' 0
Fig. T 4.5.14 (a) Diagram of Significant Wave Fig. T 4.5.14 (b) Diagram of Significant Wave
Height in the Breaker Zone Height in the Breaker Zone
for Bottom Slope of 1/10 for Bottom Slope of 1/20
0 0
0 0
0
ine
0
ay l
ne
dec
y li
a
2%
dec
0
2%
0 0
Fig. T 4.5.14 (c) Diagram of Significant Wave Fig. T 4.5.14 (d) Diagram of Significant Wave
Height in the Breaker Zone Height in the Breaker Zone
for Bottom Slope of 1/30 for Bottom Slope of 1/50
76
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
ine
cay l
e
2% d
0 0
0
0
ine
ecay l
2 %d
0
0 0
Fig. T 4.5.14 (e) Diagram of Significant Wave Fig. T 4.5.15 (a) Diagram of Highest Wave
Height in the Breaker Zone Height in the Breaker Zone
for Bottom Slope of 1/100 for Bottom Slope of 1/10
line
ecay
0 0 ecay
2% d
2% d
0 0
Fig. T 4.5.15 (b) Diagram of Highes Wave Fig. T 4.5.15 (c) Diagram of Highest Wave
Height in the Breaker Zone Height in the Breaker Zone
for Bottom Slope of 1/20 for Bottom Slope of 1/30
77
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
ine
e
cay l
y lin
0
0
e
2% d
deca
2%
0 0
Fig. T 4.5.15 (d) Diagram of Highest Wave Fig. T 4.5.15 (e) Diagram of Highest Wave
Height in the Breaker Zone Height in the Breaker Zone
for Bottom Slope of 1/50 for Bottom Slope of 1/100
H1 ¤ 3 =
｛ Ks H0 ¢ : h ¤ L0 ≧
min { ( b0 H 0 ¢ + b 1 h ), b max H 0 ¢, K s H 0 ¢ } : h ¤ L 0 < 0.2
³ 0.2
(4.5.21)
where
64748
The shoaling coefficient Ks is determined using Fig. T 4.5.13, the operators min{ } and max{ } take the
minimum and maximum value of the mulitiple quantities within the braces, respectively, and tanq is the bottom
slope.
Similarly, an approximate calculation formula for the highest wave height Hmax is given as follows:
H max =
where
｛ 1.8K s H 0 ¢
* * *
: h ¤ L0≧
³ 0.2
min { ( b 0 H 0 ¢ + b 1 h ), b max H 0 ¢, 1.8K s H 0 ¢ } : h ¤ L 0 < 0.2
(4.5.23)
78
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
B
in the breaker zone
H
ot
Note: ( 1/3) peak is the maximum value
to
H
m
of 1/3 in the breaker zone
sl
o
pe
0
B
o
tt
o
m
sl
o
0
p
e
0 0
Hb ì ph ü
 = 0.17 1 exp í 1.5  ( 1 + 15 tan 4 ¤ 3 q ) ý (4.5.25)
L0 î L 0 þ
Bottom
slope
Hx ì x ü h + h¥
 = B exp í A æ ö ý + a  (4.5.26)
H0 ¢ è H 0 ¢ø H0 ¢
î þ
79
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
where
H0¢： equivalent deepwater wave height
Hx： significant wave height at a distance x from the tip of the reef
h： water depth over the reef
h ¥： increase in the mean water level at a place sufficiently distant from the tip of the reef
The coefficients A and a are 0.05 and 0.33, respectively, according to the results of hydraulic model
experiments. However, it is advisable to use the following values that have been obtained from the data of field
observations.
H0 ¢ ü
A = 0.089  + 0.015 ï
h + h¥ ï
ï
ì ý (4.5.27)
ï 0.20 ( 4 m > H 0 ¢ ³ 2 m ) ï
a = í ï
ï 0.33 ( H 0 ¢ ³ 4 m ) ï
î þ
The coefficient B corresponds to the bottom slope at the front of the reef. Using Fig. T 4.5.14, it is obtained
from the significant wave height Hx = 0 at water depth h as follows.
Hx = 0 h + h¥
B =  a  (4.5.28)
H0 ¢ H0 ¢
h + h¥ 3
 = C 0 ¤ æ 1 +  ba 2ö (4.5.29)
H0 ¢ è 8 ø
where b = 0.56. From the continuity of the mean water level at the tip of the reef (x = 0), C0 is given by
hx = 0 + h 2 3 Hx = 0 2
C 0 = æ ö +  b æ ö (4.5.30)
è H0¢ ø 8 è H0 ¢ ø
The term h x = 0 represents the rise in the mean water level at water depth h, which is controlled by the bottom
slope in front of the reef and wave steepness (see 4.7.1 Wave Setup).
The calculation method in the above has been derived under the assumption that the water depth h over the
reef is small and waves break over the reef. It is thus not possible to apply the method when the water is deep
and wave breaking does not occur.
Considering the breaking wave height criterion of a solitary wave, the highest wave height Hmax, x at the
distance x from the tip of the reef may be obtained as follows.
where min{a, b} is the smaller value of a or b, and h x is the rise in the mean water level at the distance x and is
given by the following equation:
hx + h 3 Hx 2
 = C 0  b æ ö (4.5.32)
H0¢ 8 è H 0 ¢ø
[Commentary]
The phenomenon of wave runup is dependent upon a whole variety of factors, such as the wave characteristics, the
configuration and location of the seawall, and the sea bottom topography; thus the runup height varies in a complex
way. There are calculation diagrams and equations based on the results of past researches that may be used, although
they are applicable only under certain limited conditions. When the seawall and sea bottom are complex in form, it is
advisable to determine wave runup heights by carrying out hydraulic model experiments. When designing seawalls of
gently sloping type and the like, it is advisable to set the crown elevation of the seawall to be higher than the runup
height for regular waves. However, for irregular waves, depending on the wave height, overflow can occur, and so
80
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
ultimately the crown elevation and the form of the seawall are determined so as to make the quantity of overtopping
(see 4.6.2 Wave Overtopping) no more than a certain permissible value.
[Technical Notes]
The following is the description of methods for calculating the runup height over smooth impermeable slopes:
(1) Simple Cross Section
“A simple cross section” refers to the case in which a seawall (including an upright wall) having a front slope of
an uniform gradient a is located at a certain place (of water depth h) on the sea bottom with an almost uniform
gradient q.
(a) Region of standing waves
Takada has proposed the following equation for determining the runup height when the water depth h at the
foot of the levee is in the range where standing waves exist (i.e., deeper than the depth at the breaker line). He
dealt with two cases separately; i.e., the case where wave breaking does not occur on the front slope and the
case where such wave breaking does occur.
Firstly, according to Miche’s equation, the minimum angle of inclination of the slope ac for which wave
breaking does not occur is found as that satisfying the following condition:
2a c sin 2 a c H0 ¢
  =  (4.6.1)
p p L0
Accordingly, when the angle of inclination of the slope is greater than ac, wave breaking does not occur over
the slope, in which case the runup height is given by the following equation:
R p hs
 = æè  +  1 öø K s : a > a c (4.6.2)
H0 ¢ 2a H1
where H0¢ is the equivalent deepwater wave height, Ks is the shoaling coefficient, H1 is the wave height at the
water depth at the foot of the slope, hs is the crest elevation, and R is the runup height.
Takada used the following equation for hs /H1,which assumes that there is good agreement between the
value from Miche’s standing wave theory and experimental data.
H1 3 1
h s ¤ H 1 = 1 + p  coth kh × æ 1 + 
 ö (4.6.3)
L è 4 sinh 2 kh 4 cosh 2 khø
When the angle of inclination of the slope is smaller than ac, wave breaking does occur on the front slope. In
this case, it is assumed that the runup height is proportional to tan2/3a, leading to the following equation:
ì p hs ü cot a c 2 ¤ 3
R ¤ H 0 ¢ = í  + æ  1ö ý Ks æ ö : a < ac (4.6.4)
è H1 ø è cot a ø
î 2a c þ
When the water depth is such that standing waves exist, the runup height can be calculated as above. The
maximum runup height occurs when a = ac, with the runup height decreasing both when the slope is more
steeply inclined than this and when it is more gently inclined.
(b) Region where the water is shallower than the breaker depth
Takada has given the runup height for regions where the water is sufficiently shallow for wave breaking to
occur as follows:
h
R ¤ H 0 ¢ = ( R max ¤ H 0 ¢ R 0 ¤ H 0 ¢ )  + R 0 ¤ H 0 ¢ (4.6.5)
hR
where R0 is the runup height on the levee body at the shoreline (h = 0).
Based on the experimental results of Toyoshima et al., R0/H0¢ is given as follows:
ì 0.18 ( H 0 ¢ ¤ L 0 ) 1 ¤ 2 : Bottom slope 1/10
ï
R ¤ H 0 ¢ = í 0.075 ( H 0 ¢ ¤ L 0 ) 1 ¤ 2 : Bottom slope 1/20 (4.6.6)
ï 0.046 ( H ¢ ¤ L ) 1 ¤ 2 : Bottom slope 1/30
î 0 0
The term hR in equation (4.6.5) is the water depth at the foot of the levee for which the runup height becomes
largest. It is estimated using Fig. T 4.6.1, which shows the runup height for a vertical wall. The term LR in the
figure is the wavelength at water depth hR, while Rmax is the maximum runup height for the region where the
water depth is such that standing waves exist (i.e., the runup height when h = hR).
81
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
calculated using Fig. T 4.6.3, and the calculated Fig. T 4.6.1 Graph for Estimating hR for a Vertical Wall
height is compared with the initially assumed
runup height. If the two do not agree, then a new
runup height is assumed, and the estimation are repeated (i.e., the new runup height is used to give a new
virtual gradient and so on). This iterative process is repeated until convergence is achieved.
④ The value so obtained is taken to be the runup height for the complex cross section in question.
(b) When the results obtained from this method are compared with actual experimental results for a complex cross
section, it is generally found that there is good agreement between the two, with the error usually being no
more than 10%. However, if the bottom slope is too gentle, the agreement between the two becomes poor, and
so this method should only be used when the bottom slope is steeper than 1/30.
(c) Figure T 4.6.4 shows experimental results obtained for a bottom slope of 1/70. This figure provides a useful
reference when estimating the runup height for a complex cross section with a gentle bottom slope.
Virtual gradient
82
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Fig. T 4.6.4 Runup Height on a Seawall Located Closer to the Land than the Wave Breaking Point
Smooth surface
Holland
0 0
(Former)
Russia
83
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
The “quantity of overtopping” is the total volume of overtopped water. The “rate of overtopping”, on the other hand,
is the average volume of water overtopping in a unit time; it is obtained by dividing the quantity of overtopping by
the time duration of measurement. The quantity of overtopping and the rate of overtopping are generally expressed
per unit width.
If the quantity of overtopping is large, then not only there will be damage to the seawall body itself, but also
damage by flooding to the roads, houses and/or port and harbor facilities behind the levee or seawall, despite that the
levee or seawall is intended to protect them. There is further a risk to users of water frontage amenity facilities that
they may be drowned or injured. During design, it is necessary to make the quantity of overtopping no more than a
certain permissible value that has been determined in line with the characteristics of structures and the situation with
regard to their usage. Furthermore, when estimating the quantity of overtopping by means of experiments, it is
desirable to consider changes in tidal water level, i.e., to carry out experiments for different water levels.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Diagrams for Calculating the Rate of Overtopping 38)
For an upright or waveabsorbing seawall that has a simple form (i.e., that does not have anything like a toe
protection mound or a crown parapet), the rate of overtopping may be estimated using Figs. T 4.6.7 ~ 4.6.10.
These graphs have been drawn up based on experiments employing irregular waves. From the results of a
comparison between the experiments and field observations, it is thought that the accuracy of the curves giving
the rate of overtopping is within the range listed in Table T 4.6.1. The rate of overtopping for the wave
absorbing seawall has been obtained under the conditition that the lower armor layer at the crown consists of 2
rows of wavedissipating concrete blocks.
Table T 4.6.1 Estimated Range for the Actual Rate of Overtopping Relative to the Estimated Value
Note that when obtaining rough estimates for the rate of overtopping for irregular waves using Figs. T 4.6.7 ~
4.6.10, the following should be considered:
(a) If the actual values of the bottom slope and the deepwater wave steepness do not match any of the values on
the graphs, the graph for which the values most closely match should be used, or alternatively interpolation
should be carried out.
(b) The wavedissipating concrete blocks in the figures are made up of two layers of tetrapods. If a different kind
of wavedissipating concrete block is used, or if the same kind of wavedissipating concrete block is used but
there are differences in the crown width, in the way in which the tetrapods are laid, or in the form of the toe,
then there is a risk that the actual rate of overtopping may considerably differ from the value obtained by the
figures.
(c) If the number of rows of concrete blocks at the crown is increased, the quantity of overtopping tends to
decrease 39).
(d) When there are difficulties in applying the graphs for estimating the rate of overtopping, the approximate
equation of Takayama et al. 40) may be used.
84
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Fig. T 4.6.7 Graphs for Estimating the Rate of Overtopping for an Upright Seawall (Bottom Slope 1/30)
85
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Fig. T 4.6.8 Graphs for Estimating the Rate of Overtopping for an Upright Seawall (Bottom Slope 1/10)
86
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
0 0
0
0
0
0
Co
nc
ret
eb
loc
k
Co
nc 0 0
ret
eb
0
loc
k
0
0
0
0
Co 0 0
nc
ret
0
eb
loc
0
k
0
0
0
Fig. T 4.6.9 Graphs for Estimating the Rate of Overtopping for a WaveAbsorbing Seawall (Bottom Slope 1/30)
87
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
0 0
0
0
Co
nc
ret
eb
loc
0 0
k
0 0
0
0
0
Co
nc
ret
eb
loc
k
Co
nc
ret 0 0
eb
loc
k
0
0
0
Fig. T 4.6.10 Graphs for Estimating the Rate of Overtopping for a WaveAbsorbing Seawall (Bottom Slope 1/10)
88
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Table T 4.6.3 Permissible Rate of Overtopping (m3/m•s) as a Function of the Degree of Importance of the Hinterland
89
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
y
cit
lo
ve
d
in
W
Gradient
[Commentary]
It is necessary to appropriately estimate the transmitted wave height after waves have overtopped and/or passed
through a breakwater, because the transmitted waves affect the wave height distribution behind the breakwater.
Transmitted waves include waves that have overtopped and/or overflowed, as well as waves that have permeated
through a rubble mound breakwater or a foundation mound of composite breakwater. Recently, several breakwaters
have been built with caissons (which are originally not permeable) having throughholes in order to enhance the
exchange of the seawater within a harbor. In this case, it is necessary to examine the value of wave transmission
coefficient, because the coefficient serves as an indicator of the efficiency of the exchange of seawater.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Transmission Coefficient for a Composite Breakwater
Figure T 4.6.12 may be used to calculate the height of waves that are transmitted into a harbor when they
overtop a composite breakwater or permeate through a foundation mound. Even when the waves are irregular,
the transmission coefficient agrees pretty well with that shown in Fig. T 4.6.12. It has also been shown that Fig.
T 4.6.12 is valid not only for the significant wave height, but also for the highest onetenth wave height and the
mean wave height.
Fig. T 4.6.12 Graph for Calculating the Wave Height Transmission Coefficient
90
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
where kt=1.26 (B/d)0.67, B is the crown width of the structure, d is the depth from the water surface to the
ground surface of the structure, H is the height of incident waves, and L is the wavelength of transmitted
waves.
(b) For a curtain wall breakwater, the empirial solutions of Morihira et al. 43) may be used (see Part VII, 3.3.1
Curtain Wall Breakwater).
(c) For the transmission coefficient of an upright breakwater of permeable type that has slits in both the front and
rear walls, the experimental results are available.
(d) Types of breakwater aiming to promote the exchange of seawater include multiplewing type permeable
breakwaters, multiplevertical cylinder breakwaters, horizontalplate type permeable breakwaters, and pipe
type breakwaters. The transmission coefficients of these types of breakwater have been obtained by hydraulic
model tests.
(5) Transmission Coefficient for a Submerged Breakwater
A submerged breakwater is usually made by piling up natural stones or crushed rock to form a mound, and then
covering the surface with concrete blocks to protect underlayers. For a submerged breakwater of crushed rock, a
graph showing the relationship between the crown height of the breakwater and the transmission coefficient is
available.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Diagrams for Estimating the Amount of Wave Setup
The changes in the mean water level by random wave breaking on the bottom slopes of 1/100 and 1/10 as
calculated by Goda 35), 44) are shown in Figs. T 4.7.1 and T 4.7.2. The smaller the wave steepness (H0¢/L0,
where H0¢ is the equivalent deepwater wave height and L0 is the wavelength in deepwater ), the larger the rise of
mean water level becomes. Moreover, the steeper the bottom slope, the larger the rise of mean water level.
Figure T 4.7.3 shows the rise of mean water level at the shoreline. The effects of wave steepness and bottom
slope on the rise of mean water level are clearly shown. When H0¢/L0 is in the range 0.01 ~ 0.05, with the
exception of very steep bottom slope, the rise of mean water level near the shoreline is of the order (0.1 ~
0.15)H0¢.
(2) Consideration of the Rise in Mean Water Level in Design
A rise of mean water level causes the wave breaking point to shift shoreward and the breaking wave height to
increase. The rise of in mean water level is thus important for the accurate calculation of the design wave height
in shallow waters.
91
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
0
0
0 0
η/H ′
0
0 0′
Change in mean water level η /H
Fig. T 4.7.1 Change in Mean Water Level Fig. T 4.7.2 Change in Mean Water Level
(Bottom Slope 1/10) (Bottom Slope 1/100)
z
rms

(h ) 0
rms 0
0
Risc in mean water level
Niigata
Miyazaki
Wave steepness 0 0
1¤2
0 h
 æ 1 + ö
0 0
at the Shoreline L è H ¢ø
0 0
[Technical Notes]
Goda’s Formula for Estimating Surf Beat Amplitude
Based on the results of field observations of surf beat, Goda has proposed the following relationship 35), 44):
0.04 ( h rms ) 0 0.01H 0 ¢
z rms =  =  (4.7.1)
H0¢ h H0 ¢ h
 æ 1 + ö  æ 1 + ö
L0 è H 0 ¢ø L0 è H 0 ¢ø
92
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
where zrms is the root mean square amplitude of the surf beat wave profile, (hrms)0 is the root mean square
amplitude of the deepwater wave profile, H0¢ is the equivalent deepwater wave height, L0 is the wavelength in
deepwater, and h is the water depth.
This equation shows that the amplitude of the surf beat is proportional to the deepwater wave height, that it
falls as the water depth increases, and that it increases as the deepwater wave steepness H0¢/L0 decreases. Figure
T 4.7.5 shows a comparison between the estimation by equation (4.7.1) and actual observation values.
[Commentary]
Water level fluctuations with the period between one and several minutes sometimes appear at observation points in
harbors and off the shore. Such fluctuations are called longperiod waves. If the period of such longperiod waves is
close to the natural period of oscillation of the vibration system made up of a vessel and its mooring ropes, the
phenomenon of resonance can give rise to a large surge motion even if the wave height is small, resulting in large
effects on the cargo handling efficiency of the port. If it is clear from observations that longperiod waves of
significant wave height 10 ~ 15 cm or more frequently arise in a harbor, it is advisable to investigate either hard or
soft countermeasures.
When conspicuous water level fluctuations with the period several minutes or longer occur at an observation point
in a harbor, it can be assumed that the phenomenon of “seiche” is taking place. This phenomenon occurs when small
disturbances in water level generated by changes in air pressure out at sea are amplified by the resonant oscillations
of the harbor or bay. If the amplitude of such seiche becomes significantly large, inundation at the head of the bay or
reverse outflow from municipal drainage channels may occur. Also high current velocities may occur locally in a
harbor, resulting in breaking of the mooring ropes of small vessels. When drawing up a harbor plan, it is thus
desirable to give consideration to making the shape of the harbor to minimize the seiche motion as much as possible.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Threshold Height of Longperiod Waves for Cargo
Handling Works
It is necessary to give due consideration to the fact
that longperiod waves in front of a quaywall can
induce ship surging with the amplitude of several
meters through resonance. The threshold height of Observed spectrum
longperiod waves for smooth cargo handling works
depends on the factors such as the period of the long
Approximate form of
period waves, the dimensions of the vessel in standard spectrum
question, the mooring situation, and the loading
conditions. Nevertheless, according to field
observations carried out in places like Tomakomai
Bay 46), it corresponds to a significant wave height of
about 10 ~ 15 cm.
(2) Calculating the Propagation of Longperiod Waves
It is desirable to calculate the propagation of long
period waves into a harbor by setting up incident
wave boundary out at sea and then using either the
Boussinesq equation 29) or a calculation method that
uses long linear wave equations 47).
Fig. T 4.8.1 Comparison between Standard Spectrum
(3) Standard Spectrum for Longperiod Waves with Longperiod Components and
When there has been insufficient field observation Observed Spectrum
data of longperiod waves out at sea and the long
period wave conditions that determine the design external forces have not been established, the standard
spectrum shown in reference 48) or its approximate expression may be used. Figure T 4.8.1 shows a comparison
between an observed spectrum and an approximate form of the standard spectrum. The term al in the figure is a
parameter that represents the energy level of the longperiod waves.
(4) Calculation Method for Seiche
See 6.5 Seiche for a calculation method for seiche.
93
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
The problem of harbor calmness is extremely complex. It involves not only physical factors such as waves, winds,
vessel motions, and the wind and waveresistance of working machinery, but also the factors requiring human
judgement: the latter include the easiness of vessels entering and leaving a harbor, vessel refuge during stormy
weather, and the threshold conditions of works at sea. The harbor calmness is further related with the economic
factors, such as the efficiency of cargo handling works, the operating rate of vessels, and the cost of constructing the
various facilities required to improve the harbor calmness. The factors that lead to wave disturbances in harbors,
which form the basis of the criteria for determining the harbor calmness, include the following:
(a) Waves penetrating through the harbor entrance
(b) Transmission of waves into the harbor over breakwaters
(c) Reflected waves
(d) Longperiod waves
(e) Seiche
In large harbors, wind waves generated within the harbor may require attention, and the shipgenerated waves by
larger vessels may cause troubles for small vessels.
[Technical Notes]
The following method may be used for evaluating the harbor calmness:
(1) To estimate the waves in the harbor, first establish the joint distribution of the height and direction of deepwater
waves.
(2) Next, calculate the wave transformations by refraction and breaking that takes place between the deepwater
wave observation and/or hindcasting point and the harbor entrance, using say the energy balance equation
method, and thus obtain the wave conditions at the harbor entrance.
(3) Obtain the wave height in the harbor, focusing mainly on diffraction and reflection. If necessary, carry out an
investigation on wave transmission at this time.
(4) The wave height in the harbor can be estimated by taking the squares of each of the diffracted wave height, the
reflected wave height and the transmitted wave height, adding the results, and then taking the square root. For
harbors where the effects of transmitted waves are relatively slight, the wave period in the harbor may be taken
to be the same as the period of the diffracted waves. Note that the wave height in the harbor should be
investigated for each wave direction for various classes of wave heights with the occurrence probability outside
the harbor.
(5) It is standard to express the occurrence rate of waves in a harbor as the percentage of the waves exceeding 0.5 m
or 1.0 m in height or in terms of the number of days. However, depending on the usage purpose, it is also
acceptable to take into consideration the exceedance probability for other wave height classes. The harbor
calmness is obtained by subtracting from 100% the occurrence probability (in percentage) that the wave height
in the harbor exceeds the threshold level for cargo handling works at the berth in question. It is not possible to
determine a value for the threshold wave height for cargo handling works that is valid universally; rather, it
depends on the purpose for which the wharf facilities are used, the dimensions of vessels, and the period and
direction of waves, etc. Nevertheless, a value of 0.5 to 1.0 m (significant wave height) may be used as a
reference value. However, it should be noted that the critical wave height for cargo handling is lower for waves
of longperiodicity such as swell 49), and so care is required when evaluating the net working rate for ports and
harbors that face out onto the open sea.
94
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Pattern of Ship Waves as Viewed from Top
If ship waves are viewed from top, it appears as shown in Fig. T 4.10.1. Specifically, it is composed of two
groups of waves. One group of waves spread out in a shape like 八 (the Chinese character for 8) from a point
slightly ahead of the bow of the vessel. The other group of waves are behind the vessel and are such that the
wave crest is perpendicular to the vessel’s sailing line. The former waves are termed the “divergent waves”,
while the latter are termed the “transverse waves”. The divergent waves form concave curves; the closer to the
sailing line, the smaller the gap between waves. On the other hand, the transverse waves are approximately arc
shaped, with the gap between waves being constant (i.e., independent of the distance from the sailing line). In
deep water, the area over which the ship waves extend is limited within the area bounded by the two cusplines
with the angles ± 19º28' from the sailing line and starting from the origin (i.e., the point from which the cusp
lines diverge) lying somewhat in front of the bow of the vessel. The divergent waves cross the transverse waves
just inside the cusplines; this is where the wave height is largest. The wave steepness is smaller for the transverse
waves than for the divergent waves, implying that the transverse waves often cannot be discerned from an aerial
photograph.
where
Lt： wavelength of transverse waves (m)
h： water depth (m)
V： sailing speed of vessel (m/s)
Note however that when the water is sufficiently deep, the wavelength of the transverse waves is given by the
following equation:
2p
L 0 = V 2 = 0.169V k2 (4.10.2)
g
where
L0： wavelength of transverse waves at places where the water is sufficiently deep (m)
Vk： sailing speed of vessel (kt); Vk = 1.946V (m/s)
(b) The period of the transverse waves is equal to the period of progresseive waves with the wavelength Lt (or L0)
in water of depth h. It is given by equation (4.10.3) or (4.10.4).
2p 2ph 2ph
Tt = L t coth æ ö = T 0 coth æ ö (4.10.3)
g è Lt ø è Lt ø
2p
T 0 = V = 0.330V k (4.10.4)
g
95
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
where
Tt： period of transverse waves in water of depth h (s)
T0： period of transverse waves at places where the water is sufficiently deep (s)
(c) The wavelength and period of the divergent waves are given by equations (4.10.5) and (4.10.6), which are
derived from the condition that the component of the vessel’s speed in the direction of travel of the divergent
waves must be equal to the velocity of the divergent waves.
L d = L t cos 2 q (4.10.5)
T d = T t cos q (4.10.6)
where
Ld： wavelength of divergent waves as measured in the direction of travel (m)
Td： period of divergent waves (s)
q： angle between the direction of travel of the divergent waves and the sailing line (º)
According to Kelvin’s theory of wave generation at places where the water is sufficiently deep, the angle of
travel q of the divergent waves can be obtained as shown in Fig. T 4.10.2, as a function of the position of the
place under study relative to the vessel. Note however that for actual vessels the minimum value of q is
generally about 40º, and q is usually about 50º ~ 55º for the point on a particular divergent wave at which the
wave height is a maximum. Note also that, as shown in the illustration in the figure, the angle q directs the
location of the source point Q from where the divergent wave has been generated; a is the angle between the
cusp line and the sailing line.
Angle between the direction of travel of the divergent waves
V ≦ 0.7 gh (4.10.7)
The critical water depth above which ship waves may be regarded as deepwater waves is calculated by equation
(4.10.7), as listed in Table T4.10.1. As can be seen from this table, the waves generated by vessels in normal
conditions can generally be regarded as deepwater waves. Situations in which they must be regarded as shallow
water waves include the following cases: a highspeed ferry travels through relatively shallow waters, a
motorboat travels through shallow waters, and ship waves propagate into shallow waters. Note that ship waves
in shallow water have a longer wavelength and period than those generated by the vessel sailing in deep water at
the same speed.
96
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Table T4.10.1 Conditions under Which Ship Waves Can Be Regarded as Deepwater Waves
Speed of vessel Vk (kt) 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 25.0 30.0
Water depth h (m) ≧ 1.4 3.1 5.5 8.6 12.4 16.9 22.0 34.4 49.6
Period of transverse waves T0 (s) 1.7 2.5 3.3 4.1 5.0 5.8 6.6 8.3 9.9
Ls 1 ¤ 3 E HPW
H 0 = æ ö  (4.10.8)
è 100ø 1620L s V K
where
H0： characteristic wave height of ship waves (m), or the maximum wave height observed at a distance of
100 m from the sailing line when a vessel is sailing at its fullload cruising speed
Ls： length of the vessel (m)
V K： fullload cruising speed (kt)
EHPW： wavemaking power (W)
The wavemaking power EHPW is calculated as follows.
E HPW = E HP E HPF (4.10.9)
E HP = 0.6S HPm (4.10.10)
1
E HPF =  rSV 03 C F (4.10.11)
2
S ≒ 2.5 ÑL s (4.10.12)
V0 Ls 2
C F = 0.075 ¤ æ log  2ö (4.10.13)
è n ø
where
SHPm： continuous maximum shaft power (W)
r0： density of seawater (kg/m3); r0 = 1030 (kg/m3)
V0： fullload cruising speed (m/s); V0 = 0.514VK
CF： frictional resistance coefficient
n： coefficient of kinematic viscosity of water (m2/s); n ≒ 1.2 × 106 (m2/s)
Ñ： fullload displacement of vessel (m3)
Equation (4.10.8) has been obtained by assuming that the energy consumed through wave making resistance is
equal to the propagation energy of ship waves, while the values of the coefficients have been determined as
averages from the data from ship towing tank tests. The characteristic wave height H0 varies from vessel to
vessel, although for mediumsized and large vessels it is about 1.0 ~ 2.0 m. Tugboats sailing at full speed
produce relatively large waves.
It is considered that the wave height decays as s1/3, where s is the distance of the observation point from the
sailing line. It is also considered that the wave height is proportional to the cube of the cruising speed of the
vessel. Accordingly:
100 1¤3 V 3
H max = H 0 æ ö æ k ö (4.10.14)
è s ø è V Kø
where
Hmax：maximum height of ship waves at any chosen observation point (m)
s：distance from the observation point to the sailing line (m)
Vk：actual cruising speed of the vessel (kt)
Equation (4.10.14) cannot be applied if s is too small; specifically, the approximate minimum value of s for
which equation (4.10.14) can be applied is either the vessel length Ls or 100 m, whichever is the smaller.
The upper limit of the height of ship waves occurs when the breaking criterion is satisfied; this criterion is
expresed as the steepness Hmax/Lt of the highest divergent wave being equal to 0.14. If the angle between the
wave direction and the sailing line is assumed to be q = 50º at the point on a divergent wave where the wave
height becomes largest, the upper limit of the wave height at any given point is given by equation (4.10.15). This
also assumes, however, that the conditions for deepwater waves are satisfied.
where
97
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Hlimit：upper limit of the height of ship waves as determined by the wave breaking conditions (m)
(5) Propagation of Ship Waves
(a) Among two groups of ship waves, the transverse waves propagate in the direction of vessel’s sailing line, and
continue to propagate even if the vessel changes course or stops. In this case, the waves have a typical nature
of regular waves (with the period being given by equation (4.10.3), and they propagate at the group velocity,
undergoing transformation such as refraction and others. Takeuchi and Nanasawa gave an example of such
transformations. Note however that as the waves propagate, the length of wave crest spreads out (the wave
crest gets longer), and even when the water is of uniform depth, the wave height decays in a manner inversely
proportional to the square root of the distance traveled.
(b) The direction of propagation of a divergent wave varies from point to point on the wave crest. According to
Kelvin’s theory of wave generation, the angle between the direction of propagation and the sailing line is q =
35.3º at the outer edge of a divergent wave. As one moves inwards along the wave crest, the value of q
approaches 90º. The first
(c) arriving at a any particular point has the angle q = 35.3º, while q getting gradually larger for subsequent
waves. This spatial change in the direction of propagation of the divergent waves can be estimated using Fig.
T 4.10.2.
(d) The propagation velocity of a divergent wave at any point on the wave crest is the group velocity
corresponding to the period Td at that point (see equation (4.10.6)). In the illustration in Fig. T 4.10.2, the
time needed for a component wave to propagate at the group velocity from the point Q at wave source to the
point P is equal to the time taken for the vessel to travel at the speed V from the point Q to the point O. Since
each wave profile propagates at the wave velocity (phase velocity), the waves appear to pass beyond the
cuspline and vanish one after the other at the outer edge of the divergent waves.
(6) Generation of Solitary Waves.
When a vessel sails through shallow waters, solitary waves are generated in front of the vessel if the cruising
speed Vk (m/s) approaches gh . Around the mouths of rivers, there is a possibility of small vessels being
affected by such solitary waves generated by other large vessels 50).
[References]
1) Dean, G. R.: “Stream function wave theory and application”, Handbook of Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Volume 1, Gulf
Pub., 1991, pp. 6394.
2) Dean G. R. and R. A. Dalrymple: “Water Wave Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists”, World Scientific, 1991, pp. 305309
3) Goda, Y.: “Wave forces on a vertical circular cylinder: Experiments and proposed method of wave force computation”, Rept.
of PHRI, No. 8, 1964, 74 p.
4) Yoshimi GODA, Yasumasa SUZUKI: “Computation of refraction and diffraction of sea waves with Mitsuyasu’s directional
spectrum”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 230, 1975 (in Japanese).
5) Pierson, W. J. Jr., G. Neumann and R. W. James: “Practical methods for observing and forecasting ocean waves by means of
wave spectra and statistics”, U. S. Navy Hydrographic Office, Pub. No. 603, 1955.
6) Inoue, T.: “On the growth of the spectra of a wind gererated sea according to a modified MilesPhillips mechanism and its
application to wave forecasting”, Geophysical Science Lab., TR675, New York Univ., 1967, pp. 174.
7) Isozaki, I. and T. Uji: “Numerical prediction of ocean wind waves”, Papers of Meteorology and Geophysics, Vol. 24 No. 2,
1973, pp. 207231.
8) Joseph, P. S., S. Kawai and Y. Toba: “Ocean wave prediction by a hybrid model combination of singleparameterized wind
waves with spectrally treated swells”, Sci. Rept. Tohoku Univ., Ser. 5, (Tohoku Geophys. Jour.), Vol. 28, No. 1, 1981.
9) Uji, T.: “A coupled discrete wave model MRIII”, Jour. Oceanogr, Society of Japan, Vol. 40, 1985, pp. 303313.
10) Günther, H. et al: “A hybrid parametrical wave prediction model”, Jour. Geophys. Res., Vol. 84, 1979, pp. 57275738.
11) Takeshi SOEJIMA, Tomoharu TAKAHASHI: “A comparison on wave hidcasting methods”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 210,
1975, pp. 124 (in Japanese).
12) Collins, J. I.: “Prediction of shallow water wares”, Jour. Geopyhs. Res., Vol. 77, No. 15, 1972, pp. 26932702.
13) Cavaleri, L. and P. H. Rizzoli: “Wind wave prediction in shallow water: theory and applications”, Jour. Geophys. Res., Vol. 86
No. C11, 1981, pp. 1096110973.
14) Golding. B: “A wave perdiction system for realtime sea state forecasting”, Quat. Jour. Royal Meleorol. Soc., Vol. 109, 1983,
pp. 393416.
15) Phillips, O. M.: “On the generation of waves by turbulent wind”, J. F. M., Vol. 2, 1957, pp. 417445.
16) Miles, J. W.: “On the generation of surface waves by shear flows”, J. F. M., Vol. 6, 1959, pp. 568582.
17) Hasselmann, K.: “Weakinteraction of ocean waves”, Basic Developments in Fluid Dynamics, Vol. 2, Academic Press Inc.,
New York., 1968.
18) Hasselmann, S and K. Hasselamann: “Computations and parameterizations of the nonlinear energy transfer in a gravity wave
spectrum, Part I: A new method for efficient computations of the exact nonlinear transfer integral”, J. Phys. Oceanogr., Vol.
15, 1985, pp. 13691377.
19) Sverdrup, H. U. and W. H. Munk: “Wind Sea and Swell, Theory of Relations for Forecasting”, U. S. Hydrographic Office,
Pub. No. 601, 1947.
20) Bretschneider, C. L.: “The generation and decay of waves in deep water”, Trans. A. G. U., Vol. 37, No. 3, 1952.
21) Wilson, B. W.: “Numerical prediction of ocean waves in the North Atlantic for December 1959”, Deut. Hydro. Zeit, Jahrg. 18,
Ht. 3. 1965.
98
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
22) Saville. T.: “The effect of fetch width on wave generation”, Tech. Memo., B. E. B., No. 70.
23) Wilson, B. W.: “Graphical approach to the forecasting of waves in moving fetches”, Tech, Memo., B. E. B., No. 73, 1955.
24) Bretschneider. C. L.: “Decay of ocean waves: Fundamentals of ocean engineering  Part 8b”, Ocean Industry, 1968, pp. 45
50.
25) Gringorten, I. I.: “A plotting rule for extreme probability paper”, J. Geophysical Res., Vol. 68 No. 3, 1963, pp. 813814.
26) Petruaskas, C. and P. M. Aagaard: “Extrapolation of historical storm data for estimating design wave heights”, Preprints 2nd
OTC, No. 1190, 1970, pp. I409428.
27) Yoshiyuki ITO, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shoichi YAMAMOTO: “Wave height distribution in the region of ray crossing 
application of the numerical analysis method of wave propagation ”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1972, pp. 87110 (in
Japanese).
28) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Naota IKEDA, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “Practical computation method of directional random wave
transformation”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 30, No. 1, 1991, pp. 2167 (in Japanese).
29) Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Isao UEHARA, Yasumasa SUZUKI: “Applicability of wave transformation model in boussinesq
equation”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 814, 1995, 22 p. (in Japanese).
30) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Katsutoshi KIMURA, Antonio Paulo dos Santos Pinto: “Random wave forces and design wave
periods of composite breakwaters under the action of double peaked spectral waves”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1986, pp.
325 (in Japanese).
31) Yoshimi GODA, Yasumasa SUZUKI, Yasuharu KISHIRA, Osamu KIKUCHI: “Estimation of incident and reflected waves in
random wave experimen”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 248, 1976, 24 p. (in Japanese).
32) Koji KOBUNE, Mutsuo OSATO: “A study of wave height distribution along a breakwater with a corner”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol.
15, No. 2, 1976 (in Japanese).
33) Yoshiyuki ITO, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO: “Meandering damages of composite type breakwaters”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No.
112, 1971 (in Japanese).
34) Yoshimi GODA, Tomotsuka YOSHIMURA: “Wave force computation for structures of large diameter, isolated in the
offshore”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1971 (in Japanese).
35) Yoshimi GODA: “Deformation of irregular waves due to depthcontrolled wave breaking” Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 14, No. 3,
1975 (in Japanese).
36) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Yutaka KAMIYAMA, Osamu KIKUCHI: “Wave transformation on a reef ”, Tech. Note of PHRI,
No. 278, 1977, 32 p. (in Japanese).
37) Saville, T. Jr.: “Wave runup on composite slopes”, Proc. 6th Conf. on Coastal Eng., 1958, pp. 691699.
38) Yoshimi GODA, Yasuharu KISHIRA, Yutaka KAMIYAMA: “Laboratory investigation on the overtopping rate of seawalls
by irregular waves”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1975, pp. 344 (in Japanese).
39) Yoshimi GODA, Yasuharu KISHIRA: “Experiments on irregular wave overtopping characteristics of low crest types”, Tech.
Note of PHRI, No. 242, 1976, 28 p. (in Japanese).
40) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Toshihiko NAGAI, Kazuhiko NISHIDA: “Decrease of wave overtopping amount due to seawalls
of low crest types”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1982, pp. 151205 (in Japanese).
41) Yoshimi GODA: “Estimation of the rate of irregular wave overtopping of seawalls”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1970, pp.
341 (in Japanese).
42) Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Norio MOCHIZUKI, Kazuo SATO, Haruhiro MARUYAMA, Tsuyoshi KANAZAWA, Tatsuya
MASUMOTO: “Effect of wave directionality on overtopping at seawall”, Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1996, pp. 3964 (in
Japanese).
43) Michio MORIHIRA, Shusaku KAKIZAKI, Yoshimi GODA: “Experimental investigation of a curtainwall breakwater”,
Rept. of PHRI, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1964, pp. 127 (in Japanese).
44) Yoshimi Goda: “Irregular wave deformation in the surf zone”, Constal Engineering in Japan, JSCE, Vol. 18, 1975, pp. 1326.
45) Kazumasa KATOH, Satoshi NAKAMURA, Naota IKEDA: “Estimation of infragravity waves in consideration of wave
groups  An examination on basis of field observation at HORF ”, Rep. of PHRI, Vol. 30, No. 1, 1991, pp. 137163 (in
Japanese).
46) Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Atsuhiro TADOKORO, Hideyoshi FUJISAKU: “Characteristics of long period waves observed in port”,
Rept. of PHRI Vol. 35, No. 3, 1996, pp. 336 (in Japanese).
47) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “Amplification mechanism of harbor oscillation derived from field
observation and numerical simulation”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 636, 1988, 70 p. (in Japanese).
48) Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Tokuhiro TADOKORO, Shigenori TAMAKI, Junzo HASEGAWA: “Standard frequency spectrum of
longperiod waves for design of port and harbor facilities,” porc. 44th Japanese Coastal Eng. Corof., 1997, pp. 246250 (in
Japanese).
49) Shigeru UEDA, Satoru SHIRAISHI, Hiroyuki OSHIMA, Kohei ASANO: “Allowable wave height and wharf operation
efficiency based on the oscillations of ships moored to quay walls”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 779, 1994, 44 p. (in Japanese).
50) Ertekin, R. C., W. C. Webster and J. V. Wehausen: “Ship generated solitions”, Proc. 15th Symp. Nav. Hydrodyn., 1985, pp.
347364.
51) Yoshimi GODA: “On the methodology of selecting design wave height”, Proc. 21st Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., ASCE, 1988, pp.
899913.
52) Yoshimi GODA and Koji KOBUNE: “Distribution function fitting to storm waves”, Proc. 22nd Int. Conf. Coastal Eng.,
ASCE, 1990, pp. 1831.
53) Yoshimi GODA: “Random Waves and Design of Maritime Structures (2nd Edition)”, World Scientific, Singapore, 2000,
Chapt. 11 (Statistical Analysis of Extreme Waves).
54) Yoshimi GODA: “Statistical variability of sea state parameters as a function of wave spectrum,” Coastal Engineering in
Japan, JSCE, Vol. 31, No. 1, 1988, pp. 3952.
99
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) Structure Type and Wave Forces
Wave forces can be generally classified by the type of structure as follows:
(a) Wave force acting on a walltype structure
(b) Wave force acting on armor stones or concrete blocks
(c) Wave force acting on submerged members
(d) Wave force acting on structures near the water surface
The wave force is different for each type of structure. It is thus necessary to use an appropriate calculation
method in accordance with the structural type. For some types of structures with a few experiences of
construction, their wave forces have not been sufficiently elucidated, and therefore it is desirable to carry out
studies including hydraulic model experiments for such structures.
(2) Wave Irregularity and Wave Force
Sea waves are irregular with the wave height and period varying from wave to wave. Depending on the water
depth and the topography of the sea bottom, there may appear waves that have not broken, waves that are just
breaking, or waves that have already broken. When calculating the wave force, it is important to include the
waves that cause the severest effect on the structure. It is necessary to give sufficient consideration to wave
irregularity and to the characteristics of the wave force being produced in accordance with the type of structure.
In general, it may be assumed that the larger the wave height, the greater the wave force becomes. It is thus
acceptable to focus on the wave force of the highest wave among a train of irregular waves attacking the
structure. However, with regard to the stabilities of floating structures and cylindrical structures with small
rigidity, and those of concrete blocks or armor stones on the slope, it is desirable to consider the effect of the
successive action of the irregular waves.
(3) Calculation of Wave Force Using Hydraulic Model Experiments
When studying wave force using hydraulic model experiments, it is necessary to give sufficient consideration to
the failure process of the structure and to use an appropriate measurement method. It is also necessary to give
sufficient consideration to the irregularity of waves. In particular, when carrying out experiments using regular
waves, an investigation against the highest wave should be included.
[Commentary]
(1) Parameters Affecting Wave Force on an Upright Wall 1)
The major parameters that affect the wave force acting on an upright wall are the wave period, the wave height,
the wave direction, the water level, the water depth, the bottom slope, the water depth on and the berm width of
the mound, the crown height of upright wall, and the water depth at the base of upright wall. In addition, it is
also necessary to consider the effect of the wall alignment. The wave force on an upright wall with a concaved
alignment may be larger than that on an upright, straight wall of infinite length. Furthermore, if the front face of
upright wall is covered with a mound of wavedissipating concrete blocks, the characteristics of these blocks and
the crown height and width of the mound will affect the wave force.
(2) Types of Wave Force
The wave force acting on an upright wall can be classified according to the type of waves as a standing wave
force, a breaking wave force, or a wave force due to a broken wave. It is considered that the wave force changes
100
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
its type continuously with the variation in the offshore wave height. A standing wave force is produced by waves
whose height is small compared with the water depth, and the change in the wave pressure over time is gradual.
As the wave height increases, the wave force also increases. In general, the largest wave force is generated by
the waves breaking just a little off the upright wall. Accordingly, with the exception of very shallow water
conditions, the force exerted by waves breaking just in front of an upright wall is larger than the wave force by
higher waves that have already broken well. It is necessary to note that when breaking waves act on an upright
wall on a steep seabed, or on an upright wall set on a high mound (even if built on a gentle seabed), a very strong
impulsive breaking wave force may be generated.
[1] Wave Force under Wave Crest (Notification Article 5, Clause 1, Number 1)
(1) Wave Pressure on the Front Face of an Upright Wall
Assuming a linear distribution of wave pressure with a maximum value p1 at the still water level, 0
at the height h* above the still water level, and p2 at the sea bottom, the wave pressure from the
bottom to the crown of the upright wall shall be calculated by the following equations:
h* = 0.75 ( 1 + cos b )l 1 H D (5.2.1)
p 1 = 0.5 ( 1 + cos b ) ( a 1 l 1 + a 2 l 2 cos 2 b )r 0 g H D (5.2.2)
p1
p 2 =  (5.2.3)
cosh ( 2 p h ¤ L )
p3 = a3 p1 (5.2.4)
where
h*： height above still water level at which intensity of wave pressure is 0 (m)
p1： intensity of wave pressure at still water level (kN/m2)
p2： intensity of wave pressure at sea bottom (kN/m2)
p3： intensity of wave pressure at toe of upright wall (kN/m2)
r0： density of water (t/m3)
g： gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
b： angle between the line normal to the upright wall and the direction of wave approach.
The angle shall be reduced by 15º, but the resultant angle shall be no less than 0º. This
correction provides a safety margin against uncertainty in the wave direction.
l1, l2： wave pressure modification factors (1.0 is the standard value)
h： water depth in front of upright wall (m)
L： wavelength at water depth h used in calculation as specified in the item (3) below (m)
HD： wave height used in calculation as specified in the item (3) below (m)
2
1 ì 4 ph ¤ L ü
a 1 = 0.6 +  í  ý (5.2.5)
2 î sinh ( 4 p h ¤ L ) þ
ì h b d H D 2 2d ü
x 2 = min í æ ö æ ö ,  ý (5.2.6)
è ø è d ø HD
î 3h b þ
h¢ ì 1 ü
a 3 = 1  í 1  ý (5.2.7)
hî cosh ( 2 p h ¤ L ) þ
where
hb： water depth at an offshore distance of 5 times the significant wave height from the
upright wall (m)
d： water depth at the crest of either the foot protection works or the mound armoring
units of whichever is higher (m)
h¢： water depth at toe of upright wall (m)
min {a,b}： smaller value of a or b
(2) Uplift beneath Upright Wall
The uplift acting on the bottom of an upright wall is described by a triangular distribution, with the
pressure intensity at the front toe pu given by the following equation and 0 at the rear toe.
p u = 0.5 ( 1 + cos b )a 1 a 3 l 3 r0 g H D (5.2.8)
101
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
where
pu： uplift pressure acting at front toe of upright wall (kN/m2)
l3： uplift pressure modification factor (1.0 is the standard value)
(3) Wave Height and Wavelength Used in the Wave Pressure Calculation
The wave height HD and the wavelength L are the height and wavelength of the highest wave. The
wavelength of the highest wave is that corresponding to the significant wave period, while the
height of the highest wave is as follows:
(a) When the upright wall is located off the breaking zone:
678
HD = Hmax
(5.2.9)
Hmax = 1.8H1/3
where
Hmax： highest wave height of incident waves at the water depth at the upright wall (m)
H1/3： significant wave height of incident waves at the water depth at the upright wall (m)
(b) When the upright wall is located within the breaking zone:
HD is the maximum wave height considering the breaking of irregular waves (m)
[Commentary]
It is standard to calculate the maximum horizontal wave force acting on an upright wall and the simultaneous uplift
pressure using the extended Goda equation.
The extended Goda pressure formula is that proposed by Goda and modified to include the effects of wave
direction and others. Its singleequation formula enables to calculate the wave force from the standing to breaking
wave conditions without making any abrupt transition. However, where the upright wall is located on a steep seabed,
or built on a high mound, and is subjected to a strong impulsive wave pressure due to breaking waves, the formula
may underestimate the wave force. It should therefore be carefully applied with consideration of the possibility of
occurrence of impulsive wave pressure due to breaking waves (see 5.2.3 Impulsive Pressure Due to Breaking
Waves).
The wave pressure given by the Goda formula takes the hydrostatic pressure at the still water condition as the
reference value. Any hydrostatic pressure difference between the offshore and onshore sides of the wall, if presents,
should be considered separately. Further, the equation is designed to examine the stability of the whole body of
vertical wall. When breaking wave actions exist, the equation does not necessarily express the local maximum wave
pressure at the respective positions; thus such should be considered during examination of the stress of structural
members.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Wave Pressure on the Front Face According to the Extended Goda Formula
Figure T 5.2.1 illustrates the distribution of wave pressure acting on an upright section of a breakwater. The
correction to the incident wave angle b is exemplified in Fig. T 5.2.2.
p
1
η*
hc
d
h' Buoyancy
h
p
u
p
2
p
3
102
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
v e
wa
n of
tio
c
ire
ld
ipa
inc
β 15
Pr
°
°
90
Fig. T 5.2.2 Way of Obtaining the Incident Wave Angle b
103
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
height at the a distance 5H1/3 offshore from the upright wall. The bottom slope thus has a strong influence on the
wave force, and so care must be taken when setting the bottom slope in the design conditions.
As explained above, the Goda formula considers the effects of the mound height and the bottom slope on the
wave pressure. Nevertheless, for an upright wall on a high mound or a steep sea bed, a large impulsive breaking
wave force may act, and under such conditions the Goda formula may underestimate the wave force. When
applying the Goda formula, it is thus necessary to pay attention to the risk of an impulsive breaking wave force
arising. In particular, with a high mound, it is necessary to consider not only a2 in equation (5.2.6) but also the
impulsive breaking wave force coefficient aI by Takahashi et al. (see 5.2.3 Impulsive Pressure Due to
Breaking Waves), and to use aI in place of a2 when aI is the larger of the two.
One more problem with the Goda formula concerns its applicability to extremely shallow waters, for
example near to the shoreline. The Goda formula cannot be applied accurately for broken waves. It is difficult,
however, to clearly define where the limit of applicability lies. For cases such as the wave force acting on an
upright wall near the shoreline, it is advisable to use other calculation equations together with the Goda formula.
(see 5.2.7 Wave Force on Upright Wall near Shoreline or on Shore).
(6) Modification of the Original Goda Formula for Wave Direction
Although results from a number of experiments on the effect of wave direction on the wave force are available,
there are still many points that are unclear. Traditionally, for standing waves, no correction has been made for
wave direction to the wave force. The effects of wave direction have been considered only for breaking waves,
by multiplying the wave force by cos2b, where b is the angle between the direction of wave approach and the
line normal to upright wall alignment. However, this has resulted in the irrational situation whereby the breaking
wave force is assumed to decrease as the wave angle b increases, reaching zero at the limiting value b = 90º, and
yet standing waves are assumed to maintain as the perfect standing wave condition. One explanation is such that
because actual breakwaters are finite in extension, when the incident angle is large (i.e., oblique wave
incidence), it takes a considerably large distance from the tip of breakwater until the wave height becomes two
times the incident height. As b approaches to the limiting value of b = 90º, the distance to the place where the
wave height becomes two fold tends to go to infinity. In other words, in this case, it is appropriate to consider
that the wave pressure of progressive waves acts on the upright wall. Considering these points and application to
breakwaters in the field, it has been decided to correct equation (5.2.2) for wave direction by multiplying a2
(which represents mound effects) with cos2b, and then multiplying the whole term by 0.5(1+cosb).
(7) Wave Force and Significant Wave Period for Waves Composed of Two Groups of Different Periods
Examples of two wave groups of different periods being superimposed are such a case that waves enter a bay
from the outer sea and another group of waves are generated within the bay by local winds. Another case is the
superposition of diffracted waves coming from the entrance of a harbor and waves transmitted by means of
overtopping. In such cases, the spectrum is bimodal (i.e., having two peaks), and there are actual cases of such
observations in the field. Tanimoto et al. 4) carried out experiments on the wave force acting on the upright
section of a composite breakwater by using waves with a bimodal spectrum, and verified that the Goda formula
can be applied even in such a case. They also proposed a method for calculating the significant wave period to
be used in the wave force calculation (see 4.5.4 Wave Reflection). If each frequency spectrum of the two wave
groups before superimposition can be considered to be a BretschneiderMitsuyasu type, the significant wave
period after superimposition may be obtained using the method by Tanimoto et al. Then this significant wave
period may be used in wave force calculation.
(8) Wave Force for Low Crested Upright Wall
According to results of model experiments, the stability of upright wall tends to increase as the crown height is
reduced. Nakata and Terauchi have proposed a method for calculating the wave force for a breakwater with a
low crown height. In the method, the horizontal wave pressure and the uplift pressure from the Goda formula are
multiplied by a modification factor lh, thus reducing the wave force.
(9) Wave Force for High Crested Upright Wall
When the crown of the upright wall is considerably higher than that for a normal breakwater, there will be no
overtopping, meaning that the wave force may be larger than that given by the Goda formula. Mizuno and
Sugimoto carried out experiments into the wave force acting on a breakwater with a high crown.
(10) Wave Force on Inclined Walls
When the wall is slightly inclined, the horizontal wave force is moreorless the same as that for a perfectly
upright wall. However, it is necessary to consider the vertical component of the wave force acting on the
inclined surface, along with the reduction in uplift pressure and others. Tanimoto and Kimura 5) have carried out
experiments on the wave force for trapezoidal caisson walls, and have proposed a method for calculating the
wave force. For a caisson in which the upper part of the upright section is inclined (slopingtop caisson), the
horizontal wave force is reduced not only for the sloping part but also for the vertical part. It is also necessary to
consider the vertical component of the wave force for the sloping part for stability analysis of breakwaters.
Morihira et al. were the first to propose a method for calculating the wave force in such a case. Hosoyamada et
al. have come up with a method that is based on the approach by Morihira et al., but the method by Hosoyamada
is more general and can be applied for a wider variety of slopingtop caissons (see Part VII, 3.2.4 SlopingTop
Caisson Breakwater).
104
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[2] Wave Force under Wave Trough (Notification Article 5, Clause 1, Number 2)
The negative wave force at the time of wave trough acting at a wall shall be calculated using either
appropriate hydraulic model experiments or an appropriate calculation formula.
[Commentary]
When the trough of a wave is acting at a wall, a negative wave force acts corresponding to the trough depth of the
water surface from the still water level. A “negative wave force” is the force directed seaward. It is necessary to note
that the negative wave force may be comparable in magnitude to a positive wave force when the water is deep and the
wavelength is short.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Negative Wave Pressure Distribution
The negative wave pressure acting on an upright wall at the wave trough can be approximately estimated as
shown in Fig. T 5.2.4. Specifically, it can be assumed that a wave pressure acts toward the sea, with the
magnitude of this wave pressure being zero at the still water level and having a constant value of pn from a depth
0.5HD below the still water level right down to the toe of the wall. Here, pn is given as follows:
p n = 0.5r 0 gH D (5.2.10)
where
pn： intensity of wave pressure in constant Seaward Shoreward
region (kN/m2)
r0： density of seawater (usually 1.03 t/m3) 0.5 HD
g： gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s2)
HD： wave height used in design calculation
(m)
In addition, the negative uplift pressure acting on the
bottom of the upright wall can be assumed to act as
shown in Fig. T 5.2.4. Specifically, it can be
assumed that an uplift pressure acts downwards with
its intensity being pn (as given by equation (5.2.10)) T 5.2.4 Negative Wave Pressure Distribution
at the front toe, zero at the rear toe, and having a
triangular distribution inbetween. Incidentally, it is necessary to use the highest wave height as the wave height
HD used in the design calculation.
105
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
An impulsive pressure is generated when the wave front of a breaking wave strikes a wall surface. It has been shown
from model experiments that under certain conditions the maximum wave pressure may rise as much as several tens
of times the hydrostatic pressure corresponding to the wave height (1.0r0 gHD). However, such a wave pressure acts
only locally and for a very short time, and even slight changes in conditions lead to marked reduction in the wave
pressure. Because of the impulsive nature of the wave force, the effects on stability and the stress in structural
elements vary according to the dynamic properties of the structure. Accordingly, when there is a risk of a large
impulsive pressure due to breaking waves being generated, it is necessary to take appropriate countermeasures by
understanding the conditions of the impulsive pressure generation and the wave force characteristics by means of
hydraulic model experiments.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Conditions of Impulsive Pressure Due to Breaking Waves
A whole variety of factors contribute to generation of an impulsive pressure due to breaking waves, and so it is
difficult to describe the conditions in general. Nevertheless, based on the results of a variety of experiments, it
can be said that an impulsive pressure is liable to occur in the following cases when the wave angle b is less than
20º.
(a) Steep bottom slope
When the three conditions (the bottom slope is steeper than about 1/30; there are waves that break slightly off
the upright wall; and their equivalent deepwater wave steepness is less than 0.03) are satisfied simultaneously,
then an impulsive pressure is liable to be generated.
(b) High mound
Even if the bottom slope is gentle, the shape of the rubble mound may cause an impulsive pressure to be
generated. In this case, in addition to the wave conditions, the crown height, the berm width and the slope
gradient of the mound all play a part, and so it is hard to determine the conditions under which such an
impulsive pressure will be generated. In general, an impulsive pressure will be generated when the mound is
relatively high, the berm width is suitably wide or the slope gradient is gentle, and breaking waves form a
vertical wall of water at the slope or at the top of the mound 7). When the seabed slope is gentler than about
1 ¤ 50 and the ratio of the depth of water above the top of the mound (including any armor work) to the water
depth above the seabed is greater than 0.6, it may be assumed that a large impulsive pressure will not be
generated.
(2) Countermeasures
If a large impulsive pressure due to breaking waves acts on an upright wall, the wave force can be greatly
reduced by sufficiently covering the front face with a mound of wavedissipating concrete blocks. In particular,
with a high mound, a sufficient covering with wavedissipating concrete blocks can stop the occurrence of the
impulsive pressure itself. In some cases the action of an impulsive pressure can also be avoided by using special
caissons such as perforatedwall caissons or slopingtop caissons 7). The wave direction also has a large effect on
the occurrence of an impulsive pressure, and therefore, one possible countermeasure is to ensure that the wave
direction is not perpendicular to the breakwater alignment.
(3) Investigating Wave Force Using Model Experiments
When investigating the wave force using hydraulic model experiments for the case that an impulsive pressure
due to breaking wave acts, it is necessary to give consideration to the response characteristics of the structure to
106
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
the impact force. It is better to study the stability of the upright wall as a whole by sliding tests, and to study the
strength of structural elements such as parapets by stress and strain measurements.
(4) Impulsive Pressure Due to Breaking Waves Acting on an Upright Wall on a Steep Seabed.
(a) Water depth that produce a maximum wave pressure and the mean intensity of wave pressure
Mitsuyasu 8), Homma et al., Morihira et al. 9), Goda and Haranaka 10), Horikawa and Noguchi, and Fujisaki
and Sasada have all carried out studies on the impulsive pressure due to breaking waves acting on an upright
wall on a steeply sloping sea bottom. In particular, Mitsuyasu carried out a wide range of experiments using
regular waves whereby he studied the breaking wave force acting on an upright wall on uniform slopes of
gradient 1/50, 1/25, and 1/15 for a variety of water depths. He investigated the change in the total wave force
with the water depth at the location of the upright wall, and obtained an equation for calculating the water
depth hM at the upright wall for which the impulsive wave force is largest. When the Mitsuyasu equation is
rewritten in terms of the deepwater wavelength, it becomes as follows:
hM H 0 1 / 4
 = C M æ ö (5.2.11)
H0 è L0 ø
where
CM = 0.59 3.2 tan q (5.2.12)
H0： deepwater wave height (m)
L0： deepwater wavelength (m)
tanq： gradient of uniform slope
Homma, Horikawa and Hase have proposed a slightly different value for CM based on the results of
experiments with a gradient of 1/15 and other data. In any case, the impulsive wave pressure is largest when
the structure is located slightly shoreward of the wave breaking point for progressive waves.
Figure T 5.2.5 shows the total wave force when the impulsive wave force is largest for a number of slope
gradients, as based on the results of Mitsuyasu’s experiments. In this figure, the mean intensity of the wave
pressure p has been obtained and then divided by r0gHD to make it dimensionless; it has then been plotted
against the deepwater wave steepness. It is possible to gain an understanding of the overall trend from this
figure. Specifically, it can be seen that the smaller the wave steepness, the larger the impulsive pressure is
generated. Also, as the slope gradient becomes smaller, the intensity of the maximum impulsive pressure
decreases.
(b) Conditions for generation of impulsive breaking wave pressure
The conditions for the occurrence of an
impulsive pressure on a steep seabed, as
described in (1) (a), have been set by prima
rily employing Fig. T 5.2.5 as a gross
guideline. For irregular waves in the sea,
the wave steepness can be evaluated as the
ratio of the equivalent deepwater wave
height corresponding to the highest wave
height Hmax to the deepwater wavelength
corresponding to the significant wave
period: the wave height Hmax is to be evalu
ated at the distance 5H1/3 from the upright
wall. One may refer to Fig. T 5.2.5 in
order to obtain an approximate estimate of
the mean intensity of the wave pressure for Fig. T 5.2.5 Mean Intensity of Wave Pressure
this equivalent deepwater wave steepness. for the Severest Wave Breaking
In this case, Hb should be taken to be the (Upright Wall on a Steep Slope)
aforementioned Hmax.
One can also envisage an installation of a breakwater at a place where the risk of impulsive pressure
generation is not large for the design waves. However, when placing an upright wall closer to the shore where
waves already broken act upon, it becomes important to carry out investigations for waves with a height lesser
than that of the design waves.
(c) Impulsive wave force acting on an upright wall on a horizontal floor adjoining a steep slope
Takahashi et al. 11) have carried out studies on the impulsive wave pressure acting on an upright wall on a
horizontal floor that is joined to a steep slope. They employed a horizontal berm connected to a slope of
gradient 1/10 or 3/100 in a wave channel, and then measured the wave pressure that acts on an upright wall at
a variety of positions with regular waves. They have proposed an equation (valid for certain wave conditions)
for calculating the upright wall position at which the wave force is largest and the maximum wave force in that
condition.
107
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
ìH ¤ d : H ¤ d ≦
£2
a I0 = í (5.2.14)
î2 : H¤d>2
height.
BH
(b) Effect of the crown height of the upright wall 0.2 α = α α
The higher the crown height, the greater the I I0 I1
H:H
risk of an impulsive breaking wave force α = d d
< 2
= d
being generated. This is because the steep
I0
H
2 :
d > 2
108
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
5.2.4 Wave Force on Upright Wall Covered with WaveDissipating Concrete Blocks
The wave force acting on an upright wall covered with a mound of wavedissipating concrete blocks shall
be evaluated based on hydraulic model experiments or an appropriate calculation equation, considering the
crown height and width of the waveabsorbing work as well as the characteristics of the wavedissipating
concrete blocks.
[Commentary]
If the front face of an upright wall is covered with a mound of wavedissipating precast concrete blocks, the features
of wave force acting on the wall are changed. The extent of this change depends on the characteristics of incident
waves, along with the crown height and width of the waveabsorbing work, the type of wavedissipating concrete
blocks used, and the composition of the waveabsorbing work. In general, when nonbreaking waves act on an upright
wall, the change in wave force upon the upright wall covered with wavedissipating blocks is not large. However,
when a large impulsive breaking wave force acts, the wave force can be reduced significantly by covering the upright
wall with a mound of wavedissipating blocks. Nevertheless, such a reduction in the wave force is only achieved
when the waveabsorbing work has a sufficient width and crown height; in particular, it should be noted that if the top
of the waveabsorbing work is below the design water level, the waveabsorbing work often invites an increase in the
wave force.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Wave Force Calculation Formula for Upright Wall Sufficiently Covered with WaveDissipating Concrete Blocks
The wave force acting on an upright wall covered with a mound of wavedissipating concrete blocks varies
depending on the composition of the waveabsorbing work, and therefore it should be evaluated using the results
of model experiments corresponding to the design conditions. However, if the crown elevation of the wave
absorbing work is as high as the top of the upright wall and the wavedissipating concrete blocks are sufficiently
stable against the wave actions, the wave force acting on the upright wall may be calculated using the extended
Goda formula. In this method with the standard formula given in 5.2.2 Wave Forces of Standing and Breaking
Waves, the values of h*, p1, and pu given by equations (5.2.1), (5.2.2), and (5.2.8) are used respectively, but it is
necessary to assign appropriate values to the wave pressure modification factors l1, l2, and l3 in accordance
with the design conditions.
(2) Modification Factors for the Extended Goda Formula
The method using the extended Goda formula can be applied by assigning appropriate values to the modification
factors l1, l2, and l3. Studies have been carried out by Tanimoto et al. 13), Takahashi et al. 14), Sekino and
Kakuno, and Tanaka and Abe amongst others and have revealed the following:
(a) Wavedissipating concrete blocks cause a considerable reduction in the breaking wave pressure, and so it is
generally acceptable to set the breaking wave pressure modification factor l2 to zero.
(b) The larger the wave height, the smaller the modification factor l1 for standing wave type pressure and the
modification factor l3 for uplift pressure become.
(c) The larger the ratio of the block mound width to the wavelength, the smaller the modification factors l1 and l3
become.
(d) If even a small portion of the upper part of the upright section is left uncovered, there is a risk of the wave
force here becoming an impulsive breaking force.
Based on such experimental results, Takahashi et al. 14) have summarized that in general, when the upright wall
is sufficiently covered with wavedissipating concrete blocks, the wave pressure reduction factor l2 may be
taken to be zero, while the values of l1 and l3 depend primarily on the wave height H (the highest wave height).
They have thus proposed the following equations:
678
l3 = l1 (5.2.16)
l2 = 0 (5.2.17)
In the breaker zone, where breakwaters covered with wavedissipating concrete blocks are generally used, the
above equations give l1 = l3 = 0.8.
109
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
When the extension of breakwater is not infinitely long, the distribution of the wave height along the face line of
breakwater becomes nonuniform due to the effects of wave reflection and diffraction. Ito and Tanimoto 16) have
pointed out that most damaged breakwaters having been struck by storm waves equivalent to design waves show a
pattern of meandering distribution of sliding distance (they have termed this “meandering damage”), and that one of
the causes of this type of damage is the differences in the local wave forces induced by the nonuniform wave height
distribution. The variation of wave heights along the breakwater is particularly prominent when the breakwater
alignment contains a corner that is concave with respect to the direction of wave incidence (see 4.5.4 [3]
Transformation of Waves at Concave Corners, near the Heads of Breakwaters, and around Detached Break
waters).
Variations in wave heights along the breakwater alignment may also occur near the head of the breakwater. In
particular, for a detached breakwater that extends over a short length only, diffracted waves from the two ends may
cause large variations in wave heights 17).
[Technical Notes]
Wave force calculation methods that consider the effects of the shape of the breakwater alignment have not reached to
the level of reasonable reliability yet. It is thus desirable to carry out an investigation using hydraulic model
experiments. Nevertheless, there is a good correlation between the increase in the wave height owing to the shape of
the breakwater alignment and the increase in the wave force. It is thus acceptable to increase the wave height for the
design calculations in accordance with the extent of the effect of the shape of the breakwater alignment as in equation
(5.2.18), and then calculate the wave force based on the standard calculation formula.
HD¢ = min {KcHD, KcbHb} (5.2.18)
where
HD¢： wave height to be used in the wave force calculation in consideration of the effect of the shape of breakwater
alignment (m)
Kc： coefficient for the increase in wave height due to the effect of the shape of breakwater alignment; Kc ≧ 1.0
Kcb： limit value of the height increase coefficient for breaking limit waves; Kcb ≒ 1.4
HD： wave height used in the wave force calculation when the effects of the shape of breakwater alignment are
not considered (m)
Hb： breaking wave height at the offshore location with the distance of 5 times the significant height of
progressive waves from the upright wall (m)
The height increase coefficient Kc in equation (5.2.18) is generally expressed as in equation (5.2.19). It should be
appropriately determined based on the distribution of the standing wave height (see 4.5.4 [3] Transformation of
Waves at Concave Corners, near the Heads of Breakwaters, and around Detached Breakwaters) along the face
line of breakwater as determined under the condition that the waves do not break.
Kc = HS / {HI (1 + KR)} (5.2.19)
where
HS： standing wave height along the front wall of breakwater (m)
HI： incident wave height (m)
KR： reflection coefficient for the breakwater in question
If the waves are treated as being of regular trains, then the coefficient for wave height increase varies considerably
along the breakwater. Moreover, the height increase coefficient is very sensitive to the period of the incident waves
and the direction of incidence. It is thus reasonable to consider the irregularity of the period and the direction of
incident wave. It should be noted that the value of Kc obtained in this way varies along the breakwater and that there
may be regions where Kc < 1.0. However, the wave height to be used in design must not be less than the original
incident wave height.
The limit value Kcb of the height increase coefficient for breaking waves has not been clarified in details.
Nevertheless, it may be considered to be about 1.4 based on experimental results up to the present time.
110
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
Ito et al. 18) have carried out experiments on the wave force acting on an upright wall located on or behind a reef
where the water depth is moreorless uniform, with the offshore slope of the shoal having a gradient of about 1/10.
[Technical Notes]
A number of different wave force formulas have been proposed for upright walls near the shoreline and on shore. It is
necessary to carry out an appropriate wave force calculation in line with the design conditions. Very roughly
speaking, the standard formula in 5.2.2 Wave Forces of Standing and Breaking Waves are applicable in the regions
where the seabed slope is gentle and the water is relatively deep. The formula of Tominaga and Kutsumi is applicable
in the regions near the shoreline. The formula of Homma, Horikawa and Hase is applicable in the regions where the
seabed slope is steep and the water is of intermediate depth.
When applying the standard wave pressure formula to the places where the water depth is less than one half the
equivalent deepwater wave height, it may be appropriate to use the values for the wavelength and wave height at the
water depth equal to one half the equivalent deepwater wave height in the calculation.
[Technical Notes]
For an upright wall situated on the landward side of the shoreline, the formulas by the US Army Coastal Engineering
Research Center (CERC) 19) are available. Moreover, one may refer to the research that has been carried out by
Tominaga and Kutsumi on the wave force acting on an upright wall situated on the landward side of the shoreline.
[Commentary]
The wave force acting on an upright waveabsorbing caisson (perforatedwall caisson etc.) varies in a complex way.
Specifically, it varies with the wave characteristics, the water level, the water depth, the topography of sea bottom and
the shape of the mound as with the case of a normal upright wall, but it also varies with the structure of the wave
absorbing compartment. It is thus difficult to designate a general calculation method that can be used in all cases.
Consequently, if the calculation method that is sufficiently reliable for the structure in question has not been
proposed, it is necessary to carry out studies using hydraulic model experiments matched to the individual conditions.
It is necessary to sufficiently investigate not only the wave force to be used in the stability investigation but also the
wave force acting on structural members. Moreover, it should be noted that the wave force varies significantly
according to whether or not the top of wave chamber is covered with a ceiling slab.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Wave Force without a Ceiling Slab in the Wave Chamber
The wave force acting on an upright waveabsorbing caisson varies depending on the structural conditions of the
waveabsorbing compartment, and so it is not possible to calculate this wave force for all general cases involved.
Nevertheless, for the normal case where there is no ceiling slab in the wave chamber, one can use the extended
Goda formula to calculate the wave force, provided necessary modifications are made. Takahashi et al. 20) have
carried out experiments on a verticalslit wall caisson, and have presented a method for calculating the wave
pressure acting on the slit and rear walls for four representative phases, whereby the wave pressure given by the
extended Goda formula is multiplied by a modification factor l for the verticalslit wall caisson; they give
specific values for the modification factor for the slit and rear walls for each phase. This method can be used to
111
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
give not only the wave force that is severest in terms of the sliding or overturning of the caisson, but also the
wave force that is severest in terms of the design of the elements for each wall.
(2) Wave Force with a Ceiling Slab in the Wave Chamber
When the top of the wave chamber is closed off with provision of a ceiling slab, an impulsive pressure is
generated at the instant when the air layer in the upper part of the wave chamber is trapped in by the rise of water
surface. It is thus necessary to give consideration to this impulsive pressure in particular with regard to the wave
pressure used in design of structural elements. This impulsive pressure can be reduced by providing suitable air
holes. However, it should be noted that if these air holes are too large, the rising water surface will directly hit
the ceiling slab without air cushion, meaning that the wave force may actually increase 22), 23).
[Commentary]
The armor layer for the slope of a rubble mound breakwater protects the rubble stones in the inside, and so it is
necessary to ensure that an armor unit has a mass sufficient to be stable against wave actions so that it does not scatter
itself. The mass required to produce such stability can be calculated using a suitable calculation formula. For
example, for the armor units on the slope of a rubble mound breakwater, the required mass was calculated in the past
by Hudson’s formula with an appropriate coefficient (KD value), but recently it has become common to use Hudson’s
formula with a stability number. The latter is more general in that it can also be applied to other cases, such as the
armor units on the mound of a composite breakwater.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Hudson’s Formula
The required mass of armor units on a slope can be expressed using the Hudson formula with a stability number
(this is also referred to as the generalized Hudson formula) 24) (see equation (5.3.1)).
(2) Stability Number and Nominal Diameter
The stability number directly corresponds to the necessary size (nominal diameter) of the armor stones or
concrete blocks for a given wave height. In other words, by introducing the nominal diameter Dn = (M/rr)1/3 and
the term D = Sr  1 and substituting them into equation (5.3.1), the following relatively simple equation is
obtained:
H/(DDn) = NS (5.3.2)
It can be seen that the nominal diameter is proportional to the wave height with the constant of proportionality
being 1/DNS.
(3) Design Wave Height
The Hudson formula was proposed based on the results of experiments that used regular waves. When applying
it to the action of actual waves (which are irregular), there is thus a problem of which defcinition of wave heights
should be used. However, with structures that are made of rubble stones or concrete blocks, there is a tendency
for damage to occur not when one single wave having the maximum height H among an irregular wave train
attacks the armor layer, but rather for damage to progress gradually under the continuous action of waves of
various heights. Considering this fact and past experiences, it has been decided to make it standard to use the
significant wave height of incident waves at the place where the slope is located as the wave height H in
equation (5.3.1), because the significant wave height is representative of the overall scale of an irregular wave
train. Consequently, it is also standard to use the significant wave height when using the generalized Hudson
formula. Note however that for places where the water depth is less than one half the equivalent deepwater wave
height, the significant wave height at the water depth equal to one half the equivalent deepwater wave height
should be used.
112
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
113
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
(7) Stability Number for Armor Concrete Units of Rubble Mound Breakwater
Van der Meer has carried out model experiments on several kinds of precast concrete blocks, and proposed the
formulas for calculating the stability number NS 26). In addition, other people are also proceeding with research
into establishing calculation formulas for precast concrete blocks. For example, Burcharth and Liu 27) have
proposed a calculation formula. However, it should be noted that these are based on the results of experiments
for a rubble mound breakwater with a high crown.
(8) Stability Number for Concrete Units of the WaveDissipating Block Mound in Front of Upright Walls (horizontally
composite breakwater)
The wavedissipating concrete block mound of a horizontallycomposite breakwater may have various cross
sectional forms. In particular, when all the front face of an upright wall is covered by wavedissipating concrete
blocks, the stability is higher than for the normal case of armor concrete units covering a rubble mound
breakwater because the permeability is high. In Japan, much research has been carried out on the stability of
breakwaters covered with wavedissipating concrete blocks. For example, Tanimoto et al. 28), Kajima et al., and
Hanzawa et al. have carried out systematic research on the stability of waveabsorbing concrete blocks. In
addition, Takahashi et al. 29) have proposed the following equation for wavedissipating concrete blocks that are
randomly placed in the mound covering the whole of upright wall.
114
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
H0′/L0
wave height
h/H0¢
Fig. T 5.3.1 Ratio of H1/20 to H1/3 (H1/20 Values are at
a Distance 5H1/3 from the Breakwater)
layer
er able yer
Armor lay Imperme or la
Arm ter layer
Fil
Filter layer
115
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
116
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
5.3.2 Armor Units on Foundation Mound of Composite Breakwater (Notification Article 48, Clause 5)
It shall be standard to calculate the mass of armor stones or concrete blocks for the foundation mound of a
composite breakwater, by means of appropriate hydraulic model experiments or the following equation:
rr H3
M = 
3
 (5.3.1)
NS ( S r 1 ) 3
where
M： minimum mass of rubble stones or concrete blocks (t)
rr： density of rubble stones or concrete blocks (t/m3)
H： wave height used in the stability calculation (m)
NS ： stability number
Sr： specific gravity of rubble stones or concrete blocks relative to sea water
[Commentary]
The mass required for an armor unit covering the foundation mound of a composite breakwater varies according to
the wave characteristics, the water depth, the shape of the mound (thickness, berm width, slope angle, etc.), and the
type of armor unit, its placement method, and its position (breakwater head, breakwater trunk, etc.). In particular, the
effects of the wave characteristics and the mound shape are more pronounced than those in the case of the armor units
covering the surface of sloped breakwater in 5.3.1 Armor Units on Slope. It is thus necessary to appropriately
determine the mass, considering the results of past studies, research, and actual experience in the field, and carrying
out model experiments if necessary. Moreover, it is necessary to take sufficient heed of the effects of wave
irregularity.
117
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
Note however that the stability of the armor units covering the foundation mound of a composite breakwater is not
necessarily determined purely by their sizes. Depending on the structure and the layout of armor units, it may be
possible to achieve stability even when the armor units are relatively small.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Generalized Hudson’s Formula for Calculating the Required Mass
Similarly with the stable mass of armor units on a slope, the required mass of armor units covering the
foundation mound of a composite breakwater can be calculated using the generalized Hudson formula (the
Hudson formula with the stability number), i.e., equation (5.3.1). Ever since Brebner and Donnelly 32) used it as
the basic equation for calculating the required mass of the armor stones of the rubble mound for an upright wall,
the generalized Hudson formula has been used widely, and in Japan it is also known as the BrebnerDonnelly
formula. Because it has a certain degree of validity even from a theoretical standpoint, the generalized Hudson
formula may also be used as the basic formula for calculating the minimum mass of armor units for the
breakwater mound 33). Note however that the stability number NS varies not only with the water depth, the wave
characteristics, the shape of the mound, and the characteristics of the armor units, but also with their position of
the placement (breakwater trunk, breakwater head, etc.). It is thus necessary to assign the stability number NS
appropriately through model experiments corresponding to the design conditions. Moreover, the wave height
used in the design calculation is generally the significant wave height, and the waves used in the model
experiments should be irregular.
(2) Stability Number for Armor Stones
The stability number NS can be determined using the method of Inagaki and Katayama 34), which is based upon
the work of Brebner and Donnelly and past experience of damage. However, the following formulas by
Tanimoto et al. 33) are based on the flow velocity near the mound and allow the incorporation of a variety of
conditions, and they have been extended by Takahashi, Kimura, and Tanimoto 35) to include the effects of wave
direction. The extended Tanimoto formulas have thus been made the standard formulas.
(a) Extended Tanimoto formulas
ì 1 k h¢ ( 1 k ) 2 h¢ ü
N S = max í 1.8, 1.3 
/
  + 1.8 exp 1.5 
  ý : B M ¤ L¢ < 0.25 (5.3.8)
î k 1 3 H 1¤3 k 1 / 3 H1 ¤ 3 þ
k = k 1 ( k 2 )B (5.3.9)
4ph¢ ¤ L¢
k 1 =  (5.3.10)
sinh ( 4ph¢ ¤ L¢ )
( k 2 )B = max { a s sin 2 b cos 2 ( 2p l cos b ¤ L¢ ), cos 2 b sin 2 ( 2p l cos b ¤ L¢ ) }
s a (5.3.11)
where
h¢： water depth on top of rubble mound foundation (excluding the armor layer) (m) (see Fig. T 5.3.4)
l： in the case of normal wave incidence, the berm width BM (m)
In the case of oblique wave incidence, either BM or BM¢, whichever gives the larger value of (k2)B
(see Fig. T 5.3.4)
L： wavelength corresponding to the design significant wave period at the water depth h¢ (m)
as： correction factor for when the armor layer is horizontal (= 0.45)
b： incident wave angle (see Fig. T 5.3.5)
H1/3： design significant wave height (m)
The validity of the above formulas have been verified for the breakwater trunk for oblique wave incidence
with an angle of incidence of up to 60º.
Seaward Shoreward
h
C
Upright section
BM
d '
BM
h'
Foot protection blocks Foot protection blocks
h
118
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
nk
tru
Foundation Mound
r
ate
When the water above the armor units covering a mound is shallow,
w
eak
wave breaking often causes the armor stones to become unstable. It
Br
is thus appropriate to use the stability number for armor stones on a
mound only when h¢/H1/3 ≧ 1: when h¢/H1/3<1, it is better to use the
stability number for armor stones on a slope of mound breakwater.
The validity of the stability number for armor stones in the
Tanimoto formulas has not been verified experimentally for when
h’/H1/3 is small: when h’/H1/3 is about 1 or less, it is thus desirable
to examine the validity using hydraulic model experiments.
(5) Armor Layer Thickness Fig. T 5.3.5 Shape of the Breakwater
It is standard to use two layers of armor stones. However, it is Alignment and Effects of
acceptable to use only one layer, provided that consideration is Wave Direction
given to past experiences of breakwaters. In this case, one could
think of compensating the use of one layer only by setting the damage ratio in the aforementioned equation
(5.3.12) to a low value of DN = 1% for N =1000 acting waves. For concrete armor blocks, it is rather standard to
use one layer, although two layers may be laid if the shape of the blocks is favorable for two layer placement and
the design wave conditions are severe.
(6) Armor Units for Breakwater Head
At the head of a breakwater, strong currents occur locally near the corners at the edge of the upright section,
meaning that the armor units become liable to move. It is thus necessary to verify the extent to which the mass of
armor units should be increased at the breakwater head by carrying out hydraulic model experiments. If
hydraulic model experiments are not carried out, it is standard to increase the mass to at least 1.5 times that at the
breakwater trunk.
The mass of the armor stones at the breakwater head can also be calculated using the extended Tanimoto
formula. Specifically, for the breakwater head, the flow velocity parameter k in equation (5.3.9) should be
rewritten as follows:
k = k 1 (k 2)T (5.3.13)
(k2)T = 0.22 (5.3.14)
Note however that if the calculated mass turns out to be less than 1.5 times that for the breakwater trunk, it is
advisable to set it to 1.5 times that for the breakwater trunk.
5.4 Wave Forces Acting on Cylindrical Members and Large Isolated Structures
5.4.1 Wave Force on Cylindrical Members
The wave force acting on an cylindrical member can be calculated as the sum of a drag force that is
proportional to the square of the water particle velocity under waves and an inertia force that is
proportional to the water particle acceleration.
[Commentary]
Structural members such as piles that have a small diameter relative to the wavelength hardly disturb the propagation
of waves. The wave force acting on such members can be obtained using the Morison equation, in which the wave
force is expressed as the sum of a drag force that is proportional to the square of the velocity of the water particles and
an inertia force that is proportional to the acceleration. Note however that with the Morison equation, it is necessary
to assign accurate values to the water particle velocity and acceleration of the waves, as well as to the wave surface
elevation. It is also necessary to appropriately evaluate the drag coefficient and the inertia coefficient by means of
model experiments or field measurement results. It should further be noted that the impact of the wave front may
119
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
generate an impulsive wave force if the member is located near to the still water level or if breaking waves hit the
member, and that a lift force may act upon it, depending on the shape and position of the member.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Morison’s Equation
The wave force acting on a structural member is calculated based on the following equation:
1
fun =  C D r 0 u n u n DDS + C M r 0 aun ADS
2 (5.4.1)
where
uf： force that acts on a small length DS (m) in the axial direction of the member, where the direction of
n
this force lies in the plane containing the member axis and the direction of motion of the water
particles and is perpendicular to the member axis (kN)
u n： components of the water particle velocity (m/s) and acceleration (m/s2), respectively, in the direction
u n, a
perpendicular to the member axis that lies within the plane containing the member axis and the
direction of motion of the water particles (i.e., the same direction as ufn) (these components are for
incident waves that are not disturbed by the presence of member)
u n ： absolute value of u n (m/s)
CD： drag coefficient
CM： inertia coefficient
D： width of the member in the direction perpendicular to the member axis as viewed from the direction
of ufn (m)
A： crosssectional area of the member along a plane perpendicular to member axis (m2)
r0： density of seawater (normally 1.03 t/m3)
Equation (5.4.1) is a generalized form of the equation presented by Morison et al. 36), to give the wave force
acting on a section of a very small length DS of a member orientated in any given direction. The arrows on top of
symbols indicate that the force, velocity and acceleration are the components in the direction perpendicular to
the member. The first term on the righthand side represents the drag force, while the second term represents the
inertia force. The water particle velocity and acceleration components in the equation both vary in time and
space. It is necessary to take sufficient heed of these variations, and to investigate the distribution of the wave
force that is severest to the member or structure in question.
(2) Water Particle Velocity and Acceleration Components
The components of water particle velocity and acceleration u n and a u n in equation (5.4.1) represent those of the
water particle motion at the center of the member. These components are in the direction perpendicular to the
member axis, and are evaluated under the assumption that waves are not disturbed by the presence of the
structure in question. When calculating the wave force, it is necessary to estimate these components as accurate
as possible, based on either experimental dater or theoretical prediction. In particular, the water particle velocity
component contributes to the wave force with its second power, meaning that when the wave height is large, an
approximation using small amplitude wave theory becomes insufficient to yield reliable estimate. Moreover,
when the member extends above the mean water level, it is necessary to give sufficient consideration to the
range over which the wave force acts, i.e., the elevation of wave crest. When evaluating these terms using
theoretical values, it is desirable to use the finite amplitude wave theory that agrees with the characteristics of
the design waves, based on 4.1.3 Properties of Waves. Note also that it is necessary to take full account of wave
irregularity with regard to the wave height and period used in the wave force calculation, and to study the wave
characteristics that are severest to the safety of member or structure in question. In general, the highest wave
height and the significant wave period should be used in the analysis for rigid structures.
(3) Drag Coefficient
In general, the drag coefficient for steady flow can be used as the drag coefficient CD for wave force. Note
however that the drag coefficient varies with the shape of the member, the surface roughness, the Reynolds
number Re, and the separation distance between neighboring members. It also varies with the Keulegan
Carpenter number (KC number) because the flow is of oscillating nature. It is necessary to consider these
conditions when setting the value of drag coefficient. For a circular cylindrical member, it is standard to set CD =
1.0 if the finite amplitude properties of the waves are fully evaluated. For an unmanned structure, a lower value
may be used if its value is based on the results of model experiments matched to the conditions. Even in this
case, however, CD should not be set below 0.7. Note also that when estimating the water particle velocity by
means of an approximate equation, it is necessary to use a value for the drag coefficient that has been adjusted
for the estimation error in the water particle velocity
(4) Inertia Coefficient
The calculated value by the small amplitude wave theory may be used for the inertia coefficient CM. Note,
however, that the inertia coefficient varies with the shape of the member and other factors such as the Reynolds
number, the KC number, the surface roughness, and the separation distance between neighboring members. It is
thus necessary to set the value of the inertia coefficient appropriately in line with the given conditions. For a
120
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
circular cylindrical member, CM = 2.0 may be used as a standard value, provided the diameter of the member is
no more than 1/10 of the wavelength.
(5) Lift Force
In addition to the drag and inertia forces of equation (5.4.1), the lift force acts on an underwater member in the
direction perpendicular to the plane containing the member axis and the direction of the water particle motion. In
general, it is acceptable to ignore this lift force, but it is necessary to take heed of the fact that the lift force may
become a problem for horizontal members that are placed near to the seabed. Moreover, for long and thin
members, it is necessary to take heed of the fact that the lift force may induce vibrations.
(6) Standard Value for Drag Coefficient
When the water particle velocity can be calculated accurately, the value of drag coefficient for steady flow such
as those listed in Table T 7.2.1 in 7.2 Current Forces Acting on Submerged Members and Structures may
be used.
(7) Standard Value for Inertia Coefficient
When the diameter of the object in question is no more than 1/10 of the wavelength, it is standard to use the
value listed in Table T 5.4.1 for the inertia coefficient CM. However, when estimating the water particle
acceleration by means of an approximate equation, it is necessary to adjust the value of CM for the error in the
estimate of water particle acceleration. The value of inertia coefficient shown here is mostly from the study by
Stelson and Mavis 40). According to the experiments of Hamada and et al., the inertia coefficient for a cube under
waves is in the range of 1.4 to 2.3.
Circular cylinder
πD2 2.0 D
4
D
Squarebased
prism
D2 2.19 D
D
D
D
Cube D3 1.67
D D
πD 3 1.5
Sphere D
6
D/ =1 0.61
πD2
Flat plate
4 D/ =2 0.85
D D/ = 1.0
(8) Experimental Values for Drag Coefficient and Inertia Coefficient of Circular Cylinder
There are many experimental values for the drag coefficient and inertia coefficient of a vertical circular cylinder;
for example, those of Keulegan and Carpenter 41), Sarpkaya 42), 43), 44), Goda 45), Yamaguchi, Nakamura,
Chakrabarti 46), 47), and Koderayama and Tashiro. There are much variations between these values. However,
there is not sufficient data in the region of high Reynolds number, which is experienced in actual design. Oda
has produced a summary of these researches which may be referred to.
[Commentary]
The wave force acting on a large isolated structure whose dimensions are comparable to the wavelength can be
calculated using the velocity potential, because it is generally possible to ignore the drag force. In particular, for
structures of a simple shape, analytical solutions obtained by means of diffraction theory are available. However, it is
necessary to calculate the breaking wave force by means of hydraulic model experiments if there is a possibility of
breaking wave force exerted on structure.
121
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Technical Notes]
(1) Diffraction Theory
MacCamy and Fuchs 59) have determined the velocity potential of waves around an upright circular cylinder of
large diameter using diffraction theory, and calculated the wave force from the water pressure distribution at the
surface of cylinder. Goda and Yoshimura 60) have applied diffraction theory to an upright elliptic cylinder, and
presented their results in terms of the inertia coefficient CM. Yamaguchi has investigated the effect of the wave
nonlinearity on the wave force acting on an upright circular cylinder of large diameter by means of nonlinear
diffraction theory, and pointed out that it is necessary to consider these effects when the water is shallow.
(2) Isolated Structure of Arbitrary Shape
For a structure that is complex in shape, it is difficult to obtain the wave force analytically, and so it is necessary
to carry out a numerical calculation. Various methods are available, such as integral equation methods.
5.5 Wave Force Acting on Structure Located near the Still Water Level
5.5.1 Uplift Acting on Horizontal Plate near the Still Water Level
For a horizontal plate located near the still water level, an impact wave force may act on the bottom face of
the plate (this wave force is hereafter referred to as the uplift), depending on the wave conditions and the
structural form of the plate. When there exists such a risk, the impulsive uplift shall be evaluated by means
of an appropriate method including hydraulic model experiments etc.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Characteristics of Impulsive Uplift
If the bottom face of the plate is flat, the impulsive uplift acting on a horizontal plate near the still water level
varies with the impact (uprising) velocity of the wave surface and the angle between the wave surface and the
plate. As shown in Fig. T 5.5.1 (a), when there is an angle between the wave surface and the plate, the wave
surface runs along the bottom face of the plate and the wave pressure distribution becomes as shown there. The
distinct feature of the wave pressure in this case is its rapid rise in time. On the other hand, when the angle
between the wave front and the plate is close to 0° as shown in Fig. T 5.5.1 (b), a layer of air is trapped between
the wave surface and the plate, and compression of this layer of air results in the almost uniform wave pressure
distribution. The distinct feature of the wave pressure in this case is its oscillation in time with having a short
period and damping.
(a)
Wave impact
Pressure distribution
(b)
Pressure distribution
Wave impact
In case of a pier with a deck plate supported by horizontal beams, the wave surface is disturbed by the beams,
and the uplift becomes of complex nature. With beams, a layer of trapped air is often formed and this layer of air
is compressed by the uprising wave surface. It is thus necessary to give consideration to the change in the uplift
with respect to the shape of the bottom face of the horizontal plate.
The shape of the impacting wave surface varies greatly according to the condition whether the wave is
progressive or standing in nature. With standing waves, the shape of the impacting wave front varies with the
122
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
distance between the position of wave reflection and the horizontal plate. It is thus necessary to consider such
differences.
(2) Uplift Acting on Horizontal Plate with Flat Bottom Face (with standing waves)
Goda thought of the uplift acting on a horizontal plate as being the force arising from the sudden change in the
upward momentum of wave surface by its collision with the plate. Using von Karman’s theory, he obtained the
following formulas for calculating the uplift from standing waves acting on a horizontal plate.
r0 g 2ph H s¢
P = z HLB tanh  æ  ö (5.5.1)
4 L è s¢ Hø
H2 2ph
s¢ = s p  coth  (5.5.2)
L L
where
P： total uplift (kN)
z： correction factor
r0： density of seawater (1.03 t/m3)
g： gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s2)
H： wave height of progressive waves (m) (generally the highest wave height Hmax)
L： wavelength of progressive waves (m)
B： extension width of plate perpendicular to wave incidence (m)
h： water depth (m)
s： clearance of the plate above the still water level (m)
s¢： clearance of the plate above the level corresponding to the middle of the wave crest and trough (m)
One should take note of the fact that the uplift in the above equations does not depend on the length of the
horizontal plate.
The impact force has the magnitude given by the above equations and takes the form of a pulse that lasts for
a time t from the moment of the impact, that is given as follows:
pT l 2 s¢
t = 
2
  (5.5.3)
L H 2 s¢ 2
where T is the wave period and l is the length of the horizontal plate. Provided the length of the horizontal plate
is sufficiently small compared with the wavelength L and the bottom face of the horizontal plate is flat, equation
(5.5.1) well represents the features of the uplift well (despite the fact that the equation is simple). Comparing
calculated values with z = 1.0 to experimental values, agreement is relatively good provided H/s ¢ is no more
than 2.
Tanimoto et al. 61) have proposed another method for calculating the uplift acting on horizontal plate based
on Wagner’s theory. With this calculation method, the angle of contact b between the wave surface and the
horizontal plate as well as the impact velocity Vn are given by Stokes’ third order wave theory, making it
possible to obtain the spatial distribution of the impact pressure and its change over time. Note however that the
use of Stokes’ third order wave theory makes the calculation rather complex. This calculation method is
intended for use when the bottom face of the horizontal plate is flat. It cannot be applied directly to structures of
complicated shape such as an ordinary pier that have beams under the floor slab; the impact between the wave
surface and the floor slab is disturbed by the beams. In general, the presence of beams causes air to become
trapped in and the wave surface to be distorted, the result being that the impact force is less than for a horizontal
plate with a flat surface. Accordingly, the value obtained from this calculation method may be thought of as
being the upper limit of the uplift for an ordinary pier.
(3) Uplift Acting on Opentype Wharf (with standing waves)
Ito and Takeda 62) have conducted scale model tests of open piled marginal wharves (opentype wharves) to
obtain the uplift acting on an access bridge, and its minimum weight to prevent moving and falling. The
experimental conditions were the wave height up to 40 cm, a period of 1.0 s and 2.4 s, and a water depth of
56 cm and 60 cm. According to the measurement records of wave pressure gauges attached to the access bridge,
the peak value of the uplift varied considerably from wave to wave even under the same conditions.
Nevertheless, the mean of these peak values is given approximately by the following equation:
p = r 0 g ( 8 H 4.5s ) (5.5.4)
where
p： mean peak value of the intensity of uplift (kN/m2)
r0： density of seawater (1.03 t/m3)
g： gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s2)
H： incident wave height (m) (Hmax)
s： distance from the water level to the underside of access bridge (m)
Note however that the peak value of the intensity of the uplift given by equation (5.5.4) acts only for an
extremely short time, and that the phase of this uplift varies from place to place. This means that even if the
intensity of the uplift p exceeds the deadweight q (specifically the weight per unit area (kN/m2)) of the access
123
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
bridge, the bridge will not necessarily move or fall down. Based on this perspective, Ito and Takeda have
obtained the threshold weight at which the access bridge starts to move and that at which the deck slab falls
down. For waves of period 2.4 s, the relationship between the moving threshold weight per unit area q and the
wave height H was as follows:
q = r 0 g ( 1.6H 0.9s ) (5.5.5)
The moving threshold weight given by equation (5.5.5) is one fifth of the intensity of the uplift as given by
equation (5.5.4). The falling threshold weight was found to be 1/2 to 1/3 of the moving threshold weight.
In these access bridge experiments, Ito and Takeda also tested the access bridge with holes or slits of various
sizes, and investigated how the threshold weights changed when the void ratio was changed. In general, the
change in the moving threshold weight by the void ration is only slight. The falling threshold weight, on the
other hand, drops noticeably when the void ratio exceeds 20%. Note that the bridge weight referred to here is the
weight per unit area of the substantial part (i.e., the weight per unit area excluding the voids).
Furthermore, Ito and Takeda 62) have attached a strain gauge to the deck slab of the model of opentype wharf
and measured the stress. Based on their results, they proposed the following equation for the equivalent static
load (kN/m2) assumed to act with uniform distribution on the deck slab.
p = 4r 0 gH (5.5.6)
Note however that the value given by this equation corresponds to the upper limit of the experimental values and
should thus be thought of as corresponding to the case that the distance s from the water level to the underside of
the is almost 0. The equivalent static load given by equation (5.5.6) is generally lower than the uplift acting on a
horizontal plate with a flat bottom face. It is thought that this is partly because the beams disturb the impacting
wave front and cause air to become trapped in. It is also thought that because the uplift acts very locally and for
an extremely short time, the equivalent static load becomes much smaller than the peak value of the uplift.
Experimental research into the uplift acting on a pier has also been carried out by Murota and Furudoi, Nagai
and Kubo, Horikawa and Nakao, and Sawaragi and Nochino.
(4) Uplift Acting on Horizontal Plate with Flat Bottom Face (with progressive waves)
An impulsive uplift also acts when progressive waves act on a horizontal plate that is fixed near to the still water
level. Tanimoto et al. 63) have proposed a method for calculating this impulsive uplift, based on the same theory
by Wagner that was used for impulsive uplift by standing waves.
(5) Uplift Acting on Superstructure of Detached Pier (with progressive waves)
Ito and Takeda 62) have also carried out studies on the uplift from progressed waves acting on a detached pier.
Specifically, they measured the stress occurring in the deck slabs of a detached pier model. Based on the upper
limits of their experimental results, they proposed the following equation for the uniformly distributed
equivalent static load.
p = 2r 0 gH (5.5.7)
[References]
1) Yoshiyuki ITO, Mutsumi Fujishima, Takao KITATANI: “On the stability of breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 5, No. 14,
1966, 134p. (in Japanese).
2) Yoshimi GODA: “A new method of wave pressure calculation for the design of composite breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol.
12, No. 3, 1973, pp. 3169 (in Japanese), also “New wave pressure formulae for composite breakwater” Proc. 14th Conf.
Coastal Eng., ASCE, 1974, pp.17021720.
3) Sainflou, G.: “Essai sur les diques maritimes verticales”, Annales des Ponts et Chaussées, Vol. 98, No. 1, 1928, pp. 548.
4) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Katsutoshi KIMURA, Antonio Paulo dos Santos Pinto: “Random wave forces and design wave
periods of composite breakwaters under the action of double peaked spectral weves”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1986, pp.
325 (in Japanese).
5) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Katsutoshi KIMURA: “A hydraulic experimental study on trapezoidal caisson breakwaters”, Tech.
Note of PHRI, No. 528, 1985 (in Japanese).
6) Yoshimi GODA, Shusaku KAKIZAKI: “Study on finite amplitude standing waves and their pressures upon a vertical wall”,
Rept of PHRI, Vol. 5, No. 10, 1966, pp. 157 (in Japanese).
7) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Takao KITATANI: “Experimental study of impact breaking wave forces on a
verticalwall caisson of composite breakwater”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 20, No. 2, 1981, pp. 339 (in Japanese).
8) Mitsuyasu, H.: “Experimental study on wave force against a wall”, Report of Trans. Tech. Res. Inst, No. 47, 1962, pp. 139.
9) Michio MORIHIRA, Shusaku KAKIZAKI, Toru KIKUYA: “Experimental study on wave force damping effects due to
deformed artificial blocks”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1967, pp. 331 (in Japanese).
10) Yoshimi GODA, Suketo HARANAKA: “An experiment on the shock pressure of breaking waves”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No.
32, 1967, pp. 118 (in Japanese).
11) Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Satoshi SUZUMURA: “Generation mechanism of impulsive pressure by
breaking wave on a vertical wall”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 22, No. 4, 1983, pp. 331 (in Japanese).
12) Yoshimi GODA: “Motion of composite breakwater on elastic foundation under the action of impulsive breaking wave
pressure”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1973, pp. 329 (in Japanese).
13) Katsutosi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki MYOSE: “Experimental study of random wave forces on upright
sections of breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1984, pp. 47100 (in Japanese).
124
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
14) Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Kenichirou SHIMOSAKO: “Wave and block forces on a caisson covered
with wave dissipating blocks”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 29, No. 1, 1990, pp. 5475 (in Japanese).
15) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Roshi OJIMA: “Experimental study of wave forces acting on a superstructure of sloping
breakwaters and on block type composite breakwaters”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 450, 1983 (in Japanese).
16) Yoshiyuki ITO, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO: “Meandering damages of composite type breakwaters”, Tech. Note of PHRI,
No.112, 1971 (in Japanese).
17) Yoshimi GODA, Tomotsuka YOSHIMURA, Masahiko ITO: “Reflection and diffraction of water waves by an insular
breakwater”, Tech. Note of PHRI, 10, No. 2, 1971, pp. 352 (in Japanese).
18) Yoshiyuki ITO, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Koji KOBUNE, Takao KITATANI, Masahiko TODOROKI: “An experimental
investigation of upright breakwaters at reefs”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 189, 1974 (in Japanese).
19) Coastal Engineering Research Center: “Shore Protection Manual” Vol. II, US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984.
20) Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Kenichirou SHIMOSAKO, Hitoshi SASAKI: “Experimental study on wave forces acting on
perforated wall caisson breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 30, No. 4, 1991, pp. 334 (in Japanese).
21) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Suketo HARANAKA, Eiji TOMIDA, Yoshikazu IZUMIDA, Satoshi SUZUMURA: “A hydraulic
experimental study on curved slit caisson breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1980, pp. 353 (in Japanese).
22) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Tsutomu MURANAGA “Uplift forces on a ceiling slab of wave dissipating
caisson with a permeable front wall  analytical model for compression of an enclosed air layer ”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 19,
No. 1, 1980, pp. 331 (in Japanese).
23) Sigeo TAKAHASHI, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO: “Uplift forces on a ceiling slab of wave dissipating caisson with a permeable
front wall (2nd Report)  field data analysis ”, Rept of PHRI, Vol.23, No.2, 1984, pp. 325 (in Japanese).
24) Hudson, R. Y.: “Laboratory investigation of rubblemound breakwater”, Proc. ASCE. Vol. 85, No. WW3., 1959, pp. 93121.
25) Van der Meer, J. W.: “Rock slopes and gravel beaches under wave attack”, Doctoral thesis, Delft Univ. of Tech., 1988, 152p.
or Van der Meer, J. W.: “Stability of breakwater armour layer  Design equations”, Coastal Engineering, 11, 1987, pp. 219
239.
26) Van der Meer, J. W.: “Stability of cubes, Tetrapods and Accropode”, Proc. of Breakwater '88, Eastbourne, UK., 1988, pp. 71
80.
27) Burcharth, H. F. and Z. Liu: “Design of Dolos armour units”, Proc. 23rd Int. Conf. Coastal Eng., Venice, 1992, pp. 1053
1066.
28) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Suketo HARANAKA, Kazuo YAMAZAKI: “Experimental study on the stability of wave
dissipating concrete blocks against irregular waves”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1985, pp. 86121 (in Japanese).
29) Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Minoru HANZAWA, Hirokazu SATO, Michio GOMYO, Kenichiro SHIMOSAKO, Kiyoshi
TERAUCHI, Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO: “Lifetime damage estimation with a new stability equation
for concrete blocks  study on wavedissipating concrete blocks covering horizontally composite breakwaters, the first rept.
”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 38, No. 1, 1998, pp. 328 (in Japanese).
30) Van de Kreeke, J.: “Damage function of rubble mound breakwaters”, Jour. Waterway and Harbors Div., Vol. 95, No.WW3,
ASCE., 1969, pp. 345354.
31) Christensen, F. T., P. C. Broberg, S. E. Sand, and P. Tryde: “Behavior of rubblemound breakwater in directional and uni
directional waves”, Coastal Eng., Vol. 8, 1984, pp. 265278.
32) Brebner, A. and D. Donnelly: “Laboratory study of rubble foundations for vertical breakwaters”, Proc. 8th Conf. Coastal
Eng., New Mexico City, 1962, pp. 408429.
33) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Tadahiko YAGYU, Tsutomu MURANAGA, Kozo SHIBATA, Yoshimi GODA: “Stability of armor
units for foundation mounds of composite breakwater by irregular wave tests”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1982, pp. 342
(in Japanese).
34) Hirofumi INAGAKI, Takeo KATAYAMA: “Analysis of damage to armor stones of mounds in composite breakwaters”, Tech.
Note of PHRI, No. 127, 1971, pp. 122 (in Japanese).
35) Sigeo TAKAHASHI, Katsutoshi KIMURA, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO: “yStability of armour units of composite breakwater
mound against oblique waves”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 29, No. 2, 1990, pp. 336 (in Japanese).
36) Morison, J. R., M. P. O'Brien, J. W. Johonson, and S. A. Schaaf: “The force exerted by surface waves on piles”, Petroleum
Trans., 189, TP2846, 1950, pp. 149154.
37) Yoshimi GODA, Suketo HARANAKA, Masaki KITAHARA: “Study of impulsive breaking wave forces on piles”, Rept of
PHRI, Vol. 5, No. 6, 1966, pp. 130 (in Japanese).
38) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Tadao KANEKO, Keisuke SHIOTA, Koichiro OGURA: “Experimental
study on impulsive forces by breaking waves on circular cylinder”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1986, pp. 3387 (in
Japanese).
39) Yoshiyuki ITO, Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Koji KOBUNE: “Dynamic response of an offshore platform to random waves”,
Rept of PHRI, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1972, pp. 5986 (in Japanese).
40) Stelson, T. E. and F. T. Mavis: “Virtual mass and acceleration in fluids”, Proc. ASCE., Vol. 81, Separate No. 670, 1955, pp.
6701 ～ 6709.
41) Keulegan, G. H. and L. H. Carpenter: “Forces on cylinders and plates in an oscillating fluid”, Jour. National Bureau of
Standards, Vol. 60 No. 5, 1958, pp. 423440.
42) Sarpkaya, T.: “Forces on cylinders and spheres in a sinusoidally oscillating fluid”, Jour. Applied Mechanics, Trans. ASME,
Vol. 42, No. 1, 1975, pp. 3237.
43) Sarpkaya, T.: “Inline and transverse forces on cylinders in oscillatory flow at high Reynolds number”, Prepr. 8th Offshore
Tech. Conf., Vol. II, 1976, pp. 95108.
44) Sarpkaya, T., N. J. Collins, and S. R. Evans: “Wave forces on roughwalled cylinders at high Reynolds numbers”, Prepr. 9th
Offshore Tech. Conf., Vol. III, No.2901, 1977, pp. 167184.
45) Goda, Y.: “Wave forces on a vertical circular cylinder: Experiments and proposed method of wave force computation”, Report
of P. H. T. R. I., No. 8, 1964, 74p.
125
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
46) Chakrabarti, S. K., A. L. Wollbert, and A. T. William: “Wave forces on vertical circular cylinder”, Jour. Waterways, Harbors
and Coastal Eng. Div., Vol. 102, No. WW2, ASCE, 1976, pp. 203221.
47) Chakrabarti, S. K.: “Inline forces on fixed vertical cylinder in waves”, Jour. Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Div., Vol.
106, WW2, ASCE, 1980, pp. 145155.
48) Kim, Y. Y. and H. C. Hibbard: “Analysis of simultaneous wave force and water particle velocity measurements”, Prepr. 7th
OTC, Vol. 1, No. 2192, 1975, pp. 461469.
49) Borgman, L. E.: “Spectral analysis of ocean wave forces on pilling”, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 93 No. WW2, 1967, pp. 129156.
50) Borgman, L. E.: “Ocean wave simulation for engineering design”, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 95 No. WW4, 1969, pp. 557583.
51) Hudspeth, R. T.: “Wave force prediction from nonlinear random sea simulation”, Prepr. 7th OTC, No.2193, 1975, pp. 471
486.
52) Sharma, J. and R. G. Dean: “Secondorder directional seas and associated wave forces”, Prepr. 11th OTC, No.3645, 1979, pp.
25052514.
53) Tickell, R. G. and M. H. S. Elwany: “A probabilistic description of forces on a member in a shortcrested random sea”,
‘Mechanics of WaveInduced Forces on Cylinders’, Pitman Pub. Ltd., London, 1979, pp. 561576.
54) Yoshimi GODA, Tatsuhiko IKEDA, Tadashi SASADA, Yasuharu KISHIRA: “Study on design wave forces on circular
cylinders erected upon reefs”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1972, pp. 4581 (in Japanese).
55) Sarpkaya, T. and M. Isaacson: “Mechanics of Wave Forces on Offshore Structure”, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1981, 651p.
56) Yamamoto, T., and J. H. Nath: “Forccs on many cylinders near a plane boundary”, ASCE, National Water Resources and
Ocean Engineering Convention, Preprint No. 2633, 1976.
57) Sarpkaya, T.: “Inline and transverse forces on cylinders near a wall in oscillatory flow at high Reynolds numbers”, Prepr. 9th
OTC Paper No. 2898, 1977, pp. 161166.
58) Sarpkaya, T. and F. Rajabi.: “Hydrodynamic drag on bottommounted smooth and rough cylinders in periodic flow”,
Prepr.12th OTC Paper No. 3761, 1980, pp. 219226.
59) MacCamy, R. C. and R. A. Fuchs: “Wave forces on piles, a diffraction theory”, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Beach
Erosion Board, Tech. Memo. No. 69, 1954, 17p.
60) Yoshimi GODA, Tomotsuka YOSHIMURA: “Wave force computation for structures of large diameter, isolated in the
offshore”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1971, pp. 352 (in Japanese).
61) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Yoshikazu IZUMIDA: “A calculation method of uplift force on a horizontal
platform”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1978, pp. 347 (in Japanese).
62) Yoshiyuki ITO, Hideaki TAKEDA: “Uplift on pier deck due to wave motion”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1967, pp. 3768
(in Japanese).
63) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Shigeo TAKAHASHI, Masahiko TODOROKI, Yoshikazu IZUMIDA: “Horizontal wave forces on a
rigid platform”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 16, No. 3, 1977, pp. 3968 (in Japanese).
126
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Commentary]
(1) Design water level
As a general rule, the water level that is most dangerous to the safety of the structure in question is used as the
design water level.
(2) Simultaneous occurrence of storm surge, tsunamis, and seiche
Storm surge and tsunamis both occur only very rarely, and so it may be assumed that they will not occur at the
same time. Seiche in the narrower sence occurs independently of storm surge or tsunami, and is treated
separately.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Rising of Mean Sea Level
Apart from astronomical tides and storm surge, which are essential for the design water level, studies on the
longterm sea level rise are being carried out both in Japan and abroad. According to the Secondary Evaluation
Report of the IPCC 1), it is estimated that the mean sea level will rise 15 cm to 95 cm between 1990 and 2100.
Figure T 6.1.2 shows the IPCC panel’s forecast for the mean sea level rise. Although it is known that the mean
sea level will rise in the future, it is hard to evaluate this rise quantitatively. The IPCC panel has thus produced
three estimates.
Since the quantitative extent of the mean sea level rise is uncertain, in general it is hard to take account of it
at the design stage. It is thus unavoidable that countermeasures in response to a rise in the mean sea level will
have to be carried out through maintenance work such as raising of the crests of structures. However, when
designing important structures for which it is anticipated that subsequent repairs would be extremely difficult
(for example, when designing the clearance of a bridge that will have to remain in service for a very long time or
when designing the drainage outlets of reclaimed land), appropriate consideration should be given to the amount
of mean sea level rise in the future.
IS 92 e/High/4.5
Mean sea level rise over the whole world (cm)
IS 92 a/Medium/2.5
IS 92 c/Low/1.5
Year
Note 1: The values 1.5, 2.5, and 4.5 shown in the three graphs represent the climate sensitivities
for the three scenarios, respectively.
Note 2: The low, medium, and high represent the value of ice melting parameter for the three
scenarios. The ice melting parameter represents the extent to which the ice at the poles,
in Greenland, and in highland glaciers melts in response to a rise in air temperatures.
Fig. T 6.1.2 IPCC Panel’s Forecasts for Mean Sea Level Rise 1) (BaU Scenarios)
127
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) Definitions
The definitions for the various types of water level are as follows:
(a) Mean sea level (MSL)
The average height of the sea level over a certain period is referred to as the mean water level for that period.
For practical purposes, the mean water level is taken to be the average of the water level over one year.
(b) Chat datum level (CDL)
See PartⅠ
Ⅰ, Chapter 2 Datum Level for Construction Work.
(c) Mean monthlyhighest water level (HWL)
The average of the monthlyhighest water level, where the monthlyhighest water level for a particular month
is defined as the highest water level occurring in the period from 2 days before the day of the lunar syzygy
(new moon and full moon) to 4 days after the day of the lunar syzygy.
(d) Mean monthlylowest water level (LWL)
The average of the monthlylowest water level, where the monthlylowest water level for a particular month is
defined as the lowest water level occurring in the period from 2 days before the day of the lunar syzygy to 4
days after the day of the lunar syzygy.
(e) Mean high water level (MHWL)
The mean value of all of the high water levels, including the spring tide and the neap tide.
(f) Mean low water level (MLWL)
The mean value of all of the low water levels, including the spring tide and the neap tide.
(g) Near highest high water level (NHHWL)
The water level obtained by adding the sum of the amplitudes of the four principal tidal components (M2, S2,
K1 and O1) to the mean sea level.
[Technical Notes]
(1) In addition to the above definitions of water level, there are also the high water of ordinary spring tides
(HWOST) and the low water of ordinary spring tides (LWOST). These refer respectively to the water levels at
the height h above and below the mean water level, where h is the sum of the amplitudes of the tidal components
M2 and S2. The height of the HWOST as measured from the chart datum is known as the spring rise.
Figure T 6.2.1 shows an example of the relationship between these water levels, for the Tokyo Tide
Observation Station, along with the chart datum level (CDL), the mean sea level for Tokyo Bay (Tokyo Peil 
TP), and other commonly used water levels.
[Commentary]
(1) Definition of Storm Surge
Fluctuations in the sea level occur as the result of a combination of astronomical tide, meteorological tide, and
seiche, along with the effects of factors such as ocean currents, the seawater temperature, seasonal fluctuations
in the atmospheric pressure, the water levels of rivers, and coastal waves. Out of these factors, the sea level
fluctuation due to meteorological factors, such as air pressure fluctuations caused by passing of high or low
pressure area and winds, are referred to as meteorological tides or deviations. The term “storm surge” refers to a
type of meteorological tides, specifically an abnormal rise of the sea level that occurs when a typhoon passes by.
The causes of storm surge are the depression of atmospheric pressure and the resultant rise of sea surface, the
propagation of elevated sea surface as long waves, the resonance of water in embayments, and the wind setup.
The deviation of sea level from the astronomical tide during a storm surge is called the storm tide.
128
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Bench mark
Highest water level ever recorded (Oct 1, 1917)
(observed before the statistical period to
obtain standard water levels)
Highest water level ever (Oct 19, 1979)
(during the statistical period to obtain standard water level)
[Technical Notes]
(1) Meteorological Tide
(a) General
Meteorological tide parameters to which consideration should be given include the storm tide and its duration.
(b) Wind setup
When a strong wind continues to blow for a prolonged time in a shallow bay, seawater is dragged by the wind.
If the wind is onshore, seawater accumulates in the littoral zone, resulting in a rise in the sea level. If the angle
between the wind direction and the line perpendicular to the shoreline is a, the sea level rise h 0 (cm) at the
shoreline is given by the following equation:
F
h 0 = k  ( U cos a ) 2 (6.3.1)
h
where
F： fetch length (km)
U： constant wind velocity (m/s)
h： mean water depth (m)
The term k is a coefficient that varies depending on the bay characteristics. Colding has obtained a value of k
＝ 4.8 × 102 from the observation data in the Baltic Sea.
(c) Static water level rise caused by depression in the atmospheric
If the atmospheric pressure drops slowly by DP (hPa), the water level in the sea area where the atmospheric
pressure has dropped rises relative to the surrounding areas where the atmospheric pressure has not dropped,
because of the pressure difference. The rise in water level z (cm) is given by the following equation:
z = 0.99DP (6.3.2)
129
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
where
DP： pressure difference (hPa)
z： rise in water level (cm)
(d) Estimation formula for storm tide
For places where numerical computation of storm surge have not been carried out, equation (6.3.3) may be
used to estimate the maximum amount of storm tide. This equation incorporates the factors of suction caused
by a depression in the atmospheric pressure and wind setup.
h 0 = a ( 1010 P ) + bU 2 cos q + c (6.3.3)
where
h 0： maximum amount of storm tide (cm)
P： lowest atmosperic pressure (hPa)
U： maximum wind velocity (m/s)
q： angle between the predominant wind direction that causes the highest storm tide and the wind
direction at the time of maximum wind speed U (º)
The coefficients a, b, and c are determined by the relationship between the storm tide, the atmospheric
pressure, and the wind data that have been observed at the place in question.
(2) Numerical Computation of Storm Surge
In order to analyze the phenomenon of storm surge in detail, numerical computations are carried out. With this
method, the rise of sea surface caused by a depression in the atmospheric pressure (see (1)(c) above), along with
the tangential stress at the sea surface due to the wind and the tangential stress at the sea bottom due to viscosity,
are given as external forces. The change in the water level and the flow velocity at each point is then
progressively calculated for a series of time steps, by solving the equations of motions and continuity. The
topography of the bay is approximated using a grid system (with adjacent mesh points separated by say a few
kilometers), with the average water depth at each mesh being inputted in advance. The atmospheric pressure and
wind velocity within a typhoon is often calculated using Myers’ formula or a similar theoretical model.
(3) Design Water Level for the Facilities for Protection against Storm Surge
The following four methods exist for determing the design water level for storm surge protection facilities.
(a) Use the highest water level observed in the past, or else this plus a little extra allowance.
(b) Use the elevation above the meanmonthly highest water level by the amount of either the highest storm tide
observed in the past or the storm tide predicted for a model typhoon.
(c) Obtain the occurrence probability curve for past storm surge levels, and then use the water level that is
expected to be exceeded only once within a certain return period (say 50 years or 100 years) (this water level
is obtained by extrapolating the probability curve).
(d) Determine the design water level based on economic factors, considering the occurrence probability of various
storm surge levels, and the damage to the hinterland for each water level, along with the cost of constructing
storm surge protection facilities.
(4) Rise in Mean Water Level Due to Waves (Wave Setup)
The rise in mean water level due to waves can be estimated using Fig. T 4.7.1 and Fig. 4.7.2 in 4.7.1 Wave
Setup. Near to the shoreline, this rise is 10% or more of the deepwater significant wave height, and thus it
cannot be ignored when waves are high.
6.4 Tsunami
The following tsunami parameters shall be considered: the highest water level, the lowest water level, the
water level deviation (rise of water level by tsunami above the astronomical tide), the tsunami wave height,
and the tsunami period. These parameters shall be determined using an appropriate method, by referring to
the measured data (taken over as long a period as possible) and the heights of tsunami runup traces during
past disasters.
[Commentary]
(1) Tsunamis are waves with an extremely long period that mainly occur when the sea floor is raised and/or dropped
by an earthquake in the sea. As a tsunami approaches the coast, the wave height rises rapidly owing to the
shoaling and the concentration effect of the sea bottom topography, meaning that tsunami often causes
tremendous damage to coastal areas. It is important to investigate not only the possibility of flooding damage as
a result of overflowing a tsunami barrier, but also the possibilities of losing small vessels that have been moored
in a harbor but are carried away by strong currents of tsunami, scouring of seabed at the openings of
breakwaters, and sliding or overturning of breakwaters.
130
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
(2) The wave height of a tsunami in the outer sea is generally extremely small, but it can nevertheless be detected by
means of continuous observations recorded by a wave gauge out at sea. When a tsunami enters a bay, the wave
height increases greatly. Since the increase in wave height depends on the topography and natural periods of the
bay, the tsunami parameters used in design are determined from the past tsunami records for the place in
question or the values obtained from numerical computations for the place in question.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Definitions of TsunamiRelated Terms
The definitions of various terms related to tsunamis are shown in Fig. T 6.4.1.
(a) Estimated tide level
This is the tide level obtained by smoothing the tide level on a tide observation record by removing the
components that are thought to be of the tsunami and any oscillation component of shorter period by seiche.
The estimated tide level is expressed as the elevation above the CDL (chart datum level). This estimated tide
level may thus differ somewhat to the hindcasted tide level obtained from the tidal harmonic constants.
(b) Runup height and tsunami trace height
The elevation of the highest point to which a tsunami has runup the land or a structure is called the runup
height above the CDL (chart datum level). Note that the runup height of a tsunami is often determined based
on an investigation of tsunami traces left at the site in question. The elevation of a trace of a tsunami that has
run up over the land or a structure above the CDL is called the tsunami trace height.
(c) Deviation
The difference between the actual tide level and the estimated tide level described in (a). The maximum value
of the deviation when the actual tide level is higher than the estimated tide level is sometimes referred to as the
maximum deviation or the tsunami height.
(d) Highest water level
The maximum value of the actual tide level above the CDL (chart datum level).
(e) Tsunami wave height
As with wind waves, the tsunami wave height may be analyzed using the zeroupcrossing method. In this case,
the section between a point where the tsunami wave profile crosses over the estimated tide level from the
negative side to the positive side and the next such point is taken as one wave, and the difference between the
maximum and minimum water levels within that section is taken as the tsunami wave height for that wave.
The maximum tsunami wave height in a continuous tsunami wave record is defined as the highest tsunami
wave height.
Time
Fig. T 6.4.1 Definitions of Tsunamirelated Terms
131
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
132
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
6.5 Seiche
For harbors where the seiche motion is anticipated, the presence of seiche shall be considered as necessary
when fixing the design water level or investigating the tranquility in mooring basins.
[Commentary]
Seiche is a phenomenon involving abnormal oscillations of the water level with a period of approximately a few
minutes to a few tens of minutes. It occurs when small fluctuations of the water level are generated by a microscale
variations of the atmospheric pressure by an air front or a low in the outer sea, and the components of these
oscillations whose period is the same as a natural period of the harbor are amplified through resonance. Depending on
the topography, the amplitude of these fluctuations may be anything from a few tens of centimeters up to around 2m.
When seiche occurs in a harbor, even if the wave height is only a few tens of centimeters, the long wavelength results
in a great deal of water movement in the horizontal direction, which can cause severe problems to moored vessels and
cargo handling work. Seiche is particularly liable to occur in an artificially excavated harbor, which is long and
narrow in shape and surrounded by quaywalls. It is thus desirable to investigate the effects of seiche when drawing up
a harbor plan. This can be done using say a numerical calculation 9), whereby incident waves with the period from a
few minutes up to around one hour are inputted, and then the amplification factor for these waves in the harbor is
calculated. Small long waves in the outer sea may have an amplitude of the order of a few centimeters. It is desirable
to avoid such the shape of a harbor that the amplitude of long waves may be amplified by ten times or more within the
harbor.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Natural Periods
The natural periods of a bay that has a long, narrow rectangular shape as shown in Fig. T 6.5.1 (a) are given
approximately as in the following equation:
4l
T =  (6.5.1)
( 2m + 1 ) gh
l
where l
T： natural period (s)
l： length of bay (m)
m： number of nodes in the bay (0, 1, 2,…) b
h： mean water depth in the bay (m)
(a) (b)
g： gravitational acceleration (m/s2) (= 9.81m/s2) Fig. T 6.5.1 Bay Shape Models
In an actual bay, not only does the seawater within the bay oscillate in a periodic fashion, but the water of the
open sea around the bay entrance also oscillates somewhat. It is thus necessary to make a correction to the
natural period with equation (6.5.2) of the following:
4l
T = a  (6.5.2)
gh
where
h： mean water depth in the bay (m)
a： bay entrance correction factor, as obtained from the following equation 10).
1¤2
ì 2b pb ü
a = í 1 +  æ 0.9228 ln ö ý (6.5.3)
p lè 4lø þ
î
133
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
where
l： length of bay (m)
b： width of bay (m)
Table T 6.5.1 lists the values of the bay entrance correction factor a calculated for different values of b/l.
Table T 6.5.1 Bay Entrance Correction Factor
The natural periods of a rectangular harbor that has a narrow entrance as shown in Fig. T 6.5.1 (b) may be
calculated approximately with the following equation:
2
T =  (6.5.4)
2 2
ì mö n ü
m
gh í æ   + æ ö ý
è lø è bø
î þ
where
b： width of harbor (m)
m： number of nodes in the harbor in the length direction (0, 1, 2, …)
n： number of nodes in the harbor in the width direction (0, 1, 2, …)
Note however that because of the effect of the harbor entrance, the natural periods of an actual harbor are
slightly lower than those calculated using this equation.
(2) Amplitude
The magnitude of amplification factor for the resonant oscillations in a harbor by seiche is limited by the energy
carried out by the disturbance waves that are radiated from the harbor entrance, and the energy lost through the
vortices at the harbor entrance and the bottom friction within the harbor. Accordingly, even if the period of long
period waves arriving at the harbor coincide with one of the natural periods of the harbor, it is not the case that
the amplitude of the oscillations in the harbor will rise to infinity. Note however that when there is very little
energy loss by vortices and friction, it is necessary to take heed of the harbor paradox, which refers to a
phenomenon whereby the narrowing of a harbor entrance results in the greater amplification within the harbor.
The amplitude amplification factor R for the concave corners at the head of a rectangularshaped harbor
when the entrance loss is ignored may be obtained as a function of the ratio of the harbor length to the
wavelength using either Fig. T 6.5.2 or Fig. T 6.5.3. According to Fig. T 6.5.2, in a harbor with a long,
narrow rectangular shape, resonance occurs when the period is slightly longer than that corresponding to a
wavelength that satisfies the conventionallycited resonance condition, namely the harbor length being odd
quarters of the wavelength (1/4, 3/4, 5/4, etc.). According to Fig. T 6.5.3, the resonance points for a harbor with
a wide rectangular shape are moreorless the same as those for a completely closed rectangular lake; in other
words, they are given approximately by the following equation:
l n2
 = m 2 + 2 : m, n = 0, 1, 2 ,… (6.5.5)
L
æ 2b
ö
è lø
Amplitude amplification factor R
Fig. T 6.5.2 Resonance Spectrum for a Harbor with Fig. T 6.5.3 Resonance Spectrum for a Harbor with
Long, Narrow Rectangular Shape 11) Wide Rectangular Shape 11)
134
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[Technical Notes]
(1) Groundwater Level in Coastal Aquifer
The elevation of brackish groundwater intruding in a
coastal aquifer may be estimated using the following
equation (see Fig. T 6.6.1) 12):
2 2 2 2 x
h = h 0 + ( h l h 0 )  (6.6.1)
L Fresh water level
where
r1 r1 Fresh water
h 0 =  z 0 , h l =  z l Sea
r2 r1 r2 r1
h： depth below the sea surface of the interface Salt water Salt w
between fresh water and saltwater at the distance ater le
vel
x (m)
h0： depth below the sea surface of the interface
between fresh water and saltwater at x = 0 (m) Fig. T 6.6.1 Schematic Drawing of Groundwater
hl： depth below the sea surface of the interface at Coast
between fresh water and saltwater at x = L (m)
r 1： density of the fresh water (g/cm3)
r 2： density of saltwater (g/cm3)
z 0： elevation of fresh water above the sea surface at the coast (x ＝ 0) (m)
z l： elevation of fresh water above the sea surface at x ＝ L (m)
L： distance from the coast (x ＝ 0) to the reference point (m)
x： landward distance from the coastline (m)
Equation (6.6.1) cannot be applied if an impermeable layer exists close to the ground surface or in the aquifer:
For the relationship between the rise of groundwater level due to wave runup and beach profile change, see in
10.1 General [Technical Notes] (8).
(2) Permeation into Foundation and Structures
(a) Permeation through a sheet pile wall
The flow rate of permeation through a sheet pile wall is not determined purely by the permeability of the wall;
rather, the permeability of the soil behind the wall has a dominating influence. Shoji et al. 13) examined this
problem, and carried out comprehensive permeation experiments in which they not only varied the tension of
the joints, but also added the cases with and without sand filling in the joint section. They concluded to
propose the following experimental formula:
n
q = Kh (6.6.4)
where
q： flow rate of permeation through a sheet pile joint per unit length in the vertical direction (cm3/s/cm)
K： permeation coefficient for the joints (cm2n/s)
h： pressure head difference between the front and back of a joint (cm)
n： coefficient depending on the state of the joints
(n ≒ 0.5 when the joints are not filled with sand, and n ≒ 1.0 when the joints are filled with sand)
When there was sand on both sides of the sheet pile and the joints were under tension, Shoji et al. obtained a
value of 7.0 × 104 cm/s for K in their experiments. However, they also pointed out that if the permeation flow
135
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
is estimated with this value, then the flow rate turns out to be as much as 30 times that observed in the field.
For actual design, it is thus necessary to pay close attention to any difference between the state of the sheet pile
wall used in the experiments and those used in the field.
(b) Permeation through rubble mound
The flow rate of permeation through a rubble mound foundation of a gravity type structure may be estimated
using the following equation:
q = UH
678
2 g d DH
U =  ×  (6.6.5)
z DS
where
q： flow rate of permeation per unit width (m3/s/m)
U： mean permeation velocity for the whole cross section of rubble mound (m/s)
H： height of the permeable layer (m)
d： rubble stone size (m)
g： gravitational acceleration (= 9.81 m/s2)
DH/DS： hydraulic gradient
z： resistance coefficient
Equation (6.5.5) has been proposed based on the experimental results using eight different types of stones of
uniform size, with the diameter ranging from 5 mm to 100 mm. The virtual flow length DS may be taken to be
as the total of the 70% to 80% of the permeable layer height and the width of the caisson base. The coefficient
of resistance is shown in Fig. T 6.6.3. When R e ( = Ud / n ) > 10 4 , it is acceptable to take z ≒ 20.
Ud
R e = 
n
Fig. T 6.6.3 Relationship between Resistance Coefficient and Reynolds Number
[References]
1) IPCC: “Climate Change 1995”, IPCC Second Assessment Report, The Science of Climate Change, 1995, 572p.
2) Toshihiko NAGAI, Kazuteru SUGAHARA, Hiroshi WATANABE, Koji KAWAGUCHI: “Long team observation of the mean
tide level and lond waves at the KurihamaBay”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 35, No. 4, 1996. (in Japanese).
3) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Kazuo MURAKAMI, Shigeru MURATA, Hiroiti TSURUYA, Shigeo
TAKAHASHI, Masayuki MORIKAWA, Yasutoshi YOSHIMOTO, Susumu NAKANO, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “Field and
laboratory investigations of the tsunami caused by 1983 Nihonkai Chubu Earthquake”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 470, 1983,
299p. (in Japanese).
4) Chiaki GOTO, Kazuo SATO: “Development of tsunami numerical simulation system for Sanriku Coast in Japan”, Rept of
PHRI, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1995. (in Japanese).
5) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “Hydraulic model tests on tsunamis at Suzaki Port”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No.
549, 1986, 131p. (in Japanese).
6) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Norihiro NAGAI, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “The numerical calculation of tsunami in Tokyo Bay”,
Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 454, 1986, 131p.(in Japanese).
7) Toshihoko NAGAI, Noriaki HASHIMOTO, Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Katsuyoshi SHIMIZU: “Characteristics of the Hokkaido
EastoffEarthquake Tsunami”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 802, 1995, 97p. (in Japanese).
8) Koji KOBUNE, Toshihiko NAGAI, Noriaki HASHIMOTO, Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Katsuyoshi SHIMIZU “Characteristics of
the Irianjaya Earthquake Tsunami in 1996”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 842, 1996, 96p. (in Japanese).
136
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
9) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Tetsuya HIRAISHI: “Amplification mechanism of harbor oscillation derived from field
observation and numerical simulation”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 636, 1988, 70p. (in Japanese).
10) Honda, K., T. Terada, and D. Ishitani: “Secondary undulation of oceanic tides”, Philosophical Magazine, Vol.15,1908, pp.88
126.
11) Ippen, A.T. and Y. Goda: “Waveinduced oscillations in harbors: the solution for a rectangular harbor connected to the open
sea,” M.I.T. Hydrodynamics Lab. Report No.59, 1963, 90p.
12) Todd, D. K.: “Groundwater Hydrology”, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1963.
13) Yoshihiro SHOJI, Masaharu KUMEDA, Yukiharu TOMITA: “Experiments on seepage through interlocking joints of sheet
pile”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1982, pp. 4182 (in Japanese).
137
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
For structures that are located in a place where there is strong currents such as a tidal currents or river flow, it is
necessary to carry out investigations on the forces produced by the currents with the largest velocity from the most
unfavorable direction. Depending on the type of structures or members, it may also be necessary to consider the
vertical distribution of the current velocity. When waves coexist with currents, it is necessary to use the current
velocity and direction in the state of coexistence. Types of currents in the sea area include ocean currents, tidal
currents, and wind drift currents, which are described in the [Technical Notes] below, along with density currents
caused by the density differences due to salinity or water temperature. In addition, in the coastal area, there are
longshore currents and rip currents caused by waves.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Ocean Currents
Ocean currents are the phenomenon involving the circulation of seawater around the ocean as a whole. They are
the result of a combination of the following currents: a) density currents that are based on local differences in the
density of seawater, b) winddriven drift currents that are caused by the wind, and c) gradient currents that
accompany spatial inequalities in the atmospheric pressure, along with d) compensation currents (upwelling
currents and or sinking currents) that supplement the aforementioned currents. Ocean currents maintain the
almost steady direction and strength over prolonged periods of time.
(2) Tidal Currents
(a) The nature and strength of tidal currents vary with the geographical conditions of the sea area in question and
the celestial movements. In order to analyze the harmonic components of tidal currents, it is necessary to carry
out continuous observation for at least 25 hours or advisably for full 15 days. In particular, if the topography of
a place is going to be changed considerably, for example when carrying out largescale land reclamation in
shallow coastal waters, it is desirable to examine the resultant changes in tidal currents at the planning stage.
(b) The tidal currents are the flow of seawater in the horizontal direction that accompanies a tidal variation of sea
level. This variation consists of the tidal components (diurnal tide, semidiurnal tide, etc.) of the water level
and is thus periodic.
(3) WindDriven Currents
When a wind blows over the sea surface, the friction on the boundary between the air and the sea surface
produces a shear stress that causes to induce a flow on the sea surface. As this flow develops, the turbulent eddy
viscosity of the seawater causes the lower layers to start to be pulled along by the upper layers. If the wind
velocity and direction remain constant for a prolonged period of time, a steady state of currents is eventually
reached. Such the currents are referred to as the winddriven currents.
(4) Nearshore Currents
In the surf zone, there exist special currents called the nearshore currents induced by waves. Because the
nearshore currents are induced within the surf zone, they transport suspended sediments and cause topographical
change of beaches. Consequently, an understanding of the pattern of nearshore currents leads to a deeper
perception of topographical change.
7.2 Current Forces Acting on Submerged Members and Structures (Notification Article 7)
It shall be standard to calculate the drag and lift forces caused by currents acting on a member or a
structure that is submerged or near the water surface using the following equations:
(1) Drag Force
1
F D =  C D r 0 AU 2 (7.2.1)
2
138
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
where
F D： drag force acting on the object in the direction of the current (kN)
CD： drag coefficient
r0： density of water (t/m3)
A： projected area of the object in the direction of the current (m2)
U： flow velocity (m/s)
(2) Lift Force
1
F L =  C L r 0 A L U 2 (7.2.2)
2
where
FL： lift force acting on the object in the direction perpendicular to the current (kN)
CL： lift coefficient
AL： projected area of the object in the direction perpendicular to the current (m2)
[Commentary]
The fluid force due to the currents acting on members of a pilesupported structure such as a pier, a pipeline, or the
armor units of a mound is proportional to the square of the flow velocity. It may be divided into the drag force acting
in the direction of the current and the lift force acting in the direction perpendicular to this. Note also that a thin, tube
like object in the water may be subject to vibrations excited by currentinduced vortices.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Drag Coefficient
The drag to a submerged object due to currents is expressed as the sum of the surface resistance due to friction
and the form drag due to pressure difference around the object. The drag coefficient varies according to the
shape of the object, the roughness, the direction of the current, and the Reynolds number, and thus the value
appropriate to the conditions in question must be used.
When the Reynolds number is greater than about 103, the values listed in Table T 7.2.1 may be used as
standard values for the drag coefficient. Note that for a circular cylinder or sphere with a smooth surface, there is
a phenomenon whereby the value of the drag coefficient drops suddenly when the Reynolds number is around
105. However, for a circular cylinder with a rough surface, this drop in drag coefficient is not particularly large,
and the drag coefficient settles down to a constant value that depends on the relative roughness.
For the values of the drag coefficient when a prism or Lshaped member is oriented diagonally relative to the
current, search for references. The data for the cube have been obtained from wave force experiments carried out
by Hamada, Mitsuyasu and Hase.
Rectangular
prism B
B 2.0 B
Sphere D
πD2
4
0.5 0.2
Cube
D
D2 1.3 1.6
D D
139
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
7.3 Mass of Armor Stones and Concrete Blocks against Currents (Notification Article 48,
Clause 6)
It shall be standard to calculate the required mass for the armor units (rubble etc.) on a rubble mound to be
stable against currents by means of either appropriate hydraulic model experiments or else the following
equation:
prr U 6
M = 
 (7.3.1)
( 48 )g 3 y 6 ( S r 1 ) 3 ( cos q sin q ) 3
where
M： minimum mass of armor stones and blocks (t)
rr： density of armor stones and blocks (t/m3)
U： current velocity above armor stones and blocks (m/s)
g： gravitational acceleration (= 9.81 m/s2)
y： Isbash’s constant (1.20 for embedded stones; 0.86 for exposed stones)
Sr： specific gravity of armor stones and blocks relative to water
q： slope angle in the axial direction of the channel bed (º)
[Technical Notes]
(1) Isbash’s Equation
With regard to the mass of rubble stone that is stable against currents, the US Army Coastal Engineering
Research Center (CERC) has presented equation (7.3.1) for the mass that a rubble stone must have in order to
prevent scouring by tidal currents 8).
(2) Isbash’s Constant
Equation (7.3.1) has been derived by considering the balance between the drag caused by a flow acting on a
spherical object on a sloped surface and the frictional resistance of the object. The coefficient y is termed
Isbash’s constant. It would appear that the values of 1.20 and 0.86 for embedded stones and exposed stones,
respectively, were determined by Isbash, but the details were not documented. Since equation (7.3.1) has been
obtained by considering the balance of forces for steady flow, for places where it is anticipated that strong
vortices will be generated, it is necessary to use rubble stones of larger mass.
(3) Armor Units for the Mound at the Opening of Tsunami Protection Breakwaters
Iwasaki et al. have carried out twodimensional steady flow experiments in which they used precast concrete
blocks as the armor for the mound in the opening of breakwaters designed to protect harbors and coastal area
against tsunamis. They obtained a value of 1.08 for Isbash’s constant in equation (7.3.1). Tanimoto et al. have
carried out threedimensional experiments on the opening of a tsunami breakwater. They clarified the structure
of the threedimensional flow near the opening, and revealed the relationship between the damage ratio and
Isbash's constant when stones or precast concrete blocks were used as the covering material.
[References]
1) Kazuo MURAKAMI, Masayuki MORIKAWA, Tatsuya SAKAGUCHI: “Wind effect and water discharge effect on constant
flow  discussion using observation data at offSennan (19781981) ”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1982, pp. 339 (in
Japanese).
2) Masch, F. D.: “Mixing and dispersion of wastes by wind and wave action”, ‘Advances in Water Pollution Research,’ Proc. Int.
Conf., Vol. 3, 1962, pp. 145168.
3) LonguetHiggins, M.S. and R.W. Stewart: “Radiation stress and mass transport in gravity waves, with application to ‘surf
beat’”, J. Fluid Mech., Vol. 13, 1962, pp. 481504.
4) Bowen, A. J., D. L. Inman, and V. P. Simons: “Wave ‘setdown’ and ‘setup’”, J. Geophs. Res. Vol. 73, 1968, pp. 25692577.
5) Kazumasa KATOH, Shinichi YANAGISHIMA, Tomoyoshi ISOGAMI, Hiroyuki MURAKAMI: “Wave setup near the
shoreline  field observation at HORF ”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1989, pp. 341 (in Japanese).
140
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
6) Yoshimi GODA: “Deformation of irregular waves due to depthcontrolled wave breaking”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 14, No. 3,
1975, pp. 59106 (in Japanese), also “Irregular wave deformation in the surf zone”, Coastal Engineering in Japan, JSCE,
Vol.18, 1975, pp.1326.
7) Katsutoshi TANIMOTO, Katsutoshi KIMURA, Keiji MIYAZAKI: “Study on stability of submerged disk at the opening
section of tsunami protection breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 27, No. 4, 1988, pp. 93121 (in Japanese).
8) Coastal Engineering Research Center: “Shore Protection Manual”, Vol. II, U.S. Army Corps of Engineering, 1977
141
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
(1) Floating Body
In general, a floating body refers to a structure that is buoyant in water and its motions within a certain range is
permitted during use. When designing a floating body, it is necessary to investigate both its functions that are
going to be demanded and its safety. In general, the design conditions for the investigation of its function differ
from those for the examination of its safety.
(2) Mooring Equipment
Mooring equipment comes in a whole variety of types and is generally composed of a combination of mooring
lines, mooring anchors, sinkers, intermediate weights, intermediate buoys, mooring rods, connection joints, and
fenders. The mooring equipment has a large influence on the motions of a floating body, and so it is important to
design this equipment safely and appropriately.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Classification of Floating Bodies
The floating bodies used as port and harbor facilities can be divided into floating terminals, offshore petroleum
stockpiling bases, floating breakwaters, mooring buoys, and floating bridges. Moreover, researches for
development of extra large floating structures (megafloat) are being carried out.
(2) Classification of Mooring Methods and Characteristic Features of Each Method
Floating bodies can also be classified by the type of mooring methods. As described below, mooring methods
include catenary mooring (slack mooring), taut mooring, and dolphin mooring.
(a) Catenary mooring (Fig. T 8.1.1(a))
This is the most common mooring method. With this method, the chains or whatever used in the mooring are
given sufficient lengths to make them slack. This means that the force restraining the motions of the floating
body is small, but nevertheless the mooring system fulfills the function of keeping the floating body in more
orless the same position. There are various types of catenary mooring, depending on factors like the material
of the mooring lines, the number of mooring lines, and the presence or absence of intermediate buoys and
sinkers.
(b) Taut mooring (Fig. T 8.1.1(b))
This is a mooring method that reduces the motions of the floating body greatly; a tension leg platform (TLP) is
an example. With this method, the mooring lines are given a large initial tension so that they do not become
slack even when the floating body moves. The advantages of this mooring method are that the floating body
does not move much, and only a small area is needed for installing the mooring lines. However, it is necessary
to take note of the fact that because a large tensile force is generated in the mooring lines, the design of the
lines becomes the critical factor on the safety of the floating body.
(c) Dolphin mooring (Fig. T 8.1.1(c))
With this method, mooring is maintained using either a piletype dolphin or a gravitytype dolphin. In general,
this method is suitable for restraining the motions of a floating body in the horizontal direction, but a large
mooring force acts on the dolphin. This method has been used for mooring floating units of offshore
petroleum stockpiling bases.
(d) Mooring method using a universal joint (Fig. T 8.1.1(d))
The mooring system shown in the figure is an example of a mooring method that can be used to moor a large
offshore floating body. Examples of mooring systems that use a universal joint on the sea bottom include a
SALM (Single Anchor Leg Mooring) type mooring buoy and a MAFCO (MAritime Facility of Cylindrical
cOnstruction) tower.
142
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Fender
Chain
Mooring anchor Dolphin
Damper
Universal joint
8.2 External Forces Acting on Floating Body (Notification Article 26, Clause 1)
When a port or harbor facility is made of a floating structure, it shall be standard to take the following
forces in design calculation: wind drag force, current drag force, waveexciting force, wavedrift force,
wavemaking resistance, restoring force, and mooring force. These forces shall be calculated by means of
an appropriate analytical method or hydraulic model experiments, in accordance with the mooring method
for the floating body and the size of facility.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Wind Drag Force
With a structure for which a part of the floating body is above the sea surface, winds exert a force on the
structure. This force is called the wind drag force (or wind pressure), and is composed of a pressure drag and a
friction drag. If the floating body is relatively small in size, the pressure drag is dominant. The pressure drag is
proportional to the square of the wind velocity and is expressed as in the following equation:
1
F w =  r a C DW A W UW2 (8.2.1)
2
where
Fw： wind drag force (N)
ra： density of air (1.23 kg/m3)
AW： projected area of the part of the floating body above the sea surface as viewed from the direction in
which the wind is blowing (m2)
UW： wind velocity (m/s)
CDW： wind drag coefficient
The wind drag coefficient is a proportionality constant and is also known as the wind pressure coefficient. It may
be determined by means of wind tunnel experiments or the like. However, it is also acceptable to use a value that
has been obtained in the past experiments for a structure with a shape similar to the structure under current study.
Values such as those listed in Table T 8.2.1 have been proposed as the wind drag coefficients of objects in
the uniform flow. As can be seen from this table, the wind drag coefficient varies with the shape of the floating
body, but it is also affected by the wind direction and the Reynolds number. Note that it is considered that the
wind pressure acts in the direction of the wind flow, with the point of application being the centroid of the
projection of the part of the floating body that is above the water surface. However, it is necessary to take heed
of the fact that this may not necessarily be the case if the floating body is large. Moreover, the velocity of the
actual wind is not uniform in the vertical direction, and so the value of the wind velocity UW used in the wind
pressure calculation is set as that at the elevation of 10 m above the sea surface.
143
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
1.6
1
Rectangular crosssection
2 (ratio 2.3
of side lengths = 1:2)
2
1 1.5
144
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
ì 4ph ¤ L ü
R = K R2 í 1 +  ý (8.2.4)
î sinh ( 4ph ¤ L ) þ
where
r0： density of seawater (kg/m3)
Fd： wave drift force per unit width (N/m)
Hi： incident wave height (m)
KR： reflection coefficient
R： drift force coefficient
If the dimensions of the floating body are extremely small relative to the wavelength, the wave drift force may
be ignored as being much smaller than the waveexciting force. However, as the floating body becomes larger,
the wave drift force becomes dominant. When irregular waves act on a floating body moored at a system having
only a small restraining force, such as a single point mooring buoy designed for use of supertankers, the wave
drift force becomes a dominant factor as it may give rise to slow drift motions.
(5) WaveMaking Resistance
When a floating body moves in still water, the floating body exerts a force on the surrounding water, and the
floating body receives a corresponding reaction force from the water; this reaction force is called the wave
making resistance. This force may be determined by forcing the floating body to move through the still water
and measuring the force acting on the floating body. In general, however, an analytical method is used whereby
each mode of the floating body motions is assumed to be realized separately, and the velocity potential, which
represents the motion of the fluid around the floating body, is obtained. Only the forces that are proportional to
the motion of the floating body may be determined analytically; the nonlinear forces that are proportional to the
square of the motion cannot be determined analytically. Out of the linear forces (i.e., that proportional to the
motion of the floating body), the term that is proportional to the acceleration of the floating body is called the
added mass term, while the term that is proportional to the velocity is called the wave damping term.
(6) Restoring Force
The static restoring force is the force that makes a floating body to return to its original position when the
floating body moves in still water. It is generated by buoyancy and gravity, when the floating body heaves, rolls
or pitches. This force is generally treated as being proportional to the amplitude of the motion of the floating
body, although this proportionality is lost if the amplitude becomes too large.
(7) Mooring Force
The mooring force (restraining force) is the force that is generated in order to restrain the motion of the floating
body. The magintude of this force depends greatly on the displacementrestoration characteristics of the mooring
system.
(8) Solution Method for WaveExciting Force and WaveMaking Resistance Using Velocity Potential
The method adopted for calculating the waveexciting force and the wavemaking resistance involves
deriviation of the velocity potential, which represents the motion of the fluid, and then calculating the wave
exciting force and the wavemaking resistance from the potential. The analytical method with the velocity
potential is the same for both the waveexciting force and the wavemaking resistance, the only difference being
the boundary conditions. The velocity potential may be obtained using any of a number of methods, such as a
region segmentation method, an integral equation method, a strip method, or a finite element method.
(9) Wave Force Acting on Fixed Floating Body with Rectangular Cross Section
When a floating body is fixed in position, the velocity potential that satisfies the boundary conditions at the sea
bottom and around the floating body can yield the wave force. The wave force acting on a floating body with a
long rectangular cross section such as a floating breakwater can be determined using the approximation theory
of Ito and Chiba 2).
(10) Materials for Mooring
For the materials used in mooring and their characteristic features, search for appropriate references.
(11) Forces Acting on an Extra Large Floating Structure
For an extra large floating structure (megafloat), the external forces described in (1) ~ (10) above are different
from those for a smaller floating body, because of its large size and elastic response characteristics of the
floating body structure. It is thus necessary to carry out sufficient investigations on the motions and elastic
response characteristics of the floaty body structure.
8.3 Motions of Floating Body and Mooring Force (Notification Article 26, Clause 2)
The motions of a floating body and the mooring force shall be calculated by means of an appropriate
analytical method or hydraulic model experiments, in accordance with the shape of the floating body and
the characteristics of the external forces and the mooring system.
145
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
The motions of a floating body can be determined by
solving the dynamic equilibrium equation, with the Heaving Yawing Rolling
external forces taken to be the forces due to winds and Surging
waves, the restoring force of the floating body itself,
and the reaction forces of the mooring lines and
fenders. If the floating body is assumed to be a rigid
body, then its motions are comprised of the six
components shown in Fig. T8.3.1, namely surging,
Pitching
swaying, heaving, pitching, rolling and yawing. Out of Swaying
these, the modes that represent motions within the
horizontal plane, namely surging, swaying and yawing,
may show longperiod oscillations with the period of a
few minutes or more. Such longperiod oscillations Fig. T 8.3.1 Components of Vessel’s Motion
have a large influence on the occupancy area of a vessel
at a mooring buoy and the design of the mooring system. One may thus give separate consideration to the longperiod
oscillations, taking only the wavedrift force and the longperiod oscillation components of the winds and waves as
the external forces when doing analysis.
If the floating body is very long, elastic deformation may accompany the motions of floaty body and this should
be investigated as necessary.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Methods of Solving the Equations of Motions
(a) Steady state solution method for nonlinear equations of motion
The equations of motions for a floating body are nonlinear, meaning that it is not easy to obtain solutions.
Nevertheless, if it is assumed that the motion amplitudes are small and the equations of motion are linearized
by using linear approximations for the nonlinear terms, the solutions can be obtained relatively easily. For
example, for a threedimensional floating body, one ends up with a system of six simultaneous linear
equations involving the amplitudes and phases of the six modes of motions. Note that if the floating body is
assumed to be a rigid body and its motions are linear, then the motions are proportional to the external forces.
In particular, if there are no currents or wind, then the motions are proportional to the wave height.
(b) Numerical simulation of nonlinear motions
The wind drag force and the current drag force are in general nonlinear, and moreover the restraining forces of
mooring equipment are also often nonlinear. In this case, an effective solution method is to use a numerical
simulation whereby the equations of motion are progressively solved for a series of time steps. Such numerical
simulation is commonplace nowadays. First, the time series data (which will be used as the external forces)
are obtained for the waveexciting force and the flow velocity due to the waves from the input of incident
wave spectrum, as well as the fluctuating wind speed from the wind spectrum. The external forces obtained
from these time series data are then put into the equations of motions for the floating body, and the time series
data for the motions of the floating body and the mooring force are calculated.
Numerical simulations are used for analyzing the motions of all kinds of floating bodies. For example,
Ueda and Shiraishi 3) have carried out numerical simulations on the motions of a moored vessel, and Suzuki
and Moroishi 4) have analyzed the swinging motion of a vessel moored at a buoy.
Note that the following is usually assumed as preconditions in a numerical simulation: ① the fluid is an
ideal fluid; ② the amplitudes of motions of the floating body are small; ③ the incident waves are linear and
their superposition is allowed. If these assumptions cannot be held, it is necessary to carry out hydraulic model
experiments.
(2) Hydraulic Model Experiments
Hydraulic model experiments provide a powerful technique for determining the motions of a floating body and
the mooring force. Up to the present time, hydraulic model experiments have been carried out for all kinds of
floating body. For examples, see references 5) and 6).
(3) Law of Similarity for Mooring Systems
The characteristics of the motions of a floating body vary greatly with the mooring method. When carrying out
hydraulic model experiments on a floating body, it is thus particularly important to give appropriate
consideration to the laws of similarity for the displacement and reaction force characteristics of the mooring
equipment. For example, with a mooring rope, if the material used in the hydraulic model experiments is kept
the same as that used in the field and the size is simply scaled down while maintaining the same shape, then the
law of similarity will not hold; rather it is necessary to scale down the elastic modulus of the material used in the
models relative to that used in the prototype. In practice, however, it will probably be unable to find such a
material, in which case various other contrivances must be used.
146
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
[References]
1) Tomotsuka TAKAYAMA, Tetsuya HIRAISHI, Masami FURUKAWA, Kunihisa SAO, Shinichiro TACHINO: “Feild
observation of motions of a SALM buoy and tensions of mooring hawsers”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 542, 1985, 38 p. (in
Japanese).
2) Yoshiyuki ITO, Shigeru CHIBA: “An approximate theory of floating breakwaters”, Rept of PHRI, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1972, pp.
1528 (in Japanese).
3) Shigeru UEDA, Satoru SHIRAISHI: “Method and its evaluation for computation of moored ship’s motions”, Rept of PHRI,
Vol. 22, No. 4, 1983, pp. 181218 (in Japanese).
4) Yasumasa SUZUKI, Kazuyuki MOROISHI: “On the motions of ships moored to singlepoint mooring systems”, Rept of
PHRI, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1982, pp. 107150 (in Japanese).
5) Yasumasa SUZUKI: “Study on the design of single point buoy mooring”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 829, 1996, 48 p. (in
Japanese).
6) Sigeru UEDA: “Analytical method of ship motions moored to quay walls and the aplications”, Tech. Note of PHRI, No. 504,
1984, 372 p. (in Japanese).
147
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
[Commentary]
In addition to the effect of outflow of fresh water during floods and droughts and the sediment transport from rivers,
estuaries are also affected by the tide level changes, waves, tidal currents, longshore currents, and littoral drift. As a
result, several hydraulic phenomena occur such as the periodic changes in water level and current speed, the
formation of density currents, and the settling and deposition of sediment. These phenomena have a large influence
on the flow regime in the estuary and the transport of sediment and others. It is thus necessary to give consideration to
both conditions of rivers and the sea when handling estuarine hydraulics.
[Technical Notes]
(1) Tides in River
The surface water level in a river channel can be calculated using either equation (9.1.1) or equation (9.1.2).
(a) When tides are negligible (see Fig. T 9.1.1)
2 2
aQ æ 1 1 ö Q æ 1 1 ö
Dh = h 1 h 2 = z 2 z 1     ç 
 +  Dx (9.1.1)
2gs çè A 2 A 2 ÷ø 2 è K2 K2 ø
2 ÷
1 2 1
64748
2 2
1 ¶Q 2QB ¶H Q B æ ¶Hö Q ¶B ¶H Q Q
  2  
3 è
i +  3 ( H z )  +  +  =0
gA ¶t gA ¶t gA ¶x ø gA ¶x ¶x K
2
(9.1.2)
¶A ¶Q
 +  = 0
¶t ¶x
where
Dh： difference in water depth between two cross sections (m)
h1： water depth at cross section 1 (m)
h2： water depth at cross section 2 (m)
z1： height of river bed above an arbitrary datum level at cross section 1 (m)
z2： height of river bed above the arbitrary datum level at cross section 2 (m)
z： height of river bed above the arbitrary datum level (m)
a： velocity coefficient a ≒ 1.0
Q： flow rate (m3/s)
A： crosssectional area (m2)
K： flow carrying capacity of cross
section (m3/s), K 2 = A 2 R 1 / 3 / n 2
R： hydraulic radius (m)
n： Manning’s roughness coefficient (s/
m1/3)
Dx： distance between two cross sections
(m)
t： time (s)
B： river width (m)
H： water level from an arbitrary datum
level (m), H = h + z
Cross Section 2 Cross Section 1
i： channel bottom slope
g： gravitational acceleration (g = 9.81 Fig. T 9.1.1 Diagram Showing Water Level Curves
m/s2)
Equation (9.1.1) is a modified form of the basic equation for nonuniform flow in a channel of arbitrary cross
section. Consequently, it cannot be applied to an estuary where there are strong tidal effects and a reverse,
upstream flow occurs during a flood tide. However, it can be applied to an estuary where the tidal range is
small (less than 20 cm) and the tidal compartmut is not long (say up to about 3 to 4 km upstream). Even so, it
should only be used for the order estimate of hydraulic quantities during planning, because the calculation is
only an approximation while ignoring tides.
148
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
Equations (9.1.2) represents the equations of motions and continuity having been modified from the basic
equations for unsteady flow in a river, where the flow rate and water level are the variables. In order to
estimate the surface water level and flow rate due to the tidal action and propagation of tsunami into an
estuary, simultaneous solutions can be obtained by equations (9.1.2) with appropriate boundary conditions.
However, for a channel with a variable cross section, it is not so easy to solve equations (9.1.2) numerically.
(2) Waves Entering an Estuary
Upon entering a river mouth, waves are deformed by the currents. In addition to refraction due to the water
depth, refraction due to the difference in the directions between waves and currents causes the attenuation of
wave height. When the direction of waves is exactly opposite to that of river flow, however, wave height may
increase through energy exchange through the river flow’s stopping action or radiation stress. When waves with
an increased height run up the river channel, the wave height gradually decreases due to the effects of internal
and external frictions, and turbulence of currents. These opposing effects are related to the properties of river
flow and waves, and the mechanism of wave height change is very complex.
(a) Deformation of waves by currents (deepwater waves)
As shown in Fig. T 9.1.2, when waves propagates at an Wave direction
angle a across the straight boundary of discontinuity Wa
ve
cre
st Zone 1: Still water
between the zone I where the water is still and the zone II u=0
L1
α1
C1
where the water is flowing with a uniform velocity, α2
refraction occurs at the boundary, changing the wave
Wa
ve
Zone 2: Flowing water
celerity and wavelength. If waves can be regarded as C2 u
c
res
t
deepwater waves (i.e., the water is sufficiently deep L2 Uniform flow
The deformation of deepwater waves propagating on exactly opposite currents is given by equation (9.1.5).
644474448
C 2 / C 1 = ( 1 + m ) /2
L 2 / L 1 = ( 1 + m )2/4 (9.1.5)
H 2 / H 1 = 1/ 1 + 4u / C 1
m = 1 + 4u / C 1
where
a： angle between the boundary line and the wave crest (º)
u： uniform flow velocity in zone II (m/s) (positive when the flow is following the direction of
propagation of the waves, negative when it is against)
L： wavelength (m)
C： wave celerity (m/s)
H： wave height (m)
Note that the subscript 1 denotes zone I (still water), while the subscript 2 denotes zone II (flowing water).
Equations (9.1.3) was proposed by Johnson 1), while equation (9.1.4) was presented by LonguetHiggins and
Stewart 2). Equations (9.1.5) is a relationship that was obtained by Yu 3). According to equation (9.1.5), the
wave height should increase in the exactly opposite current, and waves breaking theoretically occur when u =
C1/4. However, according to Yu’s experiments, wave partially breaks around u = C1/7, and the wave height
decreases. Incidentally, it should be noted that equation (9.1.5) cannot be applied to waves after breaking.
(b) Deformation of waves by currents (finite water depth)
Near a river mouth, where the water depth is relatively shallow compared with the wavelength of the incoming
waves, the deformation of waves depends on the properties of both waves and river flow, along with the
nonlinear interaction between them. It is thus not easy to estimate the wave height.
Arthur 4) has carried out calculations whereby he specified the sea bottom bathymetry and the flow
velocity distribution. He assumed the linear long waves, where the phase velocity of waves relative to the river
flow is given as g h and it is not affected by the river flow. However, the velocity of waves is generally
affected by currents and is different from the case of no river flow.
149
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND COMMENTARIES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR FACILITIES IN JAPAN
For wave deformation near a river mouth, Iwagaki et al. have proposed a method for calculating the wave
refraction in a current field on uneaven bottom. However, since the phase velocity and the group velocity of
waves relative to the currents cannot be given in advance, any quantitative discussion was not made.
Sakai et al. 5) have proposed a numerical calculation method for obtaining the directional spectrum of
irregular waves near a coast where the water depth changes and currents are present. They show several cases
of calculations. For example, there is a tendency that the change in the principal wave directions are affected
mainly by the water depth and that wave components with frequency higher than the peak freakency are
affected by currents. However, there is much room for further study on the way in which the wave breaking
conditions are given.
With regard to the nature of waves immediately after they have entered an estuary and come up against the
river flow, Hamada has determined the changes that steady shallow water waves undergo while running up an
estuary for both the cases that the vertical velocity distributions are uniform and parabolic. According to
Hamada’s calculations, when h = 15 cm, T = 1.2 s and u = 20 cm/s, for both the distributions the wave height
increases by about 5% in comparison with the case of no river flow. However, the rates of the wave height
increase and the wavelength decrease with the river flow were slightly larger for the parabolic velocity
distribution than for the uniform distribution.
(3) Siltation and Channel Maintenance
(a) Siltation
When constructing a harbor, it is often necessary to carry out dredging, i.e., to excavate the sea bottom to
deepen it in order to create navigation channels, mooring basins, and small craft basins. Even with an existing
harbor, if the coming vessels are going to increase in size, it is necessary to carry out dredging in order to
increase the water depth of the navigation channels and mooring basins. The sediment on the sea bottom is
usually subject to external forces such as currents and waves. This means that even after construction of a
harbor has been completed, it is necessary to continue dredging in order to maintain the functionality of the
harbor because siltation occurs.
The sediment in the estuarine part of a bay is often composed of fine particles such as clay and silt
(hereafter referred to as mud). The phenomenon whereby such fine sediment is picked up, transported, and
accumulates at the sea bottom is referred to as “siltation”. In Japan, Kumamoto Port and Miike Port in the
Ariake Sea, and several harbors in the Suo Nada Sea area are faced with the problem of siltation. There are
also many harbors in Europe, Southeast Asia, China, and South America that have similar problems.
The siltation phenomenon can be divided into three stages: pickingup and transport of bottom mud by
currents; mutual interference between waves and the bottom mud layer; and settling, accumulation and
consolidation. In estuaries, both waves and currents exist simultaneously, and flocculation is promoted in the
zone where saltwater and fresh water mix.
The major difference between siltation and littoral drift (mainly sand) comes from different grain sizes.
The mud that leads to siltation has a tendency to flocculate due to the mixing of the river water and the
seawater in an estuary. Flocculation causes large changes in the settling characteristics of fine sediment. Fine
particles of mud that have settled onto the sea bottom experience a process of dewatering and form the bottom
sediment, and then its strength gradually increases over a long period of time through consolidation.
Consequently, the resistence characteristic of mud against erosion by external forces such as waves and
currents vary, strictly speaking, depending on the characteristic features of the mud (duration over time after
settling (the level of consolidation), the texture, water content, organic matter content, etc.). This is the major
difference between siltation and littoral drift, whereby the sand is generally treated as individual grain.
Near to the sea bottom, the density of the mud generally varies with depth. In harbors that suffer from
heavy siltation, much efforts are being made for the measurement, maintenance, and control of water depth,
including that of navigation channels. For places where siltation is particularly pronounced, the water depth of
navigation channels is quite changeable, and so it is necessary to monitor the bottom level constantly. If the
required water depth is not sufficient for the safe navigation of vessels, bottom sediment need to be removed
immediately.
In most of the harbors in the world that suffer from heavy siltation, the sea bottom in approach channels is
covered with fluid mud with a density of 1.05~1.3 g/cm3. In such a case, it is important to define the water
depth which ensure safe navigation, because this definition directly affects the timing and quantity of
dredging. Bathymetry measurement using a sounding lead or echosounders has been carried out for a long
time for the purpose of managing and maintaining navigation channels. In the echosounding, a fluid mud
layer can be detected by using different frequencies. The two frequencies commonly used are say 210 kHz
(sound waves of this frequency are reflected from the surface of the fluid mud) and 33 kHz (sound waves of
this frequency passes through the fluid mud but is reflected from sand or higherdensity mud). In some of the
large European ports such as Rotterdam, Zeebrugge, Dunkirk, Bordeaux and Nantes, as well as in estuaries in
Brazil, Venezuela and Indonesia, it is said that the difference between the surface detected by 210 kHz sound
waves and that detected by 33 kHz sound waves can be as much as a few meters 6). Note, however, that it is
not really sufficient to fix the water depth for which navigation is possible simply by using such equipment. In
Europe, where many navigation channels have the problem of heavy siltation (in particular in the Rotterdam
Europort area), the safe nautical depth is specified as being the depth at which the density of bottom material
is no more than 1.2 g/cm3 7).
150
PART II DESIGN CONDITIONS
In addition to this density requirement, the following two criteria must be satisfied.
① Even if the draft of a vessel approaches the nautical depth, there should be no damage to the hull.
② The viscous drag induced by the underside of a moving vessel (i.e., the rheology characteristic) and the
internal waves generated at the mud/water boundary do not cause any change in the water depth.
The criteria mentioned above can be considered that the water depth has been defined from a physical
standpoint. Although it is ultimately desirable to carry out direct evaluation by means of a viscosity meter, it
can be considered that at the present technical stage, the water depth has been specfied using the density value
that is most reliable in terms of measurement technology. New measuring equipment for the sediment density
in navigation channels using the g rays has been developed in Europe 6). In Japan, Ishizuka and Nemoto 8)
have developed a density measuring device that uses the g rays.
(b) Formation of fluid mud
The fluid mud layer is often found in estuaries or on the continental shelf close to the coast. The layer contains
a very high concentration of mud in fluid condition and easy to move. The mud concentration in the fluid mud
layer is of the order of 10,000~300,000 mg/l 9). In fact, Krone1 9) defines a fluid mud layer to have a mud
concentration of at least 10,000 mg/l. Kirby and Parker1 10) have obtained the vertical distribution of the
density within a fluid mud layer using a density measuring device that makes use of the scattering properties
of the g rays. By comparing with the results of echo sounding measurements, they have concluded that the
density of fluid mud lies in the range 1.05~1.3 g/cm3.
(c) Effect of submerged dykes
In Kumamoto Port, which is currently being constructed on very gentle mud flats of the Ariake Sea, it is
expected that navigation channels and mooring basins will be subject to siltation. Largescale field
observations are thus being carried out to investigate siltation process in this area, and proposals of
countermeasure are being investigated. Before construction was commenced, i.e., when there was nothing at
all in this sea area, three test trenches for siltation experiments were constructed. One (Trench No. 1) was
located where the water depth is 4m, and two (Trenches No. 2 and No. 3; separated from each other by 100m)
were located where the water depth is 2m. The three trenches were all of the same size, but Trench No. 3 was
made different from the other two in that it was surrounded by 1 mhigh submerged dykes. The locations of
the trenches are shown in Fig. T 9.1.3.
Figure T 9.1.4 shows the time series of the amount of siltation in each trench, as measured at the center of
each of the three trenches. During two large storms in 1987, Trenches No.1 and No.2 silted up rapidly, with
over 60 cm of siltation occurring in just one day. However, in Trench No. 3, which was surrounded by
submerged dykes, hardly any siltation occurred at all; there was also no trace of any significant mud
accumulation along the outsides of the submerged dykes.
151
0
100
0
100
100
0
100
100
0
100
100
0
100
Area 9
Area 8
Area 7
Deposition height
Area 10
9209 9209 9209
Dredging
9210 9210 9210
92.9
0
50
100
150
cm
9211 9211 9211
Area 10
9212 9212 9212
9301 9301 9301
12/1
1986
N
9303 9303 9303
93.3
9305 9305 9305
1/1
1987
Area 9
9402 9402 9402
93.10 94.2
Waterway
3/1
94.9
1000(m)
4/1
Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.
Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.
Отменить можно в любой момент.