DOCSLIB.ORG

A Hydraulic Experimental Study of a Movable Barrier on a Revetment to Block Wave Overtopping

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Hydraulic Experimental Study of a Movable Barrier on a Revetment to Block Wave Overtopping applied sciences Article A Hydraulic Experimental Study of a Movable Barrier on a Revetment to Block Wave Overtopping Byeong Wook Lee, Jihye Seo, Woo-Sun Park and Deokhee Won * Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology (KIOST), 385 Haeyang-ro, Yeongdo-gu, Busan 49111, Korea; [email protected] (B.W.L.); [email protected] (J.S.); [email protected] (W.-S.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-51-664-3565 Received: 8 November 2019; Accepted: 19 December 2019; Published: 20 December 2019 Abstract: This paper presents a design for a movable barrier on the revetment of the Haeundae Marine City in Busan, the Korea. This movable barrier was developed to use as a tourist deck in a normal state and to block wave overtopping in an abnormal state. To carry out the physical experiment in a wave flume, the model structure was reduced to a scale of 1/36 compared to the field structure. The discharge of the wave overtopping, the uplift pressure acting on the under surface of a non-standing barrier, and the wave pressure acting in front of a standing barrier were measured to analyze the hydraulic characteristics of the movable barrier. The results show that the impulsive pressure acts on the movable barrier, although the overtopping discharge is less than the allowable limit. When designing a movable barrier at a full scale, engineers should consider the impulsive pressure to secure the barrier’s stability on the target site. Keywords: movable barrier; wave overtopping; wave pressure; storm surge; hydraulic experiment 1. Introduction The ports connecting marine and land transportation are expanding to perform various functions, such as waterfront space and eco-friendly facilities, as well as fundamental functions for commerce and the fishery. These ports also include functions to create safer coasts and ports through the reinforcement of existing facilities, in addition to the development of port peripheral areas linked with leisure facilities. Thus, it is necessary to comprehensively review the planning aspects of the development and use of port peripheral areas in harbor structures. Accordingly, the mutual influence of facilities in the hinterland is complicated by the topographical characteristics and economic and social functions of ports. However, in accordance with the trend of placing more emphasis on the quality of life, sensitivity to disasters caused by climate change has increased. Hence, the needs for harbor structures to reduce disasters has increased. In particular, in areas where serious disasters are expected, the interest for disaster-reducing facilities is high. As global warming due to climate change is expected to increase the intensity and frequency of typhoons [1], storm surges must be urgently prevented because of an increase in the expected casualties and flood damage. As typhoon intensity is expected to increase because of the rising sea levels and temperatures due to the effects of global warming [2], the damage caused by storm surges is expected to increase rapidly. Hence, the requirement to reinforce coastal structures has increased with increases in wave height. Coastal and water side areas should be especially protected from inundation by wave overtopping. To quantify wave overtopping in coastal areas, the EurOtop manual provides empirical formulas for various coastal structures through physical experiments [3], and a numerical model was developed to apply simple harbor geometry [4]. Various types of barriers have been constructed to prevent such inundation. The Eider Barrier of the radial gate type was built in 1973, in Germany [5]. This barrier is part of the dike defense line of the North Friesian coast. In England, the Thames Barrier Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 89; doi:10.3390/app10010089 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 15 coast. In England, the Thames Barrier was built in 1982 to prevent inundation by high tides (with floods from the upstream of the Thames) and had its official opening in 1984 [6]. Gates of the rotary segment type are normally located on a flat face flush with the river bed when in the gate housing and then rotated 90 degree to close the barrier in an emergency. In 1953, the south-western area of the Netherlands was threatened by a severe storm and was flooded by sea water. After this disaster, the storm surge barrier called the Maeslant Barrier was built in 1997, in the Netherlands [7]. This barrier consists of two sector-gates. The same type of barrier, called the St. Petersburg Flood Appl. Sci.Protection2020, 10, Barrier, 89 was built in 2011 in Russia [8]. In a normal state, these gates are parked in docks.2 of 14 However, these gates are moved to the center of the waterway to close the channel during severe storms. In 2013, the Venice Flood Barrier, which is one the first four gates of the MOSE project, was was builtbuilt inat the 1982 Lido to preventinlet in Italy inundation [9]. These by gates high of tidesthe flap (with type floods are raised from by the compressed upstream air of pumped the Thames) and hadinto itseach offi hollowcial opening gate. in 1984 [6]. Gates of the rotary segment type are normally located on a flat face flushRecently, with the a river movable bed whenbarrier in type the was gate proposed, housing andsuch then as a rotatedflap type 90 that degree could to be close installed the barrier on in an emergency.the revetment, In1953, as shown the south-westernin Figure 1 [10]. areaThis barrie of ther Netherlandsis usually used was as a threatenedtourist deck bybuta stands severe up storm to prevent wave overtopping when a storm surge occurs. Movable barriers should have an effective and was flooded by sea water. After this disaster, the storm surge barrier called the Maeslant Barrier operational method and the ability to adequately block against wave overtopping. A movable was builtbarrier in is 1997, composed in the of Netherlands a double deck, [7]. Thiswith barriertwo hinges consists installed of two on the sector-gates. upper deck. The Hinges same are type of barrier,installed called at the the St. end Petersburg of the deckFlood and the Protection middle of Barrier,the deck. was When built the inupper 2011 deck in Russia on the [land8]. In side a normal is state,pushed these gates by the are actuators, parked inthe docks. barrier However, stands in thesethe form gates of area triangle moved since to the rotation center occurs of the at waterway the to closehinge. the To channel resist duringupward severe forces, storms. such as Inthe 2013, uplift the force, Venice three-axis Flood Barrier, bearings which are installed is one the on firstthe four gateslower of the deck. MOSE The project, height was of the built movable at the Lidobarrier inlet can in be Italy adjusted [9]. These to prevent gates ofinundation the flap type by wave are raised by compressedovertopping air via pumped the designed into each conditions hollow gate.at the target site. However, impulsive pressure can Recently,occasionally a movableoccur at a barrier barrier typesuch as was a vertical proposed, wall, such even as though a flap the type barrier that properly could be blocks installed wave on the revetment,overtopping. as shown Thus, in it Figure is important1[ 10]. to This carry barrier out ph isysical usually experiments used as ato tourist accurately deck determine but stands the up to designed wave force [11]. prevent wave overtopping when a storm surge occurs. Movable barriers should have an effective In this study, a movable barrier is considered on the revetment of Haeundae Marine City in operationalBusan, Republic method andof Korea. the ability The design to adequately of the movable block barrier against is carried wave overtopping. out for the target A movable site, unlike barrier is composedthe developed of a double movable deck, barrier with [10]. two However, hinges the installed operation on method the upper and deck. the purpose Hinges are are the installed same at the endas those of the of deck the anddeveloped the middle movable of thebarrier, deck. as When shown the in upper Figure deck 1. A onphysical the land experiment side is pushed was by the actuators,conducted the to quantitatively barrier stands analyze in the the form discharge of a triangle of wave since overtopping rotation occursin a wave at theflume, hinge. and Tothe resist upwardwave forces, pressures such acting as the on uplift the movable force, three-axis barrier are bearings later measured are installed to determine on the lower the occurrences deck. The of height of theimpulsive movable wave barrier pressure can be to adjusted reflect the to preventworking inundationdesign stage. by The wave model overtopping structure was via designed the designed conditionssimply at to the measure target site.data However,for a standing impulsive barrier pressure and a cannon-standing occasionally barrier. occur In at Section a barrier 2, suchthe as a verticalexperimental wall, even setup though and the test barrier condit properlyions of this blocks study wave are summarized. overtopping. In Thus,Section it 3, is the important results are to carry presented for the wave overtopping and wave pressure of the physical experiment. Finally, the out physical experiments to accurately determine the designed wave force [11]. conclusion is given in Section 4. (a) (b) FigureFigure 1. Sketch 1. Sketch of theof the developed developed movable movable barrier;barrier; ( (aa)) in in a anormal normal state; state; (b) ( inb) an in abnormal an abnormal state. state. In this study, a movable barrier is considered on the revetment of Haeundae Marine City in Busan, Republic of Korea. The design of the movable barrier is carried out for the target site, unlike the developed movable barrier [10].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Resilient Cambridge Summary Report
    Resilient City ↓ Resilient People This a public summary for Resilient Cambridge. 6 What is climate change? 8 What we’re doing about climate change. ↳ Closer Neighborhoods ↳ Better Buildings ↳ Stronger Infrastructure ↳ Greener City 22 How Cambridge is adapting for a resilient future. 30 Your role in our future: What you can do to help. 32 A broad view of a serious issue. 34 Let’s work together to build a Resilient Cambridge. Resilient City → Resilient People City → Resilient Resilient City of Cambridge Cambridge City of 5 While climate change poses a growing threat to our City, there are many things we can do to reduce the risk and severity of its effects. Among them: → Strengthen community → Plant more trees and organizations that provide create additional green essential services to spaces on public and residents and businesses private property to combat rising temperatures and → Make our buildings flood- energy demand and heat-resilient, and require climate-resilience → Work together with design standards on new neighboring cities and the developments state to minimize flooding What is climate change? Climate change refers to long-term changes in weather patterns that impact our environment and way of life. The science is clear: Our climate is not the same as the one that our cities were built to accommodate, and the pace of change is accelerating. Climate change will The City of Cambridge bring extreme heat, is ready to meet these severe storms, and challenges. extensive flooding. In this document, you’ll learn All three may affect our health about what needs to be done, what and comfort, cause damage to our Cambridge is already doing, and the homes and schools, and threaten our important role that you can play in access to reliable energy and safe making our City more resilient in the drinking water.
    [Show full text]
  • Kopeopeo Canal Remediation Project Flood Management Plan Condition 7.1 Resource Consent 67173
    Kopeopeo Canal Remediation Project Flood Management Plan Condition 7.1 Resource Consent 67173 BOPRC ID: A2708898 MEMORANDUM To: Brendon Love Project Manager - Kopeopeo Canal Remediation From: Peter West B.E. (Hons), CPEng, MIPENZ Date: 28 September 2017 Contract Engineer File Ref: Objective Id: Subject: Kopeopeo East Canal Remediation Project; Flood Management Plan 1 Executive Summary Bay of Plenty Regional Council has received resource consent to remove and treat contaminated sediment from within the Kopeopeo East Canal (the Canal) by a wet-dredging method. This report primarily addresses the detailed conceptual flood-management and drainage aspects of the project specific to the proposed dredging method. It is intended that this report should provide a complete treatment of the relevant material, but in places to improve readability, reference has been made to our previous and/or supporting memoranda (references at the end). This report is in two parts: Part 1 discusses relevant aspects of flood management that form necessary background material, or that have not been previously addressed – either from changes in the proposed method; or from developments in supporting information as the project has unfolded. Part 2 forms the Flood Management Plan proper, with the necessary matrix of preparation, monitoring and response procedures and actions. This flood management plan and its supporting documents (see references below) fulfil the requirements of consent condition 7.1 including all items from 7.1a through 7.1g (Resource Consent 67173; 28 September 2016). This flood management plan is consistent with the Site Management Principles and the Flood Management Principles (reproduced below) that were identified in our January 2016 memo that now form the basis of the resource consent conditions relating to flood management.
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline, Historic and Background Rates of Deposition of Lead-Rich Sediments on the Floodplain of the Coeur D’Alene River, Idaho
    In cooperation with the Coeur d’Alene Tribe Baseline, Historic and Background Rates of Deposition of Lead-Rich Sediments on the Floodplain of the Coeur d’Alene River, Idaho By Arthur A. Bookstrom1, Stephen E. Box1, Robert S. Fouseck2, John C. Wallis1, Helen Z. Kayser1 and Berne L. Jackson3 2004, revised 2013 1 USGS, 904 West Riverside Avenue, Room 202, Spokane, WA 99201 2 PO Box 2756, Auburn, AL 36831 3 Coeur d’Alene Tribe, Plummer, ID 83851 Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Open-File Report 2004-1211, Version 1.1 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 2 Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Stop Log Flood Barriers
    PRODUCT STOP LOG FLOOD BARRIERS Flood Control International Incorporated offers removable stop log barriers that are engineered to provide similar levels of protection to permanent flood defenses, but with the distinct advantage of being fully removable when not required. They comprise aluminum panels that are inserted into steel channels. Custom made clamps compress specialist gaskets to create a reliable barrier against flood water. These stop log barriers can be supplied for virtually any configuration including arcs, closed rectangles or circles and straight runs of any length. The system can be used on slopes up to 20° and can be stepped for steeper gradients. USES Each system is load calculated based on application and the prevailing flood • Single building openings. conditions and can be configured for flood depths up to 13 feet. A four-sided • Openings in flood walls. detail is available for openings that may become fully submerged. • Stainless / aluminum system for marine environments. To facilitate installation in new builds, we can supply preformed ground plates • Fully removable perimeter defense to with integral anchors for the demountable supports. The systems can be buildings. also retrospectively fitted to suitable existing foundations in which case load • A ‘usually stored’ system for erection certified, chemically fixed sleeve anchors are used to attach the demountable when flood warnings received. supports. This leaves only stainless steel bolt blanks at each post BENEFITS location. Due to the strength of our beams, this can • Low cost system. be at 10 feet spacing. • Lightweight - sections allow safe lifting of 10ft beams by one person for rapid Purpose designed gaskets that resist silt clogging and reform even after deployment.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Building Utilities from Flood Damage
    FirstEdition FEMA348 November1999 Protecting BuildingUtilities HVAC FromFloodDamage PrinciplesandPracticesfortheDesign andConstructionofFloodResistant BuildingUtilitySystems FUEL ELECTRICAL SEWAGE WATER FEDERALEMERGENCYMANAGEMENTA GENCY MitigationDirectorate 500CStreet,SW Washington,DC20472 IMPORTANT If you ordered and received your copy of Protecting Building Utilites From Flood Damage directly from the FEMA Publications Center, you will automatically receive future updates. If you received your copy of Protecting Building Utilities From Flood Damage through a source other than directly from the FEMA Publications Center, you must complete the coupon below and mail it to the Center or you will not receive future updates. ............................................................................................................ Please add my name to the FEMA Mailing List FE 30 and send me updates of Protecting Building Utilities From Flood Damage Name Address City State Zip Code Fold ........................................................................................................... Place Postage Here Federal Emergency Management Agency P.O. Box 2012 Jessup, MD 20794-2012 Table of Contents CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 - Introduction/Overview 1.0 Introduction 1-2 1.1 How to Use this Manual 1-3 1.2 Introduction to Hazards 1-8 1.3 Basic Protection Methods 1-13 CHAPTER 2 - Regulatory Framework 2.0 Introduction 2-2 2.1 Background of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) 2-2 2.2 Community Floodplain Management Permitting Process 2-5
    [Show full text]
  • Water Control Just Got Easier
    Protect Against: THE NEXT GENERATION IN FLOOD PROTECTION TM Water Control Just Got Easier Prevent Water Damage Stop Flowing Water Contain the Mess Prevent Slip & Falls Finally, a solution to these situations: Protect Against: What is the cost? • Storm preparedness • Pipe, roof & equipment leaks Property & Equipment Damage $$$ • Overflowing appliances Downtime Cost $$$ • Cafeteria accidents & spills Price of Restoration $$$ • Water runoff • A/C & refrigeration condensate control Preventing Costly • Water main breaks & sewage back up • Parking garage & elevator shaft Flood Damage PRICELESS protection & more 1 | www.quickdams.com WHY BE PREPARED? Floods are the # natural1 disaster in the United States Gate % d 2 o Feet 25 lo Absorbs Percentage of s F at ts reported work M Absorbs a 1.5 ip Quarts accidents caused r 1 M D Quart from slip and fall iverter D k a e L Pads r Absorbs A 1/8-in. pipe crack m o Da lo can result in a leak - 2 F 1.5 ta Glns rate of s Inches 250 gal/day n I ms ags Da B r 2.5 iers d te rr o 31 a Inches a B o Average number of 3.5 l W d Inches F days of missed work o o from slip and fall l F te Ga r- e 5 t Feet a W 46% of business production loss is due to water damage 2 3 CONTROL PREVENT SLIP & FALL ACCIDENTS FLUIDS Hi-Vis Gray Water Dams Activates • Absorbs water on contact & swells to create a dam when wet! • Compact & lays flat until activated & grows 2.5in high in just 5 minutes • Contain & control the flow of problem water Drip Mats Ideal for: • Absorbent Mats catch leaks, drips & spills • Condensation build up •
    [Show full text]
  • Design of Movable Weirs and Storm Surge Barriers
    InCom Working Group 26 Design of Movable Weirs and Storm Surge Barriers ----- Final Report Version 6.7 1st August 2005 Design of Movable Weirs and Storm Surge Barriers – WG26 –PIANC p. 2 SUMMARY The PIANC InCom-WG26 (Working Group) performed a - Interactions between the technical aspects of a comprehensive review (state-of-the-art) of the modern weir/barrier design with environmental and aesthetic technologies, design tools, and recent researches used to considerations (Section 5.7) design and build structures controlling water level and flow in rivers, waterways, and ports (for navigation and flood - Procedure to assess the global construction cost of a protection). weir at the design stage (Section 5.8) - Design assessment tools for preliminary and detailed The WG considered regulatory structures of river control design stages (Section 6 and Annex A) weirs and storm surge barriers, focussing on the gate design. This includes: - Prefabrication techniques (Section 7) - Gates controlling water level and flow in rivers (even - Codes, rules and standards: at national and international those not navigable) and waterways (lifting gate, tilting level; including the use of the semi-probabilistic gate, radial gate, sector, etc.; designed in one piece or Eurocode format (Section 8) with an upper flap). These are MOVABLE WEIRS. - An extensive list of relevant technical books, web sites, - Gates controlling water level and flow in estuaries with and guidelines (Section 10). regard to high tides and storms (lifting gate, articulated, tilting, rolling, floating, sliding, etc.). These are flood BARRIERS. The present hardcopy WG-26 report is a reduced version of the full report, which is available on the companion CD- The WG Report focuses on the following aspects: ROM, attached to this PIANC hardcopy report (Directory /A2- REPORT WG-26 (Extended Version)/.
    [Show full text]
  • Minor Flood Mitigation Works & Studies Scheme (Non-Coastal )
    Minor Flood Mitigation Works & Coastal Protection Scheme Approved Projects 2016 Local Authority Project Project Approved Locations Details Funding Construction of chambers, installation of gates and non-return €49,500 Carlow Paupish Lane, valves (additional funding) Carlow County Council Associated works Installation of flood gates at key loc- ations, place new concrete floor & Tinnahinch Loch up stand wall in garage €17,280 Raise level by 350mm for a distance of 80m downstream of Graignaman- agh Bridge, provide demountable flood gate to isolate area from flood- ing from Mill Race, provide de- Tinnahinch Quay mountable flood gates to each of the €31,050 properties and provide 350mm up (additional funding) stand to existing wall along Mill Race for 20m Install flood gates at pedestrian, vehicular & field gate entrances and openings on opposite side of public Fonthill, road. Provide sump to facilitate over Ballinabrannagh pumping of surface waters & con- €14,760 struct buttress wall to rear of wall of property Construct reinforced concrete flood Cassidy's House, wall & provide demountable flood Gotham gates €6,030 Construct new wall on the car park €17,985 side of existing wall & carry out Kennedy Car Park works to include drainage and sumps Removal of trees Clare Reconstruction of embankment- set back from channel edge, graded at County Council Mountcatherine €49,500 approximately 1:3 on both sides and flat on top (width of 1.5 to 2m) Associated works Tree & shrub removal from Inchinossig Bridge to the Bunsheelin River, on Bunsheelin River
    [Show full text]
  • Mosquito Creek Debris Flood Barrier – the First Line of Defence in Protecting the Public from Geohazards
    Mosquito Creek Debris Flood Barrier – The First Line of Defence in Protecting the Public from Geohazards Charles Hunt, M.Sc., P.Eng., ACSM., Jamie Stirling, M.Sc., P.Geo., Jack Price, EIT., ACSM Tetra Tech EBA, Vancouver, BC, Canada Fiona Dercole, Michelle Weston District of North Vancouver, North Vancouver, BC, Canada ABSTRACT In the District of North Vancouver, the Mosquito Creek watershed drains water from Grouse and Fromme Mountains through a densely populated residential area down to Burrard Inlet. The upper part of the watershed has had a number of landslides which have the potential to create debris floods, a significant geohazard to the residents of North Vancouver. The District of North Vancouver (DNV) requested the design and installation of a debris flood barrier at an optimal point on Mosquito Creek. Critical to this installation was careful sizing of the barrier for a 200-year debris flood event, locating the barrier within a fish bearing creek containing rare long tailed frogs and providing the most cost effective solution to the DNV. This paper presents the investigation of the mainstem of Mosquito Creek, including a detailed geohazard inventory map documenting notable features such as; significant sediment sources, natural barriers, landslides, bedrock canyons, waterfalls and debris jams. The paper also details some of the engineering design undertaken to construct the debris net within a bedrock canyon. The flexible net debris barrier at Mosquito Creek is only the second barrier of this type to be installed in British Columbia and when compared to alternatives is more cost effective, less intrusive and more easily repaired, making it a more sustainable solution.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José
    Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José Last Revised: December 2018 (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José MC14104 December 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY—JOINT EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN The first version of the Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San Jose (EAP) was approved by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) Board of Directors and San Jose City (City) Council at a joint meeting held on November 3, 2017. The EAP provided guidance on how the District and City would coordinate, communicate, and make decisions during storm and flood events and established a new method of classifying Flood Emergency Operational and Severity Levels. Since there was flooding on Coyote Creek in February of 2017, the EAP included an appendix of specific guidance related to Coyote Creek. The EAP is to be reviewed and/or exercised annually and updated/revised as appropriate. The District Board of Directors and San Jose City Council delegated approval authority for updates and revisions of the EAP to the City Manager and District Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or their designee. In addition to an annual review and revision of the EAP in 2018, three new appendices are being added to provide specific guidance related to flood risks on Guadalupe River, Canoas Creek and Ross Creek. The 2018 review and update to the EAP was initiated in April under the direction of a Joint Management Team and continues to be based on the concept of a Multi-Agency Coordination (MAC) Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Smartest Report on Design of Basic Flood Barrier Prepared For: Project Officer European Commission DRAFT May 2012
    SMARTeST Report on Design of Basic Flood Barrier Prepared for: Project Officer European Commission DRAFT May 2012 D… Flood Barrier Design Prepared by Name Cyprus Partner, under co-ordination of Antonis Toumazis, Position Cyprus Partner Signature D3.2 FReS design List of content 1 Introduction ________________________________________________________________ 4 2 The structure _______________________________________________________________ 5 3 River and Rainwater Floods ____________________________________________________ 7 3.1 Problem Definition ______________________________________________________________ 7 3.2 Hydrostatic Loading _____________________________________________________________ 7 3.3 Wind Loading __________________________________________________________________ 8 3.4 Wave Loading __________________________________________________________________ 8 3.5 Debris Impact Loading ___________________________________________________________ 9 3.6 Hydrodynamic Loading __________________________________________________________11 4 Coastal and Wave Overtopping Floods __________________________________________ 12 4.1 Problem Definition _____________________________________________________________12 4.2 Broken wave __________________________________________________________________12 5 Stress Analysis _____________________________________________________________ 14 5.1 Load Path ____________________________________________________________________14 5.2 Secondary members ____________________________________________________________14 6
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Flooding on Aquatic Ecosystem Services
    Biogeochemistry https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-0449-7 The impact of flooding on aquatic ecosystem services Ceara J. Talbot . Elena M. Bennett . Kelsie Cassell . Daniel M. Hanes . Elizabeth C. Minor . Hans Paerl . Peter A. Raymond . Rodrigo Vargas . Philippe G. Vidon . Wilfred Wollheim . Marguerite A. Xenopoulos Received: 20 October 2017 / Accepted: 27 April 2018 Ó The Author(s) 2018 Abstract Flooding is a major disturbance that people through freshwater aquatic ecosystem services, impacts aquatic ecosystems and the ecosystem ser- which often go unrecognized because they are less vices that they provide. Predicted increases in global evident and can be difficult to evaluate. Here, we flood risk due to land use change and water cycle identify the effects that small magnitude frequently intensification will likely only increase the frequency occurring floods (\ 10-year recurrence interval) and and severity of these impacts. Extreme flooding events extreme floods ([ 100-year recurrence interval) have can cause loss of life and significant destruction to on ten aquatic ecosystem services through a system- property and infrastructure, effects that are easily atic literature review. We focused on ecosystem recognized and frequently reported in the media. services considered by the Millennium Ecosystem However, flooding also has many other effects on Assessment including: (1) supporting services (pri- mary production, soil formation), (2) regulating ser- vices (water regulation, water quality, disease Responsible Editor: Sujay Kaushal. regulation, climate regulation), (3) provisioning ser- Electronic supplementary material The online version of vices (drinking water, food supply), and (4) cultural this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-0449-7) con- services (aesthetic value, recreation and tourism).
    [Show full text]