Port and Harbor TANU-H-71 -OD1 c. 2 Development System CiaCmaatse Col'Y gyesGrant. Depositot7 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ e% ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ q ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yO ~ P ..:-' j ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ g o & ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 C 0 r ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ Port and Harbor Daveloi,'mentSystem Architecture Research Center Phase1- Design GuldeNnas College of Architecture 8 Work Repel Environmental Design Texas A&M University August 1971 TAMU- SG -71-236 College Station, Texas 77843 C<~CU~gTING CPPY Sea Grant Depository Acknowledgments This project was partially fundedby NOAA, We wish to thank the personsand departments National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- who furnished us information: tration, Office of Sea Grants, Departmentof Mr. Leonard E. Hassil Commerce,through institutional grant GH-101 Prolect Manager made to TexasA8M University. Port and Cargo SystemsCommittee National Research Council Washington, D.C. Thework on the Portand Harbor Development Systemproject is the resultof the effortsof Mr. Paul A. Amundsen several groups: Executive Director The American Association of Port Authorities Architecture ResearchCenter, ResearchTeam: Washington, D.C, RussellL. Stogsdill, ResearchArchitect, Project Director Mr. Frank McCurry John Langston, ResearchAssistant Santa Fe Railroad Arie Schinnar, ResearchAssistant Amarillo, Texas Mike Willingham,Graduate Research Assistant Linda Escamilla, Secretary Mr. C.J. Calvin Judith Hlubucek, Secretary The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association Linda Jarnison, Secretary Washington, D.C. Lucinda Kerley, Librarian Mr. H.J, Rome Research Advisors: Superintendentof Docks Prof. Gunter Schmitz, Director of Project Mr. Verdun Daste Development Publicity Representative Randolph Waligura, ResearchArchitect New Orleans Centroport New Orleans, Louisiana Administrative support: Sea Grant Program Office Dr. Charles C. Bates Willis H. Clark, Assistant Director Science Advisor DonaI d Walsh, ProgramAssociate U.S. Coast Guarcl RogerD. Anderson, Marine Educationand Washington, D.C. Training Coordinator Allen Martin, Administrative Assistant Mr. George W. Altvater LeathaMiloy, Headand Editor, Departmentof Deputy Director Marine Resources information Port of Houston Janet Howe, Associate Editor Houston, Texas Ka thi Jensen, Assistant Editor RosemaryE. Hoykin, ProgramAssociate Col. J.S. Newman Executive Director of Civil Works Departmentof the Army Office of the Chief of Engineers Washington, D.C. Mr . C . S. Devoy Port Director and General Manager Port of Galveston Galveston, Texas Direct'o rs and staffs of the following ports: Port of Dublin, Ireland United States: Port of Hong Kong, China Port of Seattle, Washington SouthAfrican Railwaysand Harbors Port of New York, New York Port of Kitimat, British Columbia Port of Oakland, Cal ifornia Port of Halifax, Nova Scotia Port of Tampa, Florida Port of Antwerp, Belgium Port of Hampton Roads, Virginia Nat'ional Harbor Board, Canada Port of Long Beach, California Portof London, England Port of San Francisco, California Portof Liverpool, England Port of Los Angeles, California Port of Piraeus, Greece Port of Baltimore, Maryland Port oF Bangkok, Thialand Port of Boston, Massachusett's Port oF Bristol, England Port of Phila d elphia, Pennsy I vania Port of Lagos, Nigeria Port oF Catoosa, Okla homa Port. of Beaumont, Texas Special Credits Port of Galveston, Texas Appreciationis extendedfo the following Port of Port Arthur, Texas individualsfor supportand encouragement: Port of Corpus Christi, Texas EdwardJ. Romieniec, Dean, College of Port of New Orleans, Louisiana Architecture and EnvironmentalDesign, Foreign Dr. John C. Calhoun, Jr., Director, Sea Port of Lisbon, Portugal Grant Program Office . Port of Amsterdam, Netherlands Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands Special thanksto the Followingpersons for Port of Dover, England their time and efforts in editing fhe text: Port of Le Havre, France . Roger D. Anderson, Sea Grant Program Port of Calcutta, India Office Port of Auckland, New Zealand ' Dan Bragg, Industrial Economics Research Port of Copenhagen, Denmark Division Israel Port Authority, Israel ' John 0. Greer, Architecture Research Port of Hamburg,West Germany Center Port of Ghent, Belgium ' Gerry Maffei, College of Architecture and Port of Bremen, Germany Environmental Design Port of Helsinki, Finland ' Ahn Miloy, industrial EconomicsResearch Port of Venice, Italy Division Port of Hanko, Finland ' Don Sweeney, Architecture ResearchCenter. Port of Sydney, Au stral ia Port of Wellington, New Zealand Port of Christchurch, New Zealand Port of Bergen, Norway Port of Melbourne, Australia Port of Manchester, England Port of Stockholm, Sweden Port of Belfast, Northern ireland Part of Bombay, India Port of Osaka, Japan 1 Table of Contents 1 Table of Contents 2 introduction 3 Port 3.1 Types 3.1.1 Geographi ca I Analysis 3.1.2 Cargo 3.2 Location 3.2.1 Physical Factors 3.2.2 Socio-economic 3.3 Administration 3.3.1 Owning Organizations 12 3.3.2 Operations 3.4 Transportation 3.4,1 Land 18 3.4,2 Airborne 3.4.3 Waterborne 3.5 Cargo Handling 3.5.1 Methods 32 3.5,2 Equipment 3.6 Labor 3.6.1 Type 3.6.2 Structuref'Organization 3.6.3 Occupational Structure 3.6.4 Age 3.6.5 Mechanization 3.6.6 Safety 3.6.7 Work hours 3.6.8 Wages 3.6.9 Amenities and Welfare 3.6.10 Manpower 3.6.11 Training 3.7 Support Industry 3.8 Safety 3.8.1 Types of Fires 50 3.8.2 Firefighting Agents 3.8.3 Fire Prevention 3.8.4 Medical 3.8,5 Navigational Aids 3.8.6 Marine Safety 3,9 Finance 3,9.1 Ob jectives 3.9.2 Revenue 4 Planning 4.1 Design and 4.1.1 Decision 58 ConstrUction 4.1,2 Prel iminary 4.1,3 Site investigation 4.1.4 General Review 4.l.5 Harbor and Channel 4,1.6 Brea kwa ters 4.1.7 Terminal s 4.1.8 Offshore Structures 4.1.9 Bvil ding s 4.1,10 Dock Types 4.1. l 1 Dry Docks 4 ~1.12 Piles 4.1.13 FenderSystems 4.1.14 Mooring 4.1.15 Dolphins 4.1.16 Moles, Trestles and Catwa I ks 5 Trends 102 6 Concepts 6.1 ExistIng Port 105 6.2 interim Port 115 6.3 Trans-Port 125 7 Glossary 132 8 Bibl iography 2 Introduction Perhapsno aspect of modern times is as portsin differentstages of development.Nau- pervasiveand influential as change, This tical terms,perhaps unusual ta the uninitiated, century has been marked from its beginning are explained in the Glossary, Part 7. by far-reaching change-- scientific, tech- nical, social, political, even cultural, The synergisticeffect of changeacting on change has increased Its rate, so that the ability to cope with and plan for changehas become a central feature of modern exis- fence. The problemsthat can result from the mobility fo respondfo changeare well illustrated by the designof manyof the world's portsand harbors. Until recently thesefacilities could be designed by looking backward for examples from the past. But rapid communication and the economicpressures of world trade have so shortened the gap between scientific break- through and technological implementation that modelsfrom antiquity no longer suffice. Con- tainerization, supersized vessels, oceangoing barges and new cargo handling techniques are but few of the most recent developments to which ports must respond. Another, spawned by necessityand massivesocial pressure,is the need for preserving environmental balance. Clearly, ports and harbors of the future must be planned and designed to accommodate change. The purposeof this report is to aid those who are involved in and responsible for port and harbor planning and design. If is hoped that through the use of the guidelines presented herein, marine facilities may be de- veloped which are more rational, more flexible and thus more functional . Thenext section of the report, Part 3, pre- sents an analysis of present harbor design features. Part 4 describesstep by step re- quirements in port design and construction. Importanttrends in marineand transportation technology are described in Part 5, and Part 6 suggestsplanning and design concepts for 3 Port Analysis 3.1 Types 3.1.1 Geographical 3 .1 .1 .1 Coastal Port 3.1.1.2 Inland Port CoastalPorts are thosewhich are affected by Inland portsare thosewhich have little or no tidal rangesand are readily accessibleto tidal effects. Theseports are locatedup rivers openwater. Theyprovide the following or channels, They provide the following ad- advantages: vantages: ~ deepwater for large vessels ~ protection ~ expansioncapabilities on water and land ~ water access to interior maximumaccessibility for coastaI and reduced transportation costs overseas trade ' limited tidal action. ' desirable locations for industrial develop- ment, Reproducedby permissionoF the Port of Reproducedby permissionof the Port of Hamburg, Wellington, New Zealand Germany Disadvantagesof coastal ports: Disadvantagesof inland ports: ~ tidal action - unseasonaI rise and fall of rivers or channels sl I ting ~ accumulation of sedimentary material - unprotected. limitsan vessel size. Coastal port development fol laws two basic Inland port developmentfollows two basic forms: forms: A . Seawardexpansion A . Restrictive B, Inland expansion. B. Unrestrictive . 3.1.2 Cargo 3.1.2,1 Conta inerized Classification of ocean borne general cargo The container provides a sound protective suitable for containerization is listed in three covering for cargo and provides an econom- general classifications: ical systemfor transferof cargo from one A . Prime generally commoditiesof high transportationmode to another. value with relatively high shippingrates. Theseprime commoditiespossess physical Containers come in five basic types: reefer, attributes which permit them to be effi- dry, insulated,vented