• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Report documentation page
 Title Page
 Abstract
 Table of Contents
 List of Figures
 Introduction
 Coordinate system
 Beach and profile data
 Box and fan surveys: methods and...
 Box and fan surveys: methods and...
 References and Acknowledgement...






Group Title: UFL/COEL (University of Florida. Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Laboratory) ; 88/011
Title: Survey data report
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076120/00001
 Material Information
Title: Survey data report Cape Canaveral, March-July, 1988
Series Title: UFLCOEL
Physical Description: 3 v. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Kirby, James Thornton
University of Florida -- Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Dept
United States -- Office of Naval Research
Publisher: Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Dept., Univ. of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fl
Publication Date: 1988
 Subjects
Subject: Ocean waves -- Florida -- Canaveral, Cape (Cape)   ( lcsh )
Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering thesis M.S
Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
technical report   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Funding: Work supported by Office of Naval Research.
Statement of Responsibility: by James T. Kirby.
General Note: "November 1988."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076120
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 21398909

Table of Contents
    Report documentation page
        Unnumbered ( 1 )
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Abstract
        Abstract
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    List of Figures
        List of Figures 1
        List of Figures 2
    Introduction
        Page 1
    Coordinate system
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Beach and profile data
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 7
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
    Box and fan surveys: methods and layout
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
    Box and fan surveys: methods and layout
        Page 31
        Profiles
            Page 32
        March fan profiles
            Page 1
            Page 2
            Page 3
            Page 4
            Page 5
            Page 6
            Page 7
            Page 8
            Page 9
            Page 10
            Page 11
        June, 1988, survey
            Page 33
            Page 34
            Page 35
        June, 1988, survey
            Page 36
        June profiles
            Page 37
            Page 38
            Page 39
        July, 1988, survey
            Page 40
        Artificial Bragg Bar installation
            Page 41
        July profiles
            Page 42
            Page 43
            Page 44
            Page 45
            Page 46
    References and Acknowledgements
        Page 47
Full Text


REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
1. report No. 2. 3. ReIeptlt's Acce llss n Mo,


4. Title oad Subtitle 5. portt bDat
Survey Data Report: November, 1988
Cape Canaveral, March-July, 1988i i.
Volume 1
7. Author(s) S. Performing Orlgliuationo port No.
James T. Kirby UFL/COEL-88/011

9. Performing Orgazattoao ame and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Department
University of Florida 11. cootrct or Crant o.
336 Weil Hall N00014-86-K-0790
Gainesville, FL 32611 13. yp. o report
12. Sponsoring Orlganzation Name and Address
Office of Naval Research Data
800 North Quinc'Street
Arlington, Virginia 22217 1
14.

15. Supplementary otes



16. Abstract


This report presents the results of a bathymetric surveying program carried

out on the beach and nearshore region about 1 km to the north of the Port

Canaveral inlet. The survey data covers a period between March 16 and July 21,

1988. The data was collected in support of a field study on directional wave

measurement and Bragg reflection from artificial, shore-parallel bars, performed

during June-July, 1988. The topography at the experiment site was generally

monotonic in the on-offshore direction (except near the end of the experimental

program) and uniform in the longshore direction.







17. OriginBtor's Key Words I1. Availability Itatment
Bathymetric survey
Beach profiles
Port Canaveral


19. U. S. Security Ciasstf. of the Report 20. U. $. Security Claselt. of Thi Page 21. No. of Petes 22. Price
U-c Lisified Unclassified

























Survey Data Report: Cape Canaveral, March-July, 1988


James T. Kirby
Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Department
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 1

Report UFL/COEL-88/011
November, 1988


'Work supported by the Office of Naval Research through contract N00014-86-K-0790

























Abstract

This report presents the results of a bathymetric surveying program carried out on
the beach and nearshore region about 1km to the north of the Port Canaveral inlet. The
survey data covers a period between March 16 and July 21, 1988. The data was collected
in support of a field study on directional wave measurement and Bragg reflection from
artificial, shore-parallel bars, performed during June July, 1988. The topography at the
experiment site was generally monotonic in the on-offshore direction (except near the end
of the experimental program) and uniform in the longshore direction.











1 Introduction


2 The Coordinate System

2.1 Horizontal Positioning ....................

2.2 Vertical Positioning ................. .....


3 The Beach and Profile Data

3.1 M arch Surveys ........................

3.2 M ay Data ...........................

3.3 June-July Data ........................


4 Box and Fan surveys: Methods and Layout


5 Results of Box and Fan Surveys

5.1 M arch, 1988 ..........................

5.2 June, 1988 survey .......................

5.3 July, 1988 survey .......................


6 Artificial Bragg Bar Installation


References


Acknowledgements


Appendix A. Wading Profile Data


Appendix B. Box Boat Trajectories and Individual Profiles


Appendix C. Fan Boat Trajectories and Individual Profiles


Appendix D. Bar Position Data


. . . .


. . ... .

. . . .

. . . .







. . . .

. . . .

. . . .










List of Figures


1 Baseline for local coordinate system . . . . . .
2 Geometry of box and fan survey areas . . . . . .
3 Location of baseline, box and fan with respect to beach and Port Canaveral
entrance . . . .. . . . . . .
4 Wading profiles, March 16-17, 1988. Profiles at x stations -100, -65, -30, +5,
+40, +75 and +250 ................................
5 Overlay of March profiles. Note bar in profile at northern extreme of box,
and the slight curvature of the beach . . . . . .
6 Comparison of March, 1988 and October, 1987 profiles. March profiles indi-
cated by solid lines; October profiles by dashed lines. . . . .
7 Wading profiles, May 16-17, 1988 ........................
8 Overlay of M ay profiles. .............................


Wading profiles, June
Wading profiles, June
Wading profiles, June
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July
Wading profiles, July


21, 1988.


25, 1988. . . . . . . .
27, 1988 . . . . . .. .
7, 1988. . . . . . . .
9, 1988. . . . . . . .
10, 1988 . . . . . ...
12, 1988 . . . . . ...
13; 1988 . . . . . ...
14, 1988 . . . . . ...
15, 1988 . . . . . ...
16, 1988 . . . . . ...
17, 1988 . . .. .. . . ...
19, 1988 . . . . . ...


Boat position during March box line survey . . . . .
Box and Fan Lines for March Survey . . . ..... .....
Smoothed Box and Fan Survey Lines, March survey . . . .
Superimposed survey lines, March survey . . . . .
Longshore transects at y = 600m and 800m, March survey . .
Box and fan profile overlaps, June 1988 . . . . .
Box and fan profile overlaps, June 1988 . . . . .
Box and fan profile overlaps, June 1988 . . . . .
Artificial bar positions, July 11, 1988 . . . . .


15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
30
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
42


13
14


. .









31 Artificial bar positions, July 12, 1988 . . . . . 43
32 Artificial bar positions, July 13, 1988 . . . ..... 44
33 Change in artificial bar positions, July 11 12, 1988 . . .... 45
34 Change in artificial bar positions, July 12 13, 1988 . . ... 46


List of Tables

1 Available profile data for Cape Canaveral experiment, March July, 1988 7
2 Statistics of bar positions, July 11-13, 1988. . . . 41










1 Introduction


This report presents the results of field surveying done in support of a field experiment
conducted in June-July, 1988, at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The objectives of the surveying
program were to determine the degree of longshore uniformity of the offshore bathymetry at
the experiment site, to monitor changes in the offshore bathymetry, and to provide detailed
beach profiling as needed. Data in this report was collected on a number of occasions,
including:

1. A preliminary field survey in October, 1987.

2. A detailed survey of "box" and "cone" bathymetry regions and beach profiles in
March, 1988.

3. A beach profiling survey in May, 1988.

4. A detailed "box" survey and reduced "fan" survey in June, 1988.

5. Beach profiling during the period of June 21 July 19, 1988.

6. A final "box" survey on July 21, 1988.

Data presented in this report was collected mainly by the field crew of the Coastal
and Oceanographic Engineering Laboratory (COEL), University of Florida, with assistance
(and supervision) by personnel from the Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory (NCEL) during
beach profiling. Also reported here are measurements of Bragg bar installation locations.
Additional assistance was rendered in locating and surveying instrument arrays installed
by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) group; this data is not reported here.
This report is organized into the following sections:

1. A description of the local coordinate system established for the experiment site and
its orientation with respect to compass and map coordinates, along with a description
of vertical controls.

2. A description of the beach together with profile data obtained by wading in October,
1987, and March, May, June and July, 1988.

3. A description of methods and layout for "box" and "fan" surveys.

4. A description of results of the box and fan surveys.

5. A description of data related to the installation of the Bragg bar field.









2 The Coordinate System


A local coordinate system was established for the experiment. The local x axis consists
of a baseline running approximately parallel to the beach in the study area, and located
approximately 20m landward of the beach berm crest. Positive x is directed southward.
In the following, southward will correspond to downcoast (to right looking seaward) and
northward will correspond to upcoast (to left looking seaward). The baseline and reference
survey markers are shown in Figure 1.

2.1 Horizontal Positioning

Horizontal position of the baseline was established by aligning as nearly parallel to the local
October shoreline as possible. There is some indication that the beach is slightly curved,
with the waterline located further from the baseline at the northern end of the box.
The orientation of the baseline is 32o58'14" with respect to true North, as judged from
azimuth readings between survey markers and the Canaveral lighthouse. The longshore
extent of the "box" surveying region falls in the region -100m < x < +250m. The box
centerline is then located at x = +75m. The choice of coordinates used here makes y
positive offshore from the baseline in a right-handed coordinate system. The geometry of
the "box" and "fan" survey areas with respect to the local coordinate system is indicated
in Figure 2. The location of the origin x = Om was chosen based on a compromise between
the request that the origin be located at the extension of South Patrol Road to the baseline
and the fact that the beach access road actually curves around quite a bit.
The offshore extent of the box was taken to be 441m, which corresponds to an estimate
of 41m from baseline to MHW based on October surveys, plus 400m. The fan then is in
the offshore region 441m < y < 1041m. The position of the box and fan with respect to
the beach and other local features is indicated in Figure 3.

2.2 Vertical Positioning

The baseline is provided with three elevation markers at positions (x,y) equal to (200,0),
(50,0) and (-100,0). These markers are tied back to the survey marker "Artesia", and have
elevations of +2.87m, +2.81m and +2.71m NGVD respectively. These markers were used
as reference to establish absolute elevation during beach profiling, since direct line of sight
to the marker "Artesia" was obscured by vegetation and other beach features (and was
quite distant from the immediate measurement region).
A second marker "Spoils" is present on the shoreward side of the dredge-spoil mount,
close to the inlet. (See figure 3) This marker has been used to level tide gages and to check
























(-400,0)


(-100,-62)(
N t.-nn n


NOTE:
All Values in
Meters.
e- Box Transponder
Locations
SCALE:
1"=100m


SEMI-PERMANENT BENCHMARKS.
S@ (-100,0), 2"x4" Post, EL.= 8.89 ft.
(2.71m)
S@ (50,0), 4"x4" Post, EL.= 9.22 ft.
(2.81m)
(@ (200,0), 2"x4" Post, EL.= 9.42 ft.
(2.87m)

Referenced To 1953 USGS
BM "Artesia", EL.=11.57 ft.
Located at Seaward End of
S. Patrol Road.


(-100,441)


Buoys For
Survey Lines


Figure 1: Baseline for local coordinate system
















xy E
(-400,0) VEG. LIMIT
(MHW (y=40m)


x y
(-700,1041)


(75,0)


(-390,1041)


(500,0) //
Sy=441 (-8
x
(75,104

y=600 (230,1041)
SCALE:

\(385,1041)

V y y=800 (540,1041)
x

(695,1041)
NOTE:
ALL VALUES (850,1041)
IN METERS





Figure 2: Geometry of box and fan survey areas


1)
y






























































Ro, Ref \3 -.46 ,. \ N33 \
Figure 3: Location of baseline, box and fan with respect to beach and Port Canaveral
entrance





5









elevations at the southern end of the baseline. Positions of reference markers are indicated
in Figure 1.
All elevation data provided in this report is with respect to NGVD as provided by
NOS for the "Artesia" and "Spoils" markers. A correction to MLW is required to tie in
with the NOAA Tide Tables 1988 (Reference 1). MLW for the Port Canaveral area is
computed from a tide gage at Patrick Air Force Base. The correction is given by MLW =
-0.44m NGVD. All data may be converted by adding 0.44m from the given NGVD values
to obtain MLW elevation values. Correspondence between local converted values of tidal
minima and maxima and the values given by the NOAA tide tables was quite good under
calm weather conditions. During the March survey, a strong offshore breeze set down the
coastal water level, causing a marked discrepancy between measured and predicted tides.
However, overlap between beach profiles and boat profiles was quite good during this period,
indicating the accuracy of the tide gage levelling.










March May June July
x(m) 16-17 16-17 21 25 27 7 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19
-100 *
-82.5 *
-65 ** *
-47.5 *
-30 **
-12.5 *
5 ***** ***** *
22.5 *
40 ** *
57.5 *
75 *
110 *
145 *
180 *
215 *
250 *

Table 1: Available profile data for Cape Canaveral experiment, March July, 1988

3 The Beach and Profile Data

The beach in the study area consists of a relatively flat intertidal zone backed by a steep
foreshore. The beach shoreward of the berm is essentially flat but well vegetated, thus
providing some obstacles in line of sight surveying. The vegetation line extends close to the
berm in summer.
Beach profile data was collected using a number of techniques ranging from a standard
level and tape operation to a total surveying station with mobile prism operation. No
definitive intercomparison tests were made for the different techniques, but results were
judged to be of sufficient accuracy due to the consistent repeatability in subaerial portions
of the survey lines. A list of available profile data is indicated in Table 1. Plots of individual
profiles and listings of the data sets are given in Appendix A. For the individual profile plots,
data for each day is compared to data from the immediately previous survey, if available.

3.1 March Surveys

At the time of the March surveys, it was visually apparent that the beach had suffered
some active erosion during the winter. The activeness of the beach was evidenced by some
apparent relic scarping which starts in the northern 50m of the box and extends to the north,
as well as by the presence of a set of cusps in the southern half of the box and extending
further south. At the time of the survey, the intertidal beach appeared to be relatively flat










and uniform, as has been noted before; however, surveys (see below) indicated the presence
of a bar at the northern extreme of the box, extending to an unknown distance further
north. Talks with several security guards indicated that winter damage had been extensive
and that the beach had undergone fairly extensive recovery by the time of the surveys.
Due to the question of whether or not the beach had recovered a summer equilibrium, it
was decided to conduct a somewhat reduced set of beach profiling. Profiles were conducted
on x-coordinate stations -100m,-65m,-30m, +5m, +40m and +75m, which correspond
to the box range lines for the northern half of the box, and at station +250m, which
corresponds to the southern limit of the box. Profiling was done using a self-leveling transit
to record elevations and an OMNI total station to determine offshore distance from the
survey baseline. The wader used a standard fiberglass surveying pole with a three-prism
element mounted on its top. The longshore position of the wader was controlled by line of
site with a pair of range poles mounted on each longshore station. Elevations were tied to
markers at coordinates (-100,0), (+50,0) and (+200,0), which are in turn surveyed back to
the survey marker "Artesia" in order to tie in with NGVD.
Profile lines are plotted in Figure 4, where distance y(m) corresponds to physical distance
seaward of the baseline. The beach berm is generally located at y = +20m, but there is
some general curvature of the beach which tends to place shore somewhat further from
the baseline as x decreases (to the north). The profiles in Figure 4 are vertically scaled as
indicated, with the x = -100m profile alligned with the scale and each subsequent profile
shifted down by 0.5in/35m increment in x. The vertical profile spacing thus corresponds
to relative longshore spacing. The bottom of the figure is towards the south.
The profiles indicate the presence of a bar at the northern extreme of the profiling box.
This feature also survives at the next station (x = -65m) but is welded to the beach at this
point. South of these two profiles, the beach is essentially uniform. The bar feature and
the (otherwise) overall uniformity may be seen more clearly in Figure 5, where the profiles
are overlayed.
Finally, the question of profile stability and of the present non-equilibrium state of
the overall profile is addressed in Figure 6, where representative profiles from October
and March are overlayed. The +600m October profile overlays the -100m March profile
directly. The +450m October profile lies at +50m in the present local system and is shown
in comparison to the +40m March profile. The +300m October profile lies at +200m in
the local system and is shown in comparison to the +250m March profile. In all cases, a
seaward movement of the berm is noted coupled with a general deepening of the nearshore
profile. This somewhat odd coupling is deemed to be not-to-bizarre due to the fact that
the beach is essentially a trapped feature maintained by the vicinity of the Port Canaveral























0
0

MRARCH 16-17, 1988

3 1 -100.0 C

2 -5.0

do -30.0

5.0

40.0

75.0











250.0









0.00 20.00 ub.oo 6.00 80.00 100.0 10.00 1.0.00 1. 60.00
Y (M)








Figure 4: Wading profiles, March 16-17, 1988. Profiles at x stations -100, -65, -30, +5, +40,
+75 and +250











9





























o. MARCH 16-17, 1988




JO








0
0

-J












0.00 20.00o 40.00oo 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Y (M)







Figure 5: Overlay of March profiles. Note bar in profile at northern extreme of box, and
the slight curvature of the beach.









north jetty.


3.2 May Data

A survey of the area in May, 1988 indicated that the beach had undergone a period of
recovery since the March surveys. The shore-parallel bar evident in the northern portion
of the range had been worked further shoreward. Figure 7 shows the profiles for the May
survey, which are also shown overlayed in Figure 8 and give an indication of the longshore
uniformity of the beach in the offshore region beyond the intertidal zone.

3.3 June-July Data

The evolution of the beach profiles during the experimental period was quite complex due
to a series of strong (and unexpected) weather events. First, a storm passed through the
region about two weeks prior to the startup date of June 21. This storm left a pronounced
bar and trough system parallel to the beach face. This feature advanced shoreward for
several days, until the beach recovered a semblance of regularity on June 27. Then, an
unseasonably strong storm from the North-East swept through the area and reestablished
the bar-trough system (to an even greater degree). Beach profile recovery proceeded until
about July 9 or 10, when it was felt that the artificial bar field could be installed.
Figures 9-21 provide plots of the surveyed beach at irregular intervals during the exper-
imental period, and show the evolution of the bar-trough system. Plots for July 12, 13 and
14 also show the bar positions on the regularly surveyed profiles, while the set of profiles
for July 15 show relict scouring due to the recently removed artificial bars. Overlays of
profiles for each day are included in Appendix A, and give an idea of the relative degree of
longshore variability occurring during the stormy conditions. Note that this variability was
more extensive than during the pre-experiment surveys.










March May June July
x(m) 16-17 16-17 21 25 27 7 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19
-100 *
-82.5 *
-65 ** *
-47.5 *
-30 **
-12.5 *
5 ***** ***** *
22.5 *
40 ** *
57.5 *
75 *
110 *
145 *
180 *
215 *
250 *

Table 1: Available profile data for Cape Canaveral experiment, March July, 1988

3 The Beach and Profile Data

The beach in the study area consists of a relatively flat intertidal zone backed by a steep
foreshore. The beach shoreward of the berm is essentially flat but well vegetated, thus
providing some obstacles in line of sight surveying. The vegetation line extends close to the
berm in summer.
Beach profile data was collected using a number of techniques ranging from a standard
level and tape operation to a total surveying station with mobile prism operation. No
definitive intercomparison tests were made for the different techniques, but results were
judged to be of sufficient accuracy due to the consistent repeatability in subaerial portions
of the survey lines. A list of available profile data is indicated in Table 1. Plots of individual
profiles and listings of the data sets are given in Appendix A. For the individual profile plots,
data for each day is compared to data from the immediately previous survey, if available.

3.1 March Surveys

At the time of the March surveys, it was visually apparent that the beach had suffered
some active erosion during the winter. The activeness of the beach was evidenced by some
apparent relic scarping which starts in the northern 50m of the box and extends to the north,
as well as by the presence of a set of cusps in the southern half of the box and extending
further south. At the time of the survey, the intertidal beach appeared to be relatively flat

















March 1988
2 --- October 1987





Sx .100
-j
LU 0



-1



-2 I I I
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

y(m)

3

-\X 40
S---- 50







21

-2 I I





0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

y(m)

3

-x 250
\ ---1 = 200



D 1



4 o-
S.






0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
y(m)






Figure 6: Comparison of March, 1988 and October, 1987 profiles. March profiles indicated

by solid lines; October profiles by dashed lines.

























0




-j
S MAR 16-17, 1988

L3 -100.0
Zo

2 ; -65.0


o -30.0

5.0

40.0

75.0


110.0




180.0




250.0










0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Y (M)








Figure 7: Wading profiles, May 16-17, 1988.






































0 MAY 16-17, 1988





o0
0


9-
O
O







0

O





0



0





0


0.00 20.00 40.00 60.0 00 8b.0 10o.00
Y (M)











Figure 8: Overlay of May profiles.


























JUNE 21, 1988


75.0

110.0




180.0

215.0


o.00 20.00 o.oo0 60.00 80o.oo
Y (M)


to0.o0 120.00 140.00


Figure 9: Wading profiles, June 21, 1988.


160.00


1























0
C3

S JUNE 25, 1988
-100.0



















180 5.0
20.0


















0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Y (M)








Figure 10: Wading profiles, June 25, 1988.











16






















JUNE 27, 1988


75.0



1"s~'^ .0--^ __ __


0'.00 2b.oo Ub.oo 6b.oo ab.oo
Y (M)


Ibo.oo 120.00 10o.00 160.00


Figure 11: Wading profiles, June 27, 1988.















JULY 7, 1988


-65.0
-30.0
5.0
10.0


170.0


.0oo 20.00 00.00 6b.00 8b.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Y (M)




Figure 12: Wading profiles, July 7, 1988.


~2~
~z=


























JULY 9, 1988

C3
Z
-65.0

-, -30.0
uo
=*- 5.0


0.0

75.0






170.0
















0.00 20.00 .oo00 6b.00 80.00 o bo.oo 120.00 t1o.oo 160.00
Y (M)








Figure 13: Wading profiles, July 9, 1988.












19


























JULY 10, 1988


-65.0
-17.5
-30.0
-13.5
5.0
22.5
40.0

75.0


170.0


215.0


0.00 20.00 qb.oo


60.00 80.00
Y (M)


100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00


Figure 14: Wading profiles, July 10, 1988.























JULY 12, 1988


-65.0
-U7.5
-30.0
-12.5
5.0
22.5
40.0


145.0

180.0

215.0











o000 20.00 40.00 60b.oo 80.oo00 10o.oo 20.00 1 .0 160.00
Y (M)







Figure 15: Wading profiles, July 12, 1988.


~----~--=

~--------~
2-,






















JULY 13, 1988


-65.0
-47.5
-30.0
-12.5
5.0
22.5
40.0


180.0


0.00 20.00 Uo.00 s0.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 1o0.00 160.00
Y (M)






Figure 16: Wading profiles, July 13, 1988.


A-















JULY 14.DAT


-65.0
-30.0
5.0
40.0


180.0


0'.00 20.00 O.o00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 tlO.O0 160.00
Y (M)



Figure 17: Wading profiles, July 14, 1988.


~-----,
~'~-t~T=



























C JULT 15, 1988

CD
M3

9 6S.0

-J -30.0

145.0 '
10.0








50.0
Iq5..



















I I I I | I I
0.00 20.00 qO.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Y (M)








Figure 18: Wading profiles, July 15, 1988.













JULY 16, 1988


-65.0
-30.0
5.0
U0.


IQ5.0
180.0


c0n n


0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00oo 20.00 140o.oo 1.00
Y (M)



Figure 19: Wading profiles, July 16, 1988.


~------_
=~----r---~=_=






~--1-_~


























JULY 17, 1988


-65.0

-30.0

5.0

LIO.0


180.0


0'.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.0000 120.O0 140.00 160.00
Y (M)








Figure 20: Wading profiles, July 17, 1988.


i



























JULY 19, 1988
-100.0

-65.0
-u,7.5
-30.0
-12.5
5.0


o.00 2b.00 Ub.00 6b.00 80.00
T (M)


ibo.oo iko.oo 140.00 160.00


Figure 21: Wading profiles, July 19, 1988.


I









4 Box and Fan surveys: Methods and Layout

A view of the pre-chosen box and fan layout is indicated in Figure 2. This grid was played
out in the field by establishing a system of range poles along the lines y = Om and y = 20m
on the beach. The range pole pairs start at x = +250m and then proceed in 35m increments
along the beach to x = -100m, providing a total of 11 reference pairs at the shore end.
These range poles were left on the beach in order to aid in local positioning.
Boat position during buoy placement and surveying was measured using a Motorola
Falcon III miniranger system. All surveying was done using a two-transponder system.
Transponder sites were surveyed and marked permanently on the beach. For the fan survey
and buoy placement, transponders were located at (+500,0) and (-400,0) with respect to
the baseline. For the box surveys, transponder positions (+250,-60) and (-100,-62) were
used.
Offshore control for the box was obtained by dropping buoys at the positions indicated
in Figure 2. Based on October surveys, it was estimated that the offshore line of the box
should be located at y = 441m. Due to boat drift during dropping and other factors, buoy
position tends to be no more accurate than about 5m with respect to the originally specified
position. During dropping, boat position was controlled by operating the miniranger system
in x y mode and thus searching for the actual position. Similarly, buoys for the offshore
range of the fan were dropped along the desired line y = 1041m, with resulting typical
errors.
After a great deal of experience was obtained with the Falcon III system in the first
Canaveral survey as well as at surveys at other sites, it was found that adequate control
of boat position could be maintained by steering according to the x y position readout
given by the Falcon III. This approach proved to be advantageous in comparison to steering
between buoys, since the pilot did not need to maintain forward and backward line of site
but could simply monitor a digital readout.
In order to obtain control on the vertical elevation of the surveying boat, a Stevens type
F tide gage was mounted on the day buoy at the entrance to the Port Canaveral inlet, which
is in clear line of sight of the work area (see Figure 3). The tide gage reference elevation was
established with respect to the "Spoils" marker. The measured tide record was discretized
into 1/2 hour increments, and then reference elevation for each measured sounding was
corrected for tide by interpolation between the tabulated tide gage readings.
Depth soundings were obtained using an Innerspace model 412 fathometer. Depth
soundings were calibrated in quite water in the Port Canaveral Harbor using a lead line,
and the depth measurements were verified to be within their accuracy range (0.1ft).









Additional calibration using submerged metal discs (trash can lids) was added in the June
and July surveys.
The surveying system was operated by linking the miniranger and the fathometer to a
MicroPDP-11. The PDP-11 then sampled the miniranger output and fathometer output
at a 1Hz rate, and stored values of x,y and depth on floppy disk. Time was referenced to
a header value placed in the raw data file at the start of each continuous surveying run.
It is noted that the system experienced some difficulties during the March survey. These
problems were later found to be a communication problem between the fathometer and
PDP-11. The system error caused the computer to record short runs of data values which
were typically lower than true, and which tended to hang on a particular constant value
(although this value varied continuously with the true depth). No attempt has been made
to smooth the March data, since the noise induced by the system error is strongly biased
away from zero mean. For example, a running average then produces a profile which is
too shallow at every point along the profile. Problems with system communication were
corrected, and data from the June and July surveys are quite smooth with the exception of
the up and down motion of the boat on the waves, which is easily removed with a running
average.
During surveying, the boat operator tried to stay on the desired box profile lines while
running inshore, using line-of-sight with respect to the range poles. Diagonal lines were then
done while running offshore and tend to be more erratic. A plot of boat position during the
March box survey is indicated in Figure 22 for example. Positions for all reported survey
lines are indicated in figures in Appendices B and C.
The procedure for surveying fan lines was essentially similar, with line-of-sight position-
ing being somewhat more important. This is due to the fact that the desired lines were
oriented at an angle in the x-y plane, and thus could not be run by staying on a prespecified
x coordinate value. Plots of boat position for the entire survey run are not shown.



























































Figure 22: Boat position during March box line survey









30









5 Results of Box and Fan Surveys

5.1 March, 1988

The data collected during the March box and fan surveys was found to contain various
spikes as well as a relatively more frequent noise component represented by data shifts to
several constant values representing depths generally less than the true local value.
Survey data was prepared for reduction as follows.

1. Segments of data corresponding to a particular line, diagonal or transect were isolated
and split into separate files. Each file was provided with a header indicating time of
run start, which allows for computation of tidal effects.

2. Each separate file was then screened for bad points and, to the degree possible, for
the background noise. Bad points are replaced in the record by the arithmetic mean
of the two adjacent data points in the record.

Following this initial screening, each record was adjusted for tidal effects and the el-
evations referenced to NGVD. Appendix B contains plots of the boat track and tidally-
corrected data for each separate line and transect in the box section. Data may be obtained
on unlabelled, 1600 BPI, ASCII tapes. Beach profiles are included where available (Lines
1,2,3,4,5,6,11 corresponding to x = -100,-65,-30,5,40,75,250). Overlap of beach and
box profiles are seen to be excellent except on line 1 (and, to a lesser degree, on line 2).
Appendix C contains boat tracks and tidally-corrected data for each line and transect
in the fan survey.
Due to prevailing weather conditions and a miniranger breakdown, it was necessary to
perform the box and fan surveys 5 days apart. Figure 23 shows the overlap of tidally-
corrected data along each line. Recall that a box and fan line join at the outer edge of
the box, but a "line" does not represent a straight-offshore section beyond the junction
point. Overlap of box and fan data was again excellent except on lines 9, 10 and 11, where
a vertical offset on the order of 30 40cm is apparent. This effect is not understood at
present, but appears to be associated with the box profiles being too "flat" in their offshore
extremes.
Based on a subjective interpretation of the box and fan data, smooth profiles were
constructed and are shown in Figure 24 (with longshore distance in the fan lines again
collapsed onto apparent offshore distance alone). The profiles are offset down the page to
indicate relative longshore spacing in the box region. There is some indication that the
offshore profiles are slightly deeper in the middle of the range, but are relatively closer to
each other at the extremes of the range. There is thus no indication of an overall offshore


































(Profiles on following pages)


Figure 23: Box and Fan Lines for March Survey













Y (M) x10O
10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
I I I I I I


70.00 80.00 90.00


100.00 1I0.00 120.00


MARCH 1988:


X=-100 + FRN LINE 1


b9.00
.i


0


o





C3






o






CO-
0
C










0




o
T3-



0


I I T l l l


O













Y (M) x101
10.00 2p.00 3p.00 4p.00 5p.00 60.00


70.00 80.00 9p.00 100.00 110.00 120.00


MARCH 1988: X=-65


+ FRN LINE 2


.00oo


iI


0

I
0


o-




0


I0



o
U


o

I


o
0
I












Y (M) x10'
10.00 2p.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00


70.00 80.00 9p.00


100po.oo 110.00 120.00


MRRCH 1988:


+ FAN LINE 3


3. 00


0


0
0
cu-



0
0

Z




I



0o


0-


.













Y (M) xl10
10.00 2p.00 30.00 0p.00 50.00 60.00


MARCH


70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00 110.00 120.00


1988: X=5 + FAN LINE 4


.4


ol


0
0
cu-



o
I



0







0.

CD-



I



0
o

o

T-


b 0oo


0













T (M) x10
10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
I I I I I I


70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00 110.00 120.00
I I 1 0.00


MARCH 1988:


X=LO + FAN LINE 5


) o00
. 1


0o


a
a
Lu-
I












0
>O.
C3 *
Z








o
LI-





I


TD-


O













Y (M) x1
10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00


70.00 80.00 90.00 p10.00 110.00 120.00


MRRCH 1988:


X=75 + FAN LINE 6


00oo


0o


0

I



o
0





Z





I
0o



ao-
0
J





0

0-
I


I I I I I I !













Y (M) x10
1p.oo 2p.00 30.00 4p.00 5p.00 60.00


70.00 8p.00 90.00 100.00 110.00 120.00
III 1 1,0 0 IF0 0


MRRCH 1988: X=110 + FRN LINE 7


SI


O


0
0
CM-



0


c 1
Z




UJ

o
0
0




0
O
I
To-


2.00













Y (M) x1O
10.00 20.00 30.00 P4.00 50.00 60.00


MFRCH 1988:


70.00 8p.00 9p.00 100.00 110.00 120.00


X=145 + FRN LINE 8


oo
0



0
0

I



0
o
3.0






IL


0




CD
o





0
0












Y (M) x10O
10.00 20.00 3P.00 40.00 5p.00 60.00


7p.o00 p.00 9p.00 1p0.00 110.00 1 0.00


1988: X=180


+ FRN LINE 9


C)00


0
O
I


0





0






c-
I

.-*


MRRCH


: I


0 I


CZ












Y (M) x1O
10.00 2p.00 30.00 4p.oo 50.00 60.00


70.00 80.00 90.00 p10.00 110.00 120.00


MARCH 1988:


X=215 + FRN LINE 10


33.00
8-









C:D
o
0

LO
L3 '


Co
I





I


0
0
I












Y (M) x10'
10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
I I


7P.00 8p.00 90.00 lp0.00 110.00 120.00


MRRCH 1988:


X=250 + FRN LINE 11


2. 00


of


0
0
C,-






o
z
0












0
LJ




co





I


Q









tilt to the bottom. (This type of result may have been expected due to the presence of the
Cape feature to the north. The Cape does not seem to influence the offshore profiles in the
region of the survey.)
Several smoothed profile lines (1,6,10 and 11) are shown overlain in Figure 25. This
plot shows the relatively greater depth in the center of the range offshore, as well as the
curvature of the shoreline as manifested by profile 1 being further seaward of the other
profiles in the box region (y < 450m) The offshore region is relatively uniform (except for
the presence of the Port Canaveral Channel in the southern profiles).
Figure 26 shows plots of longshore transect data at nominal stations y = 600m and
y = 800m. These transects again show that the on-offshore profiles are somewhat deeper in
the middle of the range, and also show that the relatively shallow regions to the south are
associated with a broad feature on the shallower transect. A feature is also apparent on the
deeper transect but is confined to the region south of line 10. This narrow feature is close
to the channel edge and is possibly associated with dredging spoils or local sedimentation
patterns. Note that the vertical relief of the broad feature along y = 600m is on the order
of 20cm in a depth of 6.8m. Likewise, the somewhat sharper feature near the channel edge,
apparent on transect y = 800m, has a vertical relief of about 40cm in a depth of 7.5m.

5.2 June, 1988 survey

A box survey and a reduced fan survey were conducted in the period of June 21-22, 1988.
Plots of boat position and profile data are shown in Appendices B and C for box and fan
data, respectively. An overlay of the box lines indicates that there is very little longshore
variability in the offshore profiles, as was found in March. The profile data in appendix B
is shown in unsmoothed form (after tide correction), and after smoothing by a moving 9
point, unweighted averaging window in order to filter wave motion. The smoothed profiles
are plotted together with corresponding beach profiles from June 21, where available.
Figures 27 29 show plots of the overlap between several box and fan lines for the June
survey. In Figure 27, box line x = 5 and fan line x = -10 are shown, and the observed
overlap is good as expected. The overlap in Figure 28 is between box line x = -100 and
fan line z = -500. This figure shows the tendency for the entire profile to curve towards
the east as the cape is approached from the south, and is consistent with the overall layout
of the bathymetry. Finally, Figure 29 shows a comparison between the box line x = 250
and fan line x = 500, indicating that the on-offshore profile in the region to the south of
the surveyed box is basically uninterrupted, the only major feature being the presence of the
shipping channel. The channel shows up quite clearly in the fan region transects, shown in
Appendix C.


















200


400


y(m)

600


800


900


I I I I I I I I I I


Figure 24: Smoothed Box and Fan Survey Lines, March survey


1200


0
0

-2

-4
-4

-6

-8
-6



-10

-12

-14














o r-
I
II +
;, "


0
0

II
X


I I I I I I I


C IC


CO C <
I i


GAON (u) la


Figure 25: Superimposed survey lines, March survey


It LO
II 0
x +

lx


O0
C
















LOCAL X(M) xI0'
o0.00 -po.oo -0o.oo -?o.oo o0oo 2p.00


40.00 6p.o0 80.00 100.00


UNFILTERED


EInffI*WP


LOCAL X(M) 0'
-po.oo -0o.oo -0o.oo o,oo 2.0oo


I4p.oo


FRN TRANSECT T=800


60.00 80.00 100.00

. UNFILTERED
. UNFILTERED


2*.


MARCH 1988: FRN TRANSECT Y=600,


' L


I


MARCH 1988:










'r r, FI


41k pll T AT........r..



























Y (M) x1Ol
10.00 20.00 30.00 4p.00 5P.00 60.00


7p.oo ap.00 9p.00 1po0.00 110.00


JUNE 1988: BOX X=5 AND FAN X=-10


).oo


0\


I


"
































10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00


(M) X1 0
60.00


7p.00 8a.00


90.00 100.00 110.00


3).00
c;
o

o







ID
o


Ici
Z





LLI



co-




0
0
T-


JUNE 1988: BOX X=-100 FND FRN X=-500


I I I I I I































T (M) x10'
?. ) 00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70. 800 p.0 90.00 1p0.00 110.00










o






O -o


CD
- 0,











o o
0 0
*T-


_









5.3 July, 1988 survey


A final box survey was conducted on July 21, 1988, after the end of the beach surveying
program. Plots of boat position and profile data are shown in Appendix B. It is apparent
in the nearshore portion of the box profiles that the storm activity during the month from
June 21 to July 21 build a major bar feature at around y = 150m offshore. This bar is
apparent along the entire beach and is also relatively uniform in the longshore direction,
as is apparent from an overlay of the profiles. The offshore portion of the profiles (beyond
y = 200m or so) are essentially unaltered over the entire measurement program. The box
profile data is presented in unsmoothed and smoothed form, and the smoothed data is
compared to beach profiles where available.










July 11 July 12 Julyl3
y 99.36 98.48 98.86
Bar 1 ay 0.252 1.092 1.047
2 0.208 -0.076 -0.133
or 0.068 0.060 0.058
9 92.64 91.88 91.45
Bar 2 oa 0.246 0.397 1.299
i 0.374 0.183 -0.031
az 0.050 0.046 0.120
9 85.88 85.52 85.70
Bar 3 oa 0.266 0.462 0.904
z 0.319 0.236 0.007
oz 0.075 0.087 0.148

Table 2: Statistics of bar positions, July 11-13, 1988

6 Artificial Bragg Bar Installation

During installation of the artificial Bragg bar sections, surveying measurements were made
which located the horizontal and vertical position of the end of each bar section. These
measurements were repeated each day until the bars were removed. The complete set of
surveying data is included in Appendix D.
Table 2 gives values for the mean offshore position 9 and mean elevation z for each set
of ten artificial bar sections. Means were calculated according to
20
2=o y (1)
i=1
S20
=2 Zi (2)
i=1
where i ranges over the number of bar ends in each set of ten bars. Values of standard
deviation ao and oa of the data values about the means are also given. These quantities
were calculated according to


2 0(= E ( 9) 2 ) 2 ( 3 )
/ 20 1/2
/ 20 1/2
= il(,-')2= (4)

Plots of the surveyed horizontal bar positions are given in Figures 30, 31 and 32 for July
11, 12 and 13, respectively. Figures 33 and 34 indicate the relative change of bar positions
for each day.





































JULY 11, 1988 BAR POSITIONS



--c--


-47.50 -'5.00 -22.50 -10.00
X (M)


2.50


15.00 27.50 b4.00


Figure 30: Artificial bar positions, July 11, 1988


0
0
0
0



0
0
-n-













oD
> -









0
C0

060.00



























JULY 12, 1988 BRR POSITIONS


-47.50 -35.00 -22.50 -10.00
X (M)


2.50


15.00 27.50 40.00


Figure 31: Artificial bar positions, July 12, 1988


-60.00




























JULY 13, 1988 BAR POSITIONS


-47.50 -35.00 -22.50 -10.00
X (M)


2.50


15.00 27.50 b0.00


Figure 32: Artificial bar positions, July 13, 1988


L.J.


S-'60.00



































RELATIVE MOVEMENT OF BRRS, JULY 11 TO JULY 12



..._..-.--




--//-




/c----------


-47.50 -35.00 -22.50 -10.00
X (M)


2.50


15.00 27.50 40.00


Figure 33: Change in artificial bar positions, July 11 12, 1988













45


0
0
*
0(



U,-


0-
0
0)






01

0
2:0-


Lfl.




0,
0



co


o~ I


-60.00


@ @ I



































RELATIVE MOVEMENT OF BARS, JULY 12 TO JULY 13


---


- - -


- -


-47.50 -35.00 -22.50 -10.00
X (M)


2.50


15.00 27.50 4b.00


Figure 34: Change in artificial bar positions, July 12 13, 1988













46


0

>C;
a)3


0.


-60.00


-L-









References


1. "Tide Tables 1988: East Coast of Noth and South America, including Greenland.",
U. S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
1987.


Acknowledgements

This study was completed with the efforts of a large number of people, whose help is
greatly appreciated. The Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Laboratory performed the
offshore surveying. This work was directed by Sidney Schofield and led in the field by John
Jones, with the assistance of Roy Johnson, Don Mueller and George Chappell. During the
experiment, additional assistance with LARC operation was provided by Vernon Sparkman,
Jim Joiner and Danny Brown. Also, thanks to Sonya Brooks for help with communications
and logistics.
Beach surveying was conducted by the author together with students Tom McSherry
and Jeff Anton. Assistance and surveying equipment was also provided by Jim Bailard
and Jack deVries, both of the Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs