A Design Parameter for Reef Beach Profiles—A Methodology Applied to Cadiz, Spain

Antonio Contreras,Francisco Contreras,Pablo Cabrera,Gabriel Chamorro,Veronica Ruiz-Ortiz,Juan J Muñoz-Perez,Gregorio Gomez-Pina

doi:10.3390/jmse8050323

Antonio Contreras, Francisco Contreras + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8050323

Copy DOI

Abstract

The southwestern coast of Spain is in a tidal zone (mesotidal) which causes the equilibrium profile to be developed in two different sections: the breakage section and the swash section. These two sections give rise to the typical bi-parabolic profile existing in tidal seas. The existence of areas with reefs/rocks which interrupt the normal development of the typical bi-parabolic profile causes different types of beach profiles. The objective of this article is designing an easy methodology for determining new formulations for the design parameters of the equilibrium profile of beaches with reefs in tidal seas. These formulations are applied on 16 profiles to quantify the error between the real profile data and the modelling results. A comparative analysis is extended to the formulations proposed by other authors, from which it is found that better results are obtained with the new formulations.

Highlights

A beach regeneration project requires identifying the fundamental parameters that define the equilibrium profile
The maximum difference was observed on the Emerged Reef Bi-parabolic Profile (ERBP) profile, probably because the location of the reef flat hinders the ability of fine particles to “climb up” to the emerged beach
For the ERBP typology, the parameter I12 depends on the reef flat length, which will bFeor(steheeFEigRuBrPe 1ty):pology, the parameter I12 depends on the reef flat length, which will be: I12 = Xc − ∆ = Xc − I =X −Δ= X −

Summary

Introduction

A beach regeneration project requires identifying the fundamental parameters that define the equilibrium profile. TThhuuss,, tthhee oorriiggiinn ooff tthhee eemmeerrggeedd ppaarraabboollaa ((OO11)) iiss ttyyppiiccaallllyy llooccaatteedd ((6633..99%%)) aabboouutt tthhee HHHHWWLL,, aanndd tthhee rreesstt ooff tthhee pprrooffiilleess aarree ggrroouuppeedd bbeettwweeeenn CCOO11,, rraannggiinngg ffrroomm 00..77––00..99 ((2277..22%%)). On the other hand, based on the adjustment of real profiles, the origins of the submerged parabolas (O2) were mostly located (81.3%) at the MWL (see Figure 4B). The identification of the MWL as the origin of the submerged parabola found in Figure 4B is different to the former statements of other authors, such as Gomez-Pina [1] and Gonzalez [18] This difference may have important repercussions in the nourishment design of the bottom part of the intertidal bJ.eMaacrh. The maximum difference was observed on the ERBP profile, probably because the location of the reef flat hinders the ability of fine particles to “climb up” to the emerged beach

Emerged Shape Parameter “Ae” for Reef Flat Profiles

Application of Design Parameters on Real Profiles

Comparative Analysis with other Authors

Findings

Conclusions