results
From
experimental observation, the dock columns do not significantly break
up wave energy. The
flow
velocity causes a drag force to act on the submerged body causing a
shear
stress and normal pressure, both of which are small in amplitude
compared to the energy present in the generated incident waves.
This is one reason why energy remained constant before and after
contact was made with the obstacles.
Another
feasible explanation is that the open channel simulator violated
geometric similitude. Imperfect geometrics lead to wave
diffraction and reflection within the holding tank. If
wave energy varies significantly in the direction normal to wave
propagation, the wave energy has a tendency to be transmitted laterally
due to wave diffraction in addition to the direction of wave
propagation. Wave
diffraction also occurs in the sheltered region behind barriers and
obstacles, which may mask any decrease in wave height caused by the
obstacles. Also, anytime
a wave came into contact with the rear or side of the open channel
simulator, it reflected and altered the state of any incoming incident
waves.
Wave energy of all magnitudes has a large impact on the coastal
environment and vise versa. Within these environments, docking
structures not only break up the energy carried by incoming waves but
also significantly affect the ecological habitats, disturbance of
sediment, fragmentation of continuous areas of vegetation, and other
occupying water.
Viable
Alternatives
A
few strategies in which the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
helps protect our coastal environments in regards to coastal structures
are as a follows:
-
Encourage dock industry to design less obstructive docks
- Emphasize importance of using public access points
- Educate coastal landowners and users about importance of protecting
water resources
- Enforcing regulations
Restricting
the amount of
coastal area disturbed minimizes future impacts.
Fewer personal docking structures will have less of
an impact on the
environment. Paul Radomski, a research
scientist of the MN - Department of Natural Resoures in Brainaird, MN
states, “The
future of aquatic habitat in Minnesota depends on what happens above
the
surface of our water. The best way to
minimize development impacts is to maintain natural shoreline.”
Resources
Professor Chin Wu
Minnesota DNR
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/pwpermits/docks.html
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/pwpermits/dock_platform_general_permit_q_and_a.pdf
Mohn, Magoon, Pirrell. (2003). Advances in coastal structure design.
ASCE
Wisconsin DNR
dnr.wi.gov
University of Delaware: Wave Calculator Wave Steepness:
|