DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Stability Coefficients of Radial Shape Armor Blocks Depending on Placement Methods

피복 방법에 따른 방사형 소파 블록의 안정계수 비교

  • Min, Eun-Jong (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Cheon, Se-Hyeon (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Suh, Kyung-Duck (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University)
  • 민은종 (서울대학교 건설환경공학부) ;
  • 천세현 (서울대학교 건설환경공학부) ;
  • 서경덕 (서울대학교 건설환경공학부)
  • Received : 2015.02.27
  • Accepted : 2015.04.16
  • Published : 2015.04.30

Abstract

In this study, two different uniform placement methods are proposed for each of Tetrapod, Rakuna-IV, and Dimple armoring a rubble mound breakwater, and the corresponding stability coefficients are determined by hydraulic experiments. The Tetrapod and Rakuna-IV show similar stability coefficients regardless of the placement methods, whereas the Dimple shows somewhat different stability coefficients depending on the placement methods. It is shown that the Dimple gives the largest stability coefficient, whereas the Tatrapod gives the smallest value. The uniform placement methods of Tatrapod and Rakuna-IV give slightly larger stability coefficients than the random placement, whereas the uniform placements of Dimple give much larger stability coefficients than the random placement. However, the small void ratio of uniform placements of Dimple requires attention because the blocks would behave like single layer system blocks so that brittle failure could occur.

본 연구에서는 사석 방파제에 사용되는 대표적 방사형 소파 블록인 Tetrapod, Rakuna-IV 및 Dimple 등에 대하여 각각 두 가지의 정적 피복 방법을 제안하고 각 방법에 대한 안정계수를 수리실험을 통하여 결정하였다. Tetrapod와 Rakuna-IV는 피복 방법에 상관없이 비슷한 안정계수를 보인 반면, Dimple은 피복 방법에 따라 약간 다른 안정계수를 보였다. Dimple이 가장 큰 안정계수를 나타낸 반면, Tetrapod가 가장 작은 안정계수를 나타내었다. Tetrapod와 Rakuna-IV를 정적 하였을 경우에는 난적보다 약간 큰 안정계수를 보인 반면, Dimple을 정적 했을 경우에는 난적보다 훨씬 큰 안정계수를 나타내었다. 하지만, 본 연구에서 제안한 Dimple의 정적 방법은 공극률이 매우 작고 일층 피복 블록과 비슷한 거동을 보여서 급격한 파괴가 발생할 수 있으므로 주의를 요한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Fabiao, J., Teixeira, A.T. and Araujo, M.A.V.C. (2013). Hydraulic stability of Tetrapod armor layers - Physical model study. Proceedings of 6th International Short Course/Conference on Applied Coastal Research.
  2. Goda, Y. (2010). Random Seas and Design of Maritime Structures, 3rd Ed., World Scientific, Singapore.
  3. Gurer, S., Cevik, E., Yuksel, Y. and Gunbak, A.R. (2005). Stability of Tetrapod breakwaters for different placing methods. Journal of Coastal Research, 21(3), 464-471. https://doi.org/10.2112/00079.1
  4. Hudson, R.Y. (1959). Laboratory investigation of rubble-mound breakwaters. Journal of Waterways and Harbors Division, ASCE, 85(WW3), 93-121.
  5. Min, E.J. (2015). Experimental study of stability coefficient of breakwater armor layer depending on placement methods. Master thesis, Seoul National University.
  6. Sotramer (1978). Tetrapods. Technical Note, Grenoble, France.
  7. Suh, K.D., Park, W.S. and Park, B.S. (2001). Separation of incident and reflected waves in wave-current flumes. Coastal Engineering, 43(3-4), 149-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3839(01)00011-4
  8. Suh, K.-D., Kang, J.S. (2012). Stability formula for Tetrapods. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 138(3), 261-266. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WW.1943-5460.0000124
  9. U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center (1984). Shore Protection Manual, 4th Ed., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
  10. Van der Meer, J.W. (1987). Stability of breakwater armor layers-Design formulae. Coastal Engineering, 11, 219-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3839(87)90013-5
  11. Van der Meer, J.W. (1988). Stability of cubes, tetrapods and accropode. In: Design of breakwaters, Thomas Telford, London, 71-80.
  12. Van der Meer, J.W. (2000). Design of concrete armor layers. Proceedings of Coastal Structures '99, Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, pp. 213-221.