Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Coastal Engineering
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / c o a s t a l e n g

On the design of beach nourishment projects using static equilibrium concepts:

Application to the Spanish coast
Mauricio González a,⁎, Raul Medina a, Miguel Losada b
a
Instituto de Hidráulica Ambiental (IH), Universidad de Cantabria, E.T.S. Ingenieros de Caminos, C. y P., Av. de los Castros, s/n. 39005 Santander, Spain
b
Grupo de Puertos y Costas, Universidad de Granada. Centro Andaluz de Medio Ambiente (CEAMA). Avda. Mediterráneo s/n. 18006 Granada, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 17 November 2009 The concept of equilibrium plan form and equilibrium profile has been widely used as an engineering tool in
order to design beach nourishment projects. The scope of this paper is to further explore this “equilibrium
Keywords: beach” concept in crenulated bays, as a long-term tool for beach nourishment projects. The proposed
Beach nourishments methodology is based on González and Medina (2001) and combines the static equilibrium plan and profile
Headland-bay beaches for long-term analysis. This methodology includes a modified equilibrium plan form, which is able to define
Equilibrium plan form formulations
the orientation of the local wave front in the diffracting point, and also to locate the downcoast starting point
Equilibrium profile
Equilibrium beaches
of the static equilibrium beach from which the parabolic plan form of ,Hsu and Evans (1989) is valid. This
Spanish beach project design methodology permits the application of any equilibrium profile formulation. An example of the application
of this methodology and long-term formulations to the design of the Spanish nourishment project of
Poniente Beach (Gijón) is presented. Ten years after its construction, the beach has still got a static
equilibrium and remains pretty close to the predicted equilibrium beach in plan and profile.
© 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Beach nourishment is a viable engineering alternative for shore
protection and is the most important technique for beach restoration.
The traditional engineering response to coastal erosion has been to
prevent coastal erosion by employing coastal structures such as
seawalls, groins, or detached breakwaters. However, some cases show
adverse environmental effects in the near and far field of these
structures. Nowadays, coastal engineers are interested in developing a
“soft engineering” dynamic approach, such as adding littoral material
or modifying vegetation. An increasingly important option is the
integration of this with “supporting structures” when necessary. From
both the economical and technical point of view beach nourishment
has significantly increased in the last 15 years. Its application is
suitable for some, but not all, locations where erosion is occurring,
particularly those with high rates of erosion. Sometimes the solutions
require the use of “hard” static structures built of rock, steel or
concrete. However, beach nourishment is a valid alternative for
providing natural shore protection and recreational opportunities,
restoring dry beach area that has been lost to erosion or defending the
hinterland from flooding.
The determination of the stability and evolution of a fill for a beach
nourishment project require the use of an important set of formula-
tions and numerical tools, which have been establish based on the
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 942 201 810; fax: +34 942 201 860.
E-mail addresses: gonzalere@unican.es (M. González), medinar@unican.es
(R. Medina), mlosada@ugr.es (M. Losada).
different spatial and temporal scale of the processes. The different
dynamics affecting a beach are presented in spatial scales ranging
from centimetres (turbulence) to tens of kilometres (tides). In time
scales they range from seconds (waves) to decades (the rising of the
mean sea level). As a response to these dynamics, the beach
morphology also changes within all of these scales: centimetres–
kilometres, and seconds–decades. Despite the calculation power of
computers, it is inadequate and almost impossible to calculate the
changes that take place on a greater scale, by integrating the smaller
scale processes. This is due to the lack of a unified sediment transport
theory that retains the influence of all of these effects which are
produced on different spatial and temporal scales. This lack of a
unified theory makes it necessary to analyze all the processes
occurring on different scales (time or space) with different tools or
formulations. Therefore, the scale of interest in each particular
problem must be known and the adequate formulation to said scale
must be employed. The different dynamics and morphological
responses of the beaches are usually classified as: micro-scale,
meso-scale and macro-scale according to the spatial dimension and
to short-term, middle-term and long-term timeframes.
In a beach nourishment project the scales of interest are the meso-
scale (tens of hundreds of metres), macro-scale (kilometres) and
long-term (years), given that they define the fill evolution throughout
the useful life. The elements of smaller scales (for example, the
erosion produced by a storm) are only relevant if their effects last
throughout time or space in units close to those of interest (for
example, weeks to months) or if their effect provokes the functional
breakdown of the work (for example, the waves overtopping the

0378-3839/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2009.10.009
228 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240
dunes and flooding the back part of the beach). Following GIOC
(2003), the functionality and stability of any solution alternative in a
beach nourishment project should be designed on a long-term scale
and afterwards, the functionality and stability should be verified on
the middle- and short-term scales (under seasonal and extreme storm
events).
The objective of long-term analysis is to determine which will be
the final shape of the beach and/or the temporal evolution of said
shape on a scale of years in order to assure that the beach functionality
continues throughout its useful life. The two most widely used models
for the analysis of beaches at this long-term timeframes are those
based on the diffusion equation (Hanson and Kraus, 1989; Hanson
et al., 2003) and those based on equilibrium hypothesis (Capobianco
et al., 2002; Kraus, 2001). For the latter, the beach stability and the
equilibrium plan and profile are analyzed based on a modal wave
climate and their associated current system. This analysis does not
include other sea oscillations (e.g., infragravity waves, edge waves,
etc.).
The aim of this paper is to further explore this “equilibrium beach”
concept in crenulate-shaped bays as a long-term tool for beach
nourishment projects. The paper is organized as follows: first, a brief
review of design elements based on equilibrium formulations is
presented. Next, a beach nourishment methodology combining
equilibrium plan and profile for long-term analyzes is presented.
Finally, the methodology is applied to a real case on the Spanish coast.
2. Design elements: Orthogonality hypothesis and
equilibrium formulations
The hydrodynamic and sedimentary processes that take place in a
beach are three-dimensional. However, for engineering applications,
the present limitations of tools, formulations and understanding of
these processes make it impossible to analyze them in a fully three-
dimensional way. Hence, an additional work hypothesis in the study
of beach stability is introduced, and it regards the orthogonality of the
longitudinal and transversal movements of a beach under wind–wave
actions. According to the orthogonality hypothesis, any beach
movement can be analyzed by studying independently the longitu-
dinal and transversal movements of the beach. The orthogonality
hypothesis allows the analysis of beach stability by studying
Fig. 1. Sketch of an “equilibrium beach” (equilibrium plan + equilibrium profile). Orthogonality of the longitudinal and transversal movements of a beach.
separately the beach cross-shore (transversal axis) and the beach
longshore (longitudinal axis) dimensions (De Vriend et al., 1993). The
orthogonality hypothesis is close enough to reality, especially in open
beaches with extreme morphodynamic states (dissipative or reflec-
tive). In beaches with intermediate morphodynamic states there is a
notable plan-profile interaction, for which the separate analysis of the
cross-shore and the longshore must be carried out carefully, taking
into account the morphodynamic states.
The equilibrium hypothesis postulates that if the action of the
acting dynamics is maintained indefinitely, the beach shape will reach
a constant final position, which can be denominated “equilibrium
beach”. Thus, associated to this beach state the along- and across-
shore, the gradients of the wind waves, their mean quantities and
related mean sediment transport are negligible. In reality, it is not
necessary for the action to be maintained indefinitely, but rather for
the shape response to be faster than the scale of interest. Concerning
the beach profile, it is assumed that the modifications are produced in
reduced space scales O(100 m) and temporal scales considered to be
instantaneous (days to months) in a long-term study, which implies
that the profile always reaches equilibrium. In the case of plan shape,
the final equilibrium shape can be analyzed in longer temporal and
space scales (years and O(km)) compared with the profile, although
this makes sense only in beaches in static or dynamic equilibrium
where there is no loss of net material.
Thus, the determination of the stability and evolution of a fill for a
beach nourishment project in a long-term scale will be based on the
concept of “equilibrium beach”, which combines the equilibrium plan
form and the equilibrium profile, as is shown in Fig. 1. Some
equilibrium plan and profile formulations are discussed in the next
section.
2.1. Equilibrium plan form in crenulated-shaped bays
A great number of static equilibrium-shape models and formula-
tions have been proposed, such as the spiral logarithm by Yasso
(1965), Vichetpan (1969), Silvester (1970) and others. Hsu and Evans
(1989) showed that the logarithmic spiral does not follow the
complete periphery of the equilibrium bay, proposing a parabolic
relationship.
 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240
Fig. 2. Definition sketch of bay beach in static equilibrium.
Hsu et al. (1989a,b) proposed a methodology to test and predict
the stability of static equilibrium shapes in natural and man-made
bays using the empirical parabolic model. To apply the methodology
the bay must be fully-developed (meaning that the tangent to the
beach at the downcoast tip is normal to the orthogonal of the
persistent swell or predominant waves in the area see Fig. 2).
Applying this methodology Hsu et al. (1989c) showed several
applications of headland control in order to retain beaches in locations
with erosion.
Furthermore, Hsu and Evans (1989) found that the shape of a static
equilibrium shoreline is only dependent on the obliquity of the
incident wave, β, and the control line, R0. A parabolic relationship was
proposed to define the plan form of the bay independent of the beach
material and wave characteristics (other than the wave approach).
The sole dependence on β and R0 was also obtained by Tan and Chiew
(1994) after some extensive laboratory tests. The parabolic relation-
ship is, nowadays, the most widely used formulation for checking
crenulate-shaped bay stability.
González (1995) applied this methodology to several static
equilibrium bays along the Spanish coast and concluded that it is
not uniformly applicable. The parabolic model represents fairly well
Fig. 3. Undeveloped equilibrium beach (Sardinero Beach, Spain).
229
the static equilibrium plan form of the fully-developed crenulate-
shaped beaches including tidal beaches representing the high- and
low-tide coastlines. However, in general, there are some difficulties in
defining the “downcoast” limit.
The abovementioned difficulty can be clearly observed in Fig. 3,
where a comparison of the actual and the predicted static equilibrium
shorelines of Sardinero Beach (Santander, Spain) is presented.
Following the methodology of Hsu and Evans (1989), the tangent to
the shoreline at the downcoast tip is used to determine the front
orientation at the “control point”. Note, however, that this orientation
is not related to the predominant wave front direction. González and
Medina (2001) showed that Hsu and Evans' (1989) methodology is
adequate for testing the equilibrium plan form of “existing”
undeveloped beaches (beaches without the straight alignment
downcoast), but this methodology cannot be used for design purposes
in nourishment projects in order to predict the static equilibrium
shoreline for the design of a new (non-existing) undeveloped beach.
In these cases, there is no shoreline to define the tangent downcoast
tip to determine the front orientation at the diffraction point and, as
shown in the Sardinero case, the front used in Hsu and Evans'
methodology is not always related to the predominant waves in the
area. Hsu and Evans' (1989) methodology by itself lacks theoretical
support to define criterion for its application to the determination of
the front orientation at the “control point” in order to predict the
static equilibrium shoreline for undeveloped beaches.
The equilibrium shoreline in a beach is mainly conditioned by: (1)
the local wave climate (wave heights, wave periods and wave
incident directions), which govern the wave-induced longshore
currents; (2) the external bathymetry which determines the
incidence angle of the waves on the beach, and the local geometry
which defines the lateral and bottom boundaries where the beach is
confined; and finally, (3) the available sediment (quantity and
sediment size). Longshore currents are very important regarding the
plan form in beaches, due to the sediment transport capacity.
According to Ho (1971) from laboratory tests, a beach reaches a
“static equilibrium shape” when the mean time-averaged longshore
230 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

current velocity is negligible (V̄ = 0) and the breaker wave front is

almost parallel to the shoreline. On the other hand, it is also possible
to find an equilibrium shape in a beach with a continued littoral drift
and with a constant sediment transport rate (Hsu et al., 1993;
Silvester and Hsu, 1997). This “dynamic equilibrium shape” can be
obtained assuming a constant mean time-averaged longshore current
velocity V̄ = V0.
To solve this problem, and based on these static and dynamic
equilibrium conditions and the mean time-averaged longshore
current velocity V̄, González and Medina (2001) proposed some
analytical and empirical approaches in order to develop a modified
methodology for testing or designing static equilibrium bays. Using an
analytical expression of static equilibrium shoreline (SES) and 26
fully-developed equilibrium bay beaches along the Atlantic and
Mediterranean coasts of Spain, the “downcoast” limit, P0, was defined
(see Fig. 4). Point P0 defines the starting point where the parabolic
model (Hsu and Evans, 1989) is applicable, and it is a function of the Fig. 5. αmin versus Y/Ls.
angle αmin and the distance from the “control point” to the
prolongation of the straight alignment downcoast of the beach, Y.
Furthermore, angle αmin is a function of the dimensionless distance of Using the aforementioned findings, González and Medina (2001)
the beach to length wave Y/Ls (see Fig. 5), where Ls is the wave length. proposed a simple model for static equilibrium shoreline in bays. The
This scaling wave length, Ls, was calculated using the mean water model was based on three fundamental aspects:
depth along the wave front close to the control point, hp, and the
mean wave period associated with the wave height exceeding 12 h – The orientation of the wave front at the diffraction point that must
per year, Hs12, hereafter called, Ts12. It is noted that the selection of be used when applying Hsu and Evans' (1989) formulation
that particular wave period is arbitrary. Any other characteristic corresponds with the front of the mean energy flux of the waves
period (e.g. mean, significant…) could be used to scale the distance in the control point area.
from the control point to the beach. Fig. 5 shows the measured αmin – The downcoast limit, point P0, can be fixed using the proposed
versus Y/Ls for the selected fully-developed Spanish beaches. The relationship for αmin = f(Y/Ls) (Fig. 5).
equation of the solid curve shown can be represented by: – The static equilibrium shoreline in bays can be obtained using the
parabolic model of Hsu and Evans (1989), starting in P0. The β and
R0 parameters are defined as:
2
β4 β2r Y
1 3
r
+ 2
Y
β = 90∘−αmin and R0 =
16 2 LS
αmin = arctan4 5 ð1Þ ð3Þ
Y
LS
cosαmin

with βr = 2.13. By defining these three aspects, the static equilibrium plan form of
The level of confidence of 100% αmin is: any crenulate-shaped beach can be obtained, keeping in mind that the
following basic hypotheses must be fulfilled:
  – Only longshore currents associated with the wave-induced
Y
αmin = αmin βr = 2:13; F5∘ ð2Þ currents are important.
LS
– Longitudinal gradients of wave height on the beach are governed
only by the diffraction of the control point (diffraction point) and
the refraction over the sandy beach. Local diffraction caused by
Regarding the coast's orientation, González and Medina (2001) islands and shallows, etc., cannot be represented.
obtained that the downcoast straight alignment was parallel to the – Only one point of diffraction exists. If there were any more, they
resultant wave front associated with the mean energy flux at the would not interact mutually along the beach.
control point for all of the beaches.
Using the value of αmin as the limit of the coastline affected by a
breakwater, González and Medina (2001) analyzed the main
characteristic of the shoreline response to an offshore breakwater.
In their work three different responses were described: (1) tombolo,
(2) salient and (3) double salient. Usually, the occurrence of a tombolo
or salient is determined by two parameters: the breakwater length (B)
and the distance between the offshore breakwater and the coastline
(Y). Different researchers have reported the limiting condition
between tombolo and salient by means of B/Y parameter (see ASCE,
1994). However, results show a large dispersion indicating that the
complete picture is not adequately represented solely by this
parameter. One possible explanation of this dispersion could be that
minor attention has been given by previous investigators to the
influence of the wave characteristics (e.g. Y/L). González and Medina
(2001) proposed relationships validated with laboratory and field
data, reducing the dispersion in the proposed values for determining
Fig. 4. Definition sketch of a fully-developed bay beach. the limiting conditions of tombolo-salient.
 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240 231

2.2. Equilibrium profile dH

=γ ð7Þ
dh
One of the most important approaches used for the determination
of profile shape is the equilibrium beach profile (EBP). In a broad That is, the breaker-to-depth ratio, γ, and the wave energy
sense, the equilibrium beach profile is the result of the constructive dissipation per unit water depth, Db⁎, are constant. Introducing
and destructive forces acting on a beach profile. The hypothesis Eqs. (6) and (7) into Eq. (4), and assuming the shallow water line
behind the EBP is that beaches respond to wave forcing by adjusting wave theory, Eq. (4) can be integrated to yield Eq. (8). The most
their form to an equilibrium or constant shape attributable to a given widely used formulation, which is very simple and easy-to-apply, is
type of incident wave or sediment characteristic. Various formulations the 2/3-power profile shape proposed by Bruun (1954) and Dean
have been proposed in the literature for representing EBP in non tidal (1977).
beaches (e.g. Bruun, 1954; Dean, 1977; Bodge, 1992; González and " #
Medina, 1999; Larson et al., 1999; Romanozyk et al., 2005; Requejo 2
=3 24D⁎b
h = Ax ; 0≤x≤xr A = ð8Þ
et al., 2005), and EBP for tidal beaches (Inman et al., 1993; González, 5ρg =2 γ2
3

1995; Bernabeu, 1999; Medina et al., 2000; Gómez-Pina, 2001).

Several approaches have been pursued in an attempt to charac- where h is the total water depth, A is a dimensional shape parameter
terize EBPs. One of the most popular is to consider the time-averaged that depends on the grain size (Moore, 1982) and x is the horizontal
wave energy flux equation for straight and parallel contours: distance from the shoreline. It is remarkable that Eq. (8) is only valid
from the shoreline (x = 0, h = 0) up to the point (x = xs, h = hs).
dF Where hs has been defined for engineering applications as the depth
= −ε ð4Þ
dx of closure (DoC), described in the next section.

where F is the net shoreward energy flux per unit width and ε is the 2.2.2. Bi-parabolic EBP
energy dissipation rate per unit area. Eq. (4) involves three variables, Bernabeu (1999) taking into account wave reflection from the
namely: the wave height, H, the water depth, h, and the wave energy beach for those cases where this process is not negligible, derived a
dissipation, ε. In the EBP problem, water depth is sought and, more general derivation of the energy flux balance. In this case the
consequently, an appropriate wave energy dissipation model and total net shoreward wave energy flux Ft must be computed
wave height variation across the profile must be provided. Most of the considering the incident Fi and the reflected FR energy fluxes.
previous profile formulations have assumed the dissipation rate ε as a Thus, the equilibrium for the surf and shoaling zone would yield,
constant value, it means the surf zone is saturated with waves
breaking in spilling.  
1 dFt 1 dFi dFR
Thornton and Guza's (1983) dissipation model includes both = − = −ðεb + εf Þ ð9Þ
h dx h dx dx
breaking εb and frictional dissipation εf in the energy balance,

ε = εb + εf ð5Þ In order to obtain a composed equilibrium profile (surf profile and

shoaling profile), it is necessary to solve Eq. (9), an appropriate wave
energy dissipation model and wave height variation across the two
In their model, the rate of energy dissipation due to shallow water profile sectors must be provided.
wave breaking is modelled after a bore. The average rate of frictional The main hypothesis to solve Eq. (9) (see details in Medina et al.,
energy dissipation is calculated by assuming the usual quadratic 2000) are:
formulation for bottom shear stress. In the shoaling portion of the
profile bores are not presented and frictional dissipation is the most 1) Surf zone profile. Deans' (1977) hypothesis was assumed (Eqs. (6)
important energy loss process. Once waves start to break, friction and (7)).
becomes a minor dissipation mechanism and can be neglected 2) Shoaling zone profile. The hypothesis is that the bottom shear
compared with the dominant wave breaking dissipation (Thornton stress is constant at equilibrium (Bruun, 1954). Consequently, for a
and Guza, 1983). constant bed friction coefficient cf, the frictional dissipation εf and
In order to solve Eq. (4) a relationship between water depth and the wave orbital velocity Ub are also constant.
wave height must be proposed. In general these variables are ⁎
εf = Df ð10Þ
independent; however, the hypothesis behind equilibrium formula-
tions is that there is only one combination that remains stable in time.
where D⁎f is the constant wave energy dissipation per unit area.
In other words, they will interact with each other until equilibrium is
Assuming shallow water linear wave theory for Ub it yields:
reached. These equilibrium relationships must be proposed as
hypothesis and validated by comparison with field or laboratory pffiffiffi
H =β h ð11Þ
data. Different equilibrium relationships are considered for each
profile portion (surf profile and shoaling profile) according to the
where β is a constant.
processes involved.
3) Reflected FR energy fluxes. Bernabeu (1999), based on the large-
scale SUPERTANK data set and the analysis of wave reflection from
2.2.1. Dean´s parabolic EBP
beaches carried out by Baquerizo et al. (1998), proposed the
The hypothesis for EBPs under breaking waves (surf profile) is that
following expression:
wave energy saturates at equilibrium (Dean, 1977). That is,
shoreward propagating wave energy exceeding a threshold value is 1 dFR F dh
assumed dissipated by wave breaking. Consequently, for a given = k piffiffiffi : ð12Þ
h dx h dx
water depth there is a limit in the wave height and in the wave energy
dissipation. This hypothesis can be formulated as: where k is a constant that depends on the wave period.

Substituting Eqs. (6), (7), (10)–(12) into Eq. (9), assuming shallow
⁎
εb = Db h ð6Þ water linear wave theory and integrating the equation in the two
232 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

hr = 1:1HSa ð19Þ

2.2.3. EBP affected by coastal structures

Some EBPs for a beach affected by coastal structures have been
obtained applying variations in Eqs. (4) and (9). The main assumption for
these cases is that the equilibrium beach profile of a beach affected by a
coastal structure can be obtained if the adequate energy dissipation
model and wave height variation across the profile are used in the energy
flux balance. In this way the effect of the structure can easily be taken into
account in the energy flux balance by considering the modification that
the structure generates on the wave energy flux. This is the case of EBPs
in which refraction and/or diffraction processes are important, as in
examples of equilibrium profiles behind breakwaters or protected areas.
As Eq. (4) only considers wave energy dissipation along the profile, it is
not appropriate for refraction–diffraction areas where there is a lateral
transfer of wave energy flux across the refraction–diffraction area.
Fig. 6. Definition sketch of surf and shoaling profiles. Surf profile extends from the
shoreline to the breaking point. The offshore limit of the shoaling profile can be roughly
Therefore, new expressions have been proposed by (Requejo et al., 2005;
estimated by, ha ≈3.5Hs. (Bernabeu et al., 2003). González and Medina, 1997) in order to establish the wave energy flux
for refraction–diffraction areas. Another case is the equilibrium profile in
sectors, a bi-parabolic equilibrium profile (Fig. 6) including reflection, perched beaches (González et al., 1999). For this case the equilibrium
in tidal or non tidal beaches is obtained: beach profile depends on the amount of energy flux that is transmitted
over the toe structure. Consequently, the design of perched beaches
 3= requires an understanding of how waves are reflected at the submerged
h 2 B 3
x = + 3
h ; Surf zone profile 0 < x < xr ð13Þ structure and how they are dissipated as they travel across the structure's
AR =
AR2
top. Finally, there are many locations in which the entire beach profile is
 3= not sand rich and areas of hard bottom or mud are encountered (e.g. coral
h 2 D 3 reefs, rocky shelves). Many characteristics and informative details about
X = x − xo = + 3 h ; Shoaling profile xr < x < xa ð14Þ
C C =2 these kinds of beaches, which will be denoted as reef-protected beaches,
have been previously studied (see Muñoz-Pérez et al., 1999 as a general
 3=
hr 2 D 3 reference). Muñoz-Pérez et al. (1999) proposed a simple expression for
xo = xr − − 3 hr ; Shoaling profile origin ð15Þ
C C =2 the shape parameter Arp for EBP in reef-protected beaches based on
Andersen and Fredsoe's (1983) wave decay model. These authors
where AR, B, C and D are dimensional-shaped parameters. AR and C concluded that although the resulting beach profile form is similar to the
are associated to dissipation process (wave breaking and bottom one proposed by Dean's profile (Eq. (8)), the shape parameter Arp is
friction respectively), B and D are associated to the profile reflection. greater than the A value used in Dean's (1977) equilibrium profile. This is
Xr and hr is the interception point of the surf and shoaling profiles. due to the higher wave decay induced by the reef, which permits a
Notice that for a dissipative beach where (B ~ 0 and D ~ 0), the surf steeper profile with a shape parameter (Arp = 1.48 A).
profile corresponds with Deans' (1977) profile (Eq. (9)).
Over 50 profiles from 13 beaches along the Spanish coast were 2.3. Depth of closure
best-fitted using Eqs. (13) and (14) in order to determine the
relationship between the shape parameters (AR, B, C, and D), the Depth of closure (DoC) can be defined as the seaward limit of the
intercepting profiles point (Xr and hr) and the wave or the sediment profile envelope where all net morphological changes are negligible. It
characteristics of a beach profile. The available data include profile has been applied in nourishment projects in order to define the cross-
and sediment measurements compiled by Gómez-Pina (1995) and shore seaward boundary and also for establishing sediment budgets.
wave and tidal data recorded by the Spanish wave-recording system Several DoC formulations have been proposed in terms of simple
(REMRO). Mean grain size values are obtained as the average value of wave parameters (Hallermeier, 1981; Birkemeier, 1985; Nicholls and
the shoreface samples. Wave height and period represent the monthly Birkemeier, 1997; Nicholls et al., 1996, 1998; Requejo, 2005). The
average value of the significant wave height and peak period at the most widely used formulations for nourishment projects (e.g.
closure depth prior to the profile measurement date. Finally, the mean Hallermeier, 1981 and Birkemeier, 1985) provide robust estimates
spring tidal range in the area (M) is obtained. of DoC for events up to the annual time-scale (Nicholls et al., 1998).
Different dimensionless variables have been tested for represent- However, from annual to decadal scales, it continues to act as a limit,
ing the shape parameters (A, B, C, and D), see Bernabeu et al. (2003). but with an increasing tendency to overpredict (Capobianco et al.,
The best fit, using a single dimensionless variable, was obtained using 2002). Furthermore, the concept of DoC is only applicable for cross-
the dimensionless fall velocity, Ω (Ω = Hb/ωT). For the range of shore redistribution of sediment but it is invalid in zones with
dimensionless fall velocities 1.5 < Ω < 5, the following expressions important accreting due to littoral drift (Muñoz-Pérez et al., 1999).
were obtained: Thus, as expressed by Capobianco et al. (1997, 2002) the lack of
generality in the present definition employed for the DoC limits its
A = ð0:21−0:02ΩÞ; B = 0:89 exp½−1:24Ω ð16Þ applicability. A probability-based definition of the DoC is necessary for
a wider application of the concept.
Regarding the offshore limit of the EBP (e.g. parabolic Eq. (8) or bi-
C = ð0:66 + 0:04ΩÞ; D = 0:22 exp½−0:83Ω ð17Þ parabolic Eqs. (13) to (15)), if the nourished profile intersects with
the native profile, the need for material to extend out to the DoC is not
 3 necessary as expressed by Dean (1991). However, nonintersecting
hr + M =2 B 3
xr = + 3 ðhr + MÞ ð18Þ profiles, which occur in most beach nourishment projects, always
AR =
AR2 extend out to the DoC. In this case, the nourished equilibrium profile is
 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240
Fig. 7. Definition sketch of a procedural method to test the stability of or to predict the
static equilibrium shoreline in undeveloped bays.
extended to the DoC, and then, from this point, the beach profile
continues with a constant slope shape to intersect the native profile,
normally associated with the underwater angle or slope of repose of
the material (e.g. slope 1/12 for mean sand sizes). When the constant
slope profile is several centimetres high (elevation from the DoC to
the interception native profile), an annual time-scale DoC can be
applied. Nevertheless, there are beach nourishment situations where
an important seaward shoreline advance is necessary, sometimes
combined with a steeper native profile, which leads to an important
elevation of the constant slope profile (higher than 30 cm). In this
situation, the combination of cross- and longshore transport can be
important at different time- and space- scales. Thus, a decadal-scale
analysis of DoC is required. Due to the lack of robust approaches
permitting the generalization of different factors which influence DoC
over the range of engineering timetables, in special cases as described
before, the best option is to carry out an empirical analysis with the
existing profile data of the study area.
3. Beach nourishment long-term design procedure
The proposed methodology can be applied to design an equilib-
rium beach for a nourishment project. In other words, to determine
Fig. 8. Location map of Poniente Beach (Gijón, Spain).
233
the plan form and the profile shape of a beach in equilibrium with the
existing wave climate.
3.1. Fully-developed beaches
In order to design a new fully-developed bay beach, (FDB), first the
downcoast limit (point P0) using the angle αmin = f(Y/Ls) must be
determined and obtaining β and R0, see Fig. 2. Then, Hsu and Evans'
(1989) parabolic formulation for calculating the equilibrium shape is
used.
3.2. Undeveloped beaches
In order to predict the static equilibrium shape for a newly
designed undeveloped bay (UDB), assume that the UDB is part of a
hypothetical FDB, and follow the steps described below:
1. Determine the orientation of the wave front at the control point.
This wave front corresponds with the front of the mean energy flux
of the waves in the area.
2. Define one point at the shoreline Pc (θc > β, Rc) as shown in Fig. 7:
Since there is no shoreline, we are designing a new beach, an
estimation of the location of the future shoreline is needed. Since for
the static equilibrium not only the shoreline but also the complete
beach profile must be placed within fixed boundaries, define the
limiting offshore point, PL, so that the lateral and bottom boundaries
are able to contain the cross-shore profile. Starting at PL and using an
equilibrium beach profile formulation (e.g. bi-parabolic EBP; Medina
et al., 2000; Dean, 1977; Requejo et al., 2005; Muñoz-Pérez et al.,
1999), determine point Pc (θc, Rc). It is noteworthy that any point
landward Pc, see Fig. 7, can also be a solution to the problem yielding
a different equilibrium beach with a different equilibrium shape (not
parallel) and with a minor sand volume required.
3. Define the scaling wave length near the control point, Ls = f(hp,
TS12), keeping in mind that hp should be a mean water depth along
the wave front close to the diffraction point and TS12 refers to the
mean wave period associated with the wave height exceeded 12 h
per year, Hs12.
4. Define Y for the hypothetical FDB, even though the straight
alignment downcoast does not exist. An iterative process is
234 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

Fig. 9. Location and bathymetry before Poniente Beach construction.

 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240 235

necessary. As a first approach, use the Y value for the area through
which the coastline runs in the downcoast limit (P0).
5. Evaluate angle β using αmin = f(Y/Ls), (Fig. 5).
β = 90∘−αmin
6. Define point P0. This point can be defined evaluating R0 from the
parabolic model of Hsu and Evans (1989) as:
7.
R applied (GIOC, 2003), including a user-friendly system called coastal
R0 =
c
2
β β
C0 + C1 θc + C2 θc
with C0, C1 and C2 = f(β) and Rc, θc previously defined by Pc.
8. Recalculate Y using:
′
Y = R0 cos αmin
If Y´ is far from the initially supposed Y value, go back to step (4).
9. Using Hsu and Evans' (1989) parabolic formulation, radii, R, can be
obtained for different anglesθ, yielding the equilibrium shape.
The abovementioned methodology has been applied to several
existing beaches and nourishment projects along the Atlantic and
Mediterranean coasts for both high- and low-tides with very good
results, as shown in the next section.
4. Poniente Beach case study
The Cantabrian coast of Spain is abundant with a series of pocket
beaches; most of the natural headlands extend into deep water and
appear to be effective in confining littoral sand to the embayment.
Therefore, the coast is divided into a series of littoral cells. One of these
littoral cells is Poniente Beach and San Lorenzo Beach, which are
located in the city of Gijón on the Cantabrian coast, to the east of Gijón
Harbour (see Fig. 8).
The objective in this section is to apply the previous beach
nourishment design procedure using long-term equilibrium formula-
tions to “Poniente Beach”, a new urban beach. Regarding San Lorenzo
Beach, a beach affected by harbour enlargement, the application of the
ð20Þ long-term design procedure in order to quantify the impact on this
beach due to an offshore breakwater enlargement, and solutions to
minimize these impacts are presented in details in Raabe et al. (2009,
in this special issue).
In order to analyze the Poniente Beach case, a nourishment design
and evaluation methodology for sandy and gravel beaches has been
ð21Þ
modelling system, SMC (González et al. 2007), which encloses some
numerical models permitting the application of methodologies and
formulations to coastal projects. These methodologies and numerical
tools have been developed by The Dirección General de Costas (DGC)
(State Coastal Office) of the Spanish Environmental Ministry and the
University of Cantabria (a brief description is presented in Raabe et al.,
ð22Þ 2009, in this special issue). Basically, the study methodology permits
the analysis of the beach stability in present and future situations, on a
long-term scale (years) using the equilibrium plan and profile
procedure described previously. The tool also allows the testing of
the beach stability in plan and profile on middle-term (season) and
short-term (storm events) scales. Regarding the two case studies
presented in this paper, the emphasis will be focused on the long-
term analysis using the equilibrium formulations.
4.1. Case description of Poniente Beach
Near the local Gijón marina, between the Cantabria shipyard to the
west and the marina breakwater to the east (see study zone prior to
the beach nourishment project in Fig. 9); the local government and
the harbour authority were interested in creating a new beach in this
zone, as part of an urban developing plan. The nourishment project
presented in this section was designed and constructed following the
previous methodologies and procedures. Thus, the scope in this case is
to present the design of a new man-made beach.

Fig. 10. Geophysical map showing San Lorenzo Beach and Poniente Beach.
236 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

4.2. Morphology of the study area

The zone where San Lorenzo Beach was planned, is located to the
west of the Santa Catalina Cape (see Fig. 9). It is located between the
marina and the shipyard breakwaters which are separated by 800 m,
bounded on the south by a sidewall and on the north by the offshore
Príncipe de Asturias Breakwater (Gijón Harbour).
The geophysical studies developed in the zone demonstrate a
continental shelf with a rocky bottom with some small deposits of
sand; as shown in Fig. 10, where the dark areas correspond to a rocky
bottom and the clear zones to a sandy bottom. Notice in this figure,
that the zone in front of the location of the Poniente Beach is
composed of rock with a horizontal rocky shelf around the −1.0 level
(the zero level corresponds with the equinoctial spring low tide). In
front of the future beach, a rocky shallow 350 m long called the
Serrapio is shown in Fig. 9. Its shallowness and the horizontal shelf are
very important morphological elements regarding wave propagation
and profile stability, as will be explained later.

4.3. Nourishment design requirements

An important restriction of the nourishment design is that the

beach sediment must not pass inside the marina and ship inlets. On
the other hand, the sand is provided by dredging an offshore source on
the continental shelf and the mean size of the borrowed material is
0.4 mm.
Under summer conditions, the project requires a dry beach width
approximately 75 m from the sidewall to the shoreline (mean spring
high tide level) in a middle zone of the beach.

4.4. Marine dynamics

More than 75% of deep water waves approach the Príncipe de

Asturias offshore breakwater from the northern (N) to north-western
(NW) sector. The annual average significant height is about 1 m with
typical winter storm significant waves of about Hs = 5 m. The semi-
diurnal tides in Gijón have a mean tidal range of 3 m and a mean
spring tidal range of 4.5 m.
A wave propagation study was carried out applying the Oluca-SP
wave spectral model (GIOC, 2003), which is past of the SMC. This is a
weakly nonlinear combined refraction and diffraction model, which is
based on the parabolic approximation solution to the mild-slope
equation. As a summary, the waves in Poniente Beach are mainly
affected by the Principe the Asturias Breakwater, the Amosucas
shallow and the local hard bottom bathymetry.
The wave height behind the Príncipe de Asturias Breakwater from
the east to west decreases due to diffraction and refraction effects
caused by both, the breakwater and an important shallow area called
the Amosucas shallow, which is located in front the breakwater tip, as
shown in Fig. 11. The wave propagation of a typical year storm
(offshore Dir = NW, Hso = 4 m, Tpo = 16 s, tidal sea level = 4.5) is
shown in Fig. 11.
Regarding the wave incoming energy in the Poniente zone, it is a
more protected area compared with San Lorenzo Beach, where an
important wave concentration generated by the offshore shallow can
be appreciated in Fig. 11. The wave reduction impact in Poniente
Beach is because of its western location with respect to the Príncipe de
Asturias Breakwater. Additionally, it is not directly affected by the
wave concentrations generated by the Amosucas shallow; and finally,
local waves in the study area are strongly affected by the Serrapio
shallow and the horizontal rocky reef. The Serrapio zone elevation is
around 0.0, which limits the maximal wave height reaching the beach
location. Combined with the rocky reef, it acts as an important storm
wave attenuator. In Fig. 11, this can be noted as the Serrapio shallow
increases the wave height till wave breaking. The maximal wave
height that could arrive at the beach is under a storm condition
Fig. 11. Storm wave from NW (Hso = 4 m, Tpo = 16 s, high tide sea level=+4.5 m) with
spectral wave propagation, parabolic model (Oluca-SP).
combined with a high spring tide level (~4.5 m). Local waves with
significant wave heights greater than Hs > 2 m (in deepwaters
Hso > 4 m) break in the Serrapio shallow.
As explained in the previous sections, the equilibrium plan and
profile formulations require defining the wave conditions locally on
the beach. Regarding equilibrium profile, it is necessary to define the
local seaward limit depth of closure, h⁎ (Hallermeier, 1981; Nicholls
and Birkemeier, 1997; Nicholls et al., 1996, 1998). For the bi-parabolic
equilibrium profile the local fall speed parameter, Ω (Ω = Hb/ωT) that
permits defining the A, B, C and D coefficients (Eqs. 16 and 17) are
also required. The same is true for the diffraction–refraction
equilibrium profile or the reef-protected equilibrium profile. Regard-
ing the equilibrium plan form, it is required to determine the direction
of the mean energy flux of the local waves in the control point.
In order to obtain the wave climate near the beach, it is necessary
to propagate the offshore waves to the coast. With regard to the
offshore waves, there are two buoys close to the study area from the
Spanish wave network; the Gijón 1 buoy is a 20-year scalar buoy
located in a 23-m water depth, and the Gijón 2 is a 10-year directional
buoy in a 450-m water depth. Additionally, using the wind forecast as
 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240
Fig. 12. The design of the equilibrium beach (plan and profile) using the SMC.
an input, waves are predicted as an output from the numerical models
WAM cycle 4. Thirty-year wave data, with a 1-hour time interval is
available in several offshore points throughout the study area. The
wave and sea level hindcast has been carried out by the Spanish
holding of harbours, Puertos del Estado (PE) and the calibration of
these data has been carried out by the University of Cantabria using
the buoys' data.
Based on 350 wave cases obtained as a combination of different wave
(Hs, Tp and Ym) and tidal level conditions, and using the Spectral
propagation model Oluca-SP, several transfer interpolation functions
have been obtained for several points in lee of the hypothetical
breakwaters tips (T1 and T2; Fig. 12). Thus, the 30-year offshore wave
data, with a 1-hour time interval has been transferred to several T points;
wave data available for the different scale plan and profile models.
4.5. Long-term design of Poniente Beach
From the different nourishment alternatives developed, a sand
filling was selected to generate a pocket beach, which is confined
between two breakwaters to the east and the west of it. The sand was
Fig. 13. The predicted static equilibrium shoreline on the actual summer beach configuration (10 years after its construction).
237
provided by dredging an offshore source in the continental shelf and
the mean size of the borrowed material is 0.4 mm.
The length of the lateral breakwaters is an important design
parameter, due to the fact that the pocket equilibrium beach is
governed by the breakwater tips (T1 and T2), as shown in Fig. 12. The
position of the tips determines: (1) the limit for the maximal
shoreline advance (points P1 and P2) in order to confine the
equilibrium profile near the structures, and (2) the shape of the
static equilibrium shoreline (SES), given that the tips define the
position of the control point, where the wave front orientation
associated to the local mean energy flux must be obtained. It is
important to point out that only one maximal breakwater length
exists, which guarantees the available sand (D50 = 0.4 mm), the
confinement of the summer equilibrium profile which defines the
maximal shoreline advance until point (P) near the structure, where
the SES starts passing by point (C). Point C is pre-defined by the dry
beach width in the summer (75 m in the middle of the beach).
Applying the procedure described in Section 3 in an iterative way,
combined with the SMC and taking into account the above discussion,
the static equilibrium shoreline and the breakwater configuration is
presented in Fig. 13. Where the maximal breakwater length was
(L = 225 m), located on the −1.0 bottom level. Thus, based on the
local wave climate, the direction of the mean energy flux of the waves
(Ymef) in control points T1 and T2, are Ymef = N6E and Ymef = N17E,
respectively. The equilibrium profiles near the breakwaters are
associated to the summer conditions, which correspond with the
refraction–diffraction equilibrium profile (RDEP) proposed by
Requejo et al. (2005). The RDEP defines the maximum shoreline
advance near the breakwaters (b = 110 m from the breakwater tips).
The SES starts in points (P1 and P2), passing by the pre-defined point
(C). The tip's impact in the SES can be appreciated in Fig. 13 by mean
αmin angles (T1: αmin1 = 47° and T2: αmin2 = 46.6°).
Regarding the profile in the middle zone, where the profile is not
sand rich due to the presence of the horizontal rocky reef (at −1
level), and the diffraction effect is minor, the EBP proposed by Muñoz-
Pérez et al., 1999 has been applied. Based on the mean sediment size
of the borrow material (D50 = 0.4 mm), the shape parameter
proposed by Moore (1982) can be obtained (A = 0.14). Thus, the
238 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240

Fig. 14. The designed equilibrium beach in plan and its interception with the native bathymetry (application obtained with the SMC).

calculated reef-protected shape parameter can be definite as
Arp = 0.21 (Arp = 1.48A). As expressed in the next section, this profile
intercepts the hard bottom around the 0.0 level, inside the break-
water's confinement (see Fig. 14). On the other hand, due to the water
depth limitation imposed by the Serrapio shallow (0.0 level) and the
horizontal hard bottom reef, the maximal significant wave height that
can overpass the beach in mean spring tides is around Hs = 2.0 m. In a
sand rich profile it would correspond with a DoC around h⁎ ~ 3 m
(Hallermeier, 1981). However, in the reef-protected EBP, the profile is
composed of the sandy beach near the intertidal zone and the rocky
shelf in the submerged profile; in this case the DoC is not an offshore
limit as it is in a rich sandy beach (Muñoz-Pérez et al., 1999).
The SMC system permits the combination of the equilibrium profile
with the equilibrium plan, in order to define the “equilibrium beach”. In
Fig. 14 the designed equilibrium beach is presented. The beach berm has
been defined at the 6.0 level and the SES at the 5.0 level taking into
account different local sea level elements (e.g. astronomical and
meteorological tides, surf beat, and wave swash). In Fig. 14, also
represented is the interception between the sand filling with the native
bottom, which is near the 0.0 level, inside the breakwater's confinement.
A cross profile with the native and nourished reef-protected equilibrium
profiles is presented in Fig. 15 (see its location in Fig. 14). The volume of
sand for the sand filling in this project was calculated at 300,000 m3.
Finally, the equilibrium beach (Fig. 16) and the present situation of
the beach (Fig. 17) in summer conditions, 10 years after its
construction, demonstrate that from an engineering point of view,
the above proposed procedure and long-term tools permit to predict
adequately the beach plan form and profile.
5. Conclusions
The concept of equilibrium plan form and equilibrium profile has
been widely used for coastal morphology modelling in macro-scale
(years to decades and hundreds of metres to kilometres). These
equilibrium shapes have also been successfully applied as engineering
tools in order to design beach nourishment projects.
In this paper a methodology that combines both equilibrium
shapes (plan form and profile) is presented. The methodology is based
on the work of González and Medina (2001). After a few iterations, it
is possible to design applying this methodology, a new beach or to
verify if a beach is close or far from its equilibrium position.

Fig. 15. A nourished equilibrium profile and the native profile (see location of the cross-shore profile in Fig. 14).
 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240 239

Fig. 16. Bathymetry obtained using the SMC, based on the proposed methodology and long-term formulations in plan and profile (designed static equilibrium beach).

Fig. 17. The actual situation of Poniente Beach in summer conditions (10 years after its construction).

The model proposed by González and Medina (2001) allows the
determination of the angle αmin, which defines the downcoast limit
from which Hsu and Evans' (1989) parabolic model is applicable. Also,
it allows to predict the plan form of non-existing beaches, by means of
the definition of the front's orientation at the diffraction point in
relation to the direction of the mean wave energy flux in the area.
This methodology has been applied to the design of Poniente
Beach (Gijón, Spain). Ten years after its construction, it has been
demonstrated that the followed procedure and the long-term tools
permit a very good prediction for this kind of beaches.
Acknowledgements
The first author wishes to express his gratitude to the Spanish
Comisión Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnología (CICYT) under
research grant REN2003-9640/MAR, and the Spanish Ministerio de
240 M. González et al. / Coastal Engineering 57 (2010) 227–240
Educación y Ciencia under the Program for mobility of professors in
foreign centres for its support.
References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 1994. Coastal groins and nearshore
breakwaters. Technical Engineering and Design Guides. US Army Corps of
Engineers. No. 6.
Andersen, O.H., Fredsoe, F., 1983. Transport of suspended sediment along the coast.
Progress Report No. 54, Inst. of Hydrodynamics and Hydraulic Eng, ISVA. Tech. Univ.
of Denmark, pp. 33–46.
Baquerizo, A., Losada, M.A., Smith, J.M., 1998. Wave reflection from beaches: a
predictive model. J. Coast. Res. 14 (1), 291–298.
Bernabeu, A.M., 1999. Desarrollo, validación y aplicaciones de un modelo general de
perfil de equilibrio en playas. Ph.D thesis, Departamento de Ciencias y Técnicas del
Agua y del Medio Ambiente, Universidad de Cantabria. Santander.
Bernabeu, A., Medina, R., Vidal, C., 2003. A morphological model of the beach profile
integrating wave and tidal influences. Mar. Geol. 197, 95–116.
Birkemeier, W.A., 1985. Field data on seaward limit of profile change. J. Waterw. Port
Coast. Ocean Eng., ASCE 111 (3), 598–602.
Bodge, K.R., 1992. Representing equilibrium beach profiles with an exponential
expression. J. Coast. Res. 8 (1), 47–55.
Bruun, P., 1954. Coast erosion and the development of beach profiles. Beach Erosion
Board, Technical Memorandum, No 44.
Capobianco, M., Larson, M., Nicholls, R.J., Kraus, N.C., 1997. Depth of closure: a
contribution to the reconciliation of theory, practice and evidence. Proc. Coastal
Dynamics'97: ASCE, pp. 506–515.
Capobianco, M., Hanson, H., Larson, M., Steetzel, H., Stive, M.J.F., Chatelus, Y.,
Aarninkhof, S., Karambas, T., 2002. Nourishment design and evaluation: applica-
bility of model concepts. Coast. Eng. 47, 113–135.
Dean, R.G., 1977. Equilibrium beach profiles: U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Department
of Civil Engineering, Ocean Engineering Report No. 12, University of Delaware,
Newark.
Dean, R., 1991. Equilibrium beach profiles: characteristics and applications. J. Coast. Res.
7 (1), 53–84.
De Vriend, H.J., Zyserman, J., Nicholson, J., Roelvink, J.A., Péchon, P., Southgate, H.N., 1993.
Medium-term 2DH coastal area modelling. In: de Vriend, H.J. (Ed.), Coastal
Morphodynamics: Processes and Modelling. Coastal Engineering, vol. 21, pp. 193–224.
GIOC, 2003. Methodological Document. Beach Regeneration Manual. State Coastal Office—
Spanish Environmental Ministry and University of Cantabria. 201 pp. (In Spanish).
Gómez-Pina, G., 1995. Análisis de perfiles de playa en las fachadas cantábrica y atlántica
de la costa española y su aplicación a proyectos de regeneración. Universidad de
Cantabria E.T.S.I.C.C.P. Dpto. de Ciencias y Técnicas del Agua y Medio Ambiente,
Spain.
Gómez-Pina, G., 2001. Modelo biparabólico de cuantificación de perfiles de playas en
mares con marea basado en datos de campo del litoral español. Ph.D thesis,
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
González, M., 1995. Morfología de playas en equilibrio: planta y perfil. Ph.D Thesis,
Departamento de Ciencias y Técnicas del Agua y del Medio Ambiente, Universidad
de Cantabria. Santander, Spain.
González, M., Medina, R., 1997. Equilibrium beach profiles: effects of refraction. Proc.
Coastal Dynamics'97: ASCE, pp. 933–942.
González, M., Medina, R., 1999. Equilibrium shoreline response behind a single offshore
breakwater. Proc. Coastal Sediments'99: ASCE, 1, pp. 933–942.
González, M., Medina, R., 2001. On the application of static equilibrium bay
formulations to natural and man-made beaches. Coast. Eng. 43, 209–225.
González, M., Medina, R., Losada, M.A., 1999. Equilibrium beach profile model for
perched beaches. Coast. Eng. 36, 343–357.
González, M., Medina, R., González-Ondina, J., Osorio, A., Méndez, F.J., García, E., 2007.
An integrated coastal modelling system for analyzing beach processes and beach
restoration projects, SMC. Comput. Geosci. 33 (7), 916–931.
Hallermeier, R.J., 1981. A profile zonation for seasonal sand beaches from wave climate.
Coast. Eng. 4, 253–277.
Hanson, H., Kraus, N.C., 1989. GENESIS: Generalized Model for Simulating Shoreline
Change. Technical Report CERC-89-19, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Hanson, H., Aarninkhof, S., Capobianco, M., Jiménez, J.A., Larson, M., Nicholls, R.J., Plant,
N.G., Southgate, H.N., Steetzel, H.J., Stive, M.J.F., de Vriend, H.J., 2003. Modelling of
coastal evolution on yearly to decadal time scales. J. Coast. Res. 19 (4), 790–811.
Ho, S.K., 1971. Crenulate shaped bays. Thesis n. 346, Assoc. Institute of Technology at
Bangkok, Thailand.
Hsu, J.R.C., Evans, C., 1989. Parabolic bay shapes and applications. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.,
Lond. (Part 2) 87, 556–570.
Hsu, J.R.C., Silvester, R., Xia, Y.M., 1989a. Static equilibrium bays: new relationships.
J. Waterw. Port Coast. Ocean Eng., ASCE 115 (3), 285–298.
Hsu, J.R.C., Silvester, R., Xia, Y.M., 1989b. Generality on static equilibrium bays. Coast.
Eng. 12, 353–369.
Hsu, J.R.C., Silvester, R., Xia, Y.M., 1989c. Applications of headland control. J. Waterw.
Port Coast. Ocean Eng., ASCE 115 (3), 299–310.
Hsu, J.R.C., Uda, T., Silvester, R., 1993. Beaches downcoast of harbours in bays. Coast.
Eng. 19, 163–181.
Inman, D.L., Elwany, M.H.S., Jenkins, S.A., 1993. Shorerise and bar berm profiles on
ocean beaches. J. Geophysical Research 98 (C10), 18, 181–18,199.
Kraus, N.C., 2001. On equilibrium properties in predictive modeling of coastal
morphology change. Proc. Coastal Dynamics'01, ASCE, pp. 1–15.
Larson, M., Kraus, N., Wise, R.A., 1999. Equilibrium beach profile under breaking and
non-breaking waves. Coast. Eng. 36, 59–85.
Medina, R., Bernabeu, A.M., Vidal, C., González, M., 2000. Relationship between beach
morphodynamics and equilibrium profiles. Proc. 27th Inter. Conf. Coastal Eng:
ASCE, 3, pp. 2589–2601.
Moore, B., 1982. Beach profile evolution in response to changes in water level and wave
height. M.S. thesis, University of Delaware, Newark.
Muñoz-Pérez, J.J., Tejedor, I.L., Medina, R., 1999. Equilibrium beach profile model for
reef-protected beaches. J. Coastal Research 15 (4), 950–957.
Nicholls, R.J., Birkemeier, W.A., Hallermeier, R.J., 1996. Application of the depth of
closure concept. ASCE 4, 3874–3887.
Nicholls, R.J., Birkemeier, W.A., 1997. Morphological and sediment budget controls on
depth of closure at Duck, NC. Proc. Coastal Dynamics' 97: ASCE, pp. 496–505.
Nicholls, R.J., Birkemeier, W.A., Lee, G.H., 1998. Evaluation of depth of closure using data
from Duck, NC, USA. Mar. Geol. 148 (3–4), 179–201.
Raabe, A., Klein, A.H.F., González, M., Medina, M., 2009. MEPBAY & SMC: software tools
to support different operational levels of headland bay beach in coastal engineering
projects. Coast. Eng. Special Issue.
Requejo, S., 2005. “Análisis y mejoras en la evaluación de diversos términos de los
modelos de evolución de playas en escalas de medio plazo” (Analysis and
improvement of middle-term evolution models for beaches). Ph.D thesis,
Departamento de Ciencias y Tecnicas del Agua y del Medio Ambiente, Universidad
de Cantabria. Santander, Spain.
Requejo, S., Medina, R., González, M., 2005. Equilibrium beach profile for refraction–
diffraction areas. Proc. 5th Inter. Conf. on Coastal Dynamics, ASCE: Book of
Abstracts, Paper No. 74, pp. 352–353.
Romanozyk, W., Boczar-Karakiewicz, B., Bona, J.L., 2005. Extended equilibrium beach
profiles. Coast. Eng. 52, 727–744.
Silvester, R., 1970. Growth of crenulate shaped bays to equilibrium. J. Waterw. Harb.
Div., ASCE 96 (WW4), 275–287.
Silvester, R., Hsu, J.R.C., 1997. Coastal Stabilization. Advanced Series on Ocean
Engineering, 14. World Scientific. Reprint of Silvester and Hsu, 1993.
Tan, S., Chiew, Y., 1994. Analysis of bayed beaches in static equilibrium. J. Waterw. Port
Coast. Ocean Eng., ASCE 120 (2), 145–153.
Thornton, E.B., Guza, R.T., 1983. Transformation of wave height distribution. J. Geophys.
Res. 18, 5925–5938.
Vichetpan, N., 1969. Equilibrium shapes of coastline in plan. M.Eng. thesis, No. 280,
Asian Inst. of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.
Yasso, W.E., 1965. Plan geometry of headland bay beaches. J. Geology 73, 702–714.