Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.

Evaluation of Target Reliability Indices and Partial Safety Factors for Sliding of Caisson
Breakwaters
Author(s): S.-W. Kim and K.-D. Suh
Source: Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 11th
INTERNATIONAL COASTAL SYMPOSIUM ICS2011 (2011), pp. 622-626
Published by: Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26482246
Accessed: 16-12-2020 03:19 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26482246?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Journal of Coastal Research

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Journalof
Journal ofCoastal
CoastalResearch
Research SI 64 622
pg -- pg
626 ICS2011 (Proceedings)
ICS2011 Poland ISSN 0749-0208

Evaluation of Target Reliability Indices and Partial Safety Factors for

Sliding of Caisson Breakwaters
S.-W. Kim† and K.-D. Suh‡
†Dept. of Civil and Environmental ‡ Dept. of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Seoul National University, Engineering, Seoul National University,
Seoul 151-744, Korea. Seoul 151-744, Korea.
esfpknu7@snu.ac.kr kdsuh@snu.ac.kr
*Corresponding author

ABSTRACT

Kim, S.-W. and Suh, K.-D., 2011. Evaluation of target reliability indices and partial safety factors for sliding of
caisson breakwaters. Journal of Coastal Research, SI 64 (Proceedings of the 11th International Coastal
Symposium),  – . Szczecin, Poland, ISSN 0749-0208

In order to perform the reliability-based design for sliding of caisson breakwater, the target reliability index and
partial safety factor for each safety level are required. To date, these have not been evaluated for caisson
breakwaters in Korea. In this study, the target reliability indices and partial safety factors for sliding of caisson
breakwater are proposed by analyzing the existing caisson breakwaters with the First-Order Reliability Method.
The target reliability index for normal safety level was evaluated by averaging the reliability indices of existing
structures. Those for high and low safety levels were placed at plus and minus one standard deviation of the
reliability index of existing structures. The representative partial safety factors were then proposed for each
safety level by averaging those of 12 cross-sections of breakwaters in Korea. To verify the partial safety factors,
the present study was not only compared with the technical standards and commentaries of port and harbor
facilities in Japan, but also showed that the reliability indices of existing breakwaters which were redesigned by
the partial safety factors were close to the target reliability index.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Reliability-Based Design, Safety Level, First-Order Reliability Method

INTRODUCTION In this study, the target failure probabilities are evaluated by

It is necessary to adopt the probabilistic design method in the
coastal structures because of changing in international design
codes due to increasing uncertainties of design variables, i.e. wave
height, wave period, and storm duration according to climate
change. In the last several decades, the reliability-based design
method has been partially used to design the coastal structures in
the world. Recently, the reliability-based design for caisson
breakwater in Japan was adopted as a technical standard of coastal
structures (MLIT, 2009). The method selected was the partial
safety factors method which is similar to the deterministic design
method used until now. The partial safety factors in MLIT were
differently coded depending on various caisson breakwater types
and bottom slopes. On the other hand, the partial safety factors in
Europe and USA were not different for various types of
breakwaters (US Army, 2006). While those in Europe were
evaluated to consider the representative statistical characteristic
for various breakwaters, MLIT used each different statistical
characteristic depending on the type of breakwater and bottom
slope.
Sliding failure is more dominant than overturning and tilting
failures in the failure modes of caisson breakwater. While
overturning and tilting failures have been seldom occurred, sliding
of caisson has been observed in many cases (Nagao et al., 1995,
Takahashi et al., 2000, Goda and Takagi, 2000). In general, if it is
safe against sliding failure, it is also safe against overturning
failure for the caisson breakwater. Therefore, it is sufficient to
propose the partial safety factors for the sliding failure mode.
performing the reliability analysis of existing breakwaters: 12
cross-sections in Korea and 31 cross-sections (Yoshioka and
Nagao, 2005) in Japan. As using the target failure probability, the
partial safety factors are calculated regardless of types of
breakwaters and bottom slopes. The 12 cross-sections in Korea
were used to calculate each partial safety factor so that the mean
value of partial safety factors was proposed as the representative
value. To verify those factors, the proposed values are compared
with the MLIT (2009) and US Army (2006). FORM (First-Order
Reliability Method) is used to calculate the partial safety factors.
Main feature of this method is to calculate the statistical
characteristics of design variables at the most probable failure
point and the reliability index of existing structures
simultaneously.
SELECTION OF STRUCTURES
The number of caisson breakwaters in the trade and coastal
harbors in Korea is a few so that several cross-sections in Ulsan
and Donghae harbor were selected. Types of caisson breakwater
were classified into the typical composite breakwater, horizontal
composite breakwater and sloping-top caisson breakwater. As for
the region, Donghae, Okgye, Ulsan, and Uleung harbors are
located in the eastern coast and Hwasun harbor is the only one in
the southern coast. The 31 cross-sections of composite
breakwaters in Japan were used to calculate the reliability indices
in order to compare with the reliability index of breakwaters in
Korea. For each breakwater the trunk section was selected. Fig. 1

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011

622

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Reliability and Safety of Caisson Breakwater

Table 1: Comparison between measured and calculated forces for

Goda’s wave force formula (Oumeraci et al., 2001)
Forces Ratio Mean S.D.
measured/calculated
Horizontal
force, FP rFP 0.90 0.20
Vertical
force, FU rFU 0.77 0.20

Table 2: Comparison between measured and calculated forces for

Goda’s wave force formula (MLIT, 2009)
Forces Bottom Ratio
slope measured/calculated Mean S.D.
Figure 1. Typical cross-section of composite breakwater
FP , FU mild rF , rF P U
0.740 0.177

shows the geometries and wave forces with Goda’s (1974) FP , FU steep rFP , rFU 0.825 0.207
formula acting on the typical composite breakwater.
In Fig. 1, the vertical force acting on the bottom of the upright Table 3: Statistical characteristics of design variables
section is assumed to have a triangle distribution with toe pressure, Variable XD µX / X D σX / XD σ X / µX Distri.
pu . Wave pressure, p1 in the still water level can be expressed f - 1.06 0.16 0.15 Nor.
with λ1 and λ2 as Wa - 1.01 0.02 0.02 Nor.
1
p1 = (1+ cos β )( λ1 α1 + λ2 α * cos 2 β ) ρ gH max (1) WL rWL = 1.5 1.00 0.20 0.20 Nor.
2 rWL = 2 − 2.5 1.00 0.40 0.40 Nor.
where λ1 is the dissipating rate of wave force due to dissipating FP 0.90 0.20 0.222 Nor.
armor blocks, and λ2 denotes a correction factor that depends on
FU 0.77 0.20 0.260 Nor.
the structural type of breakwaters. In the typical composite
breakwater, λ1 = λ2 =1.0 , λ2 = 0.0 in the horizontal composite
breakwater with armoring front side, and the dissipating rate of Friction coefficient and weight of caisson
wave force, λ1 is different according to the ratio of maximum Normal distribution was assumed for the friction coefficient
wave height to water depth: between concrete and rock or concrete. In case of the friction
coefficient between concrete and rock, the mean and standard
λ1 =1.0 ( H max / hs ≤ 0.3) (2a) deviation used were 0.6 and 0.16 respectively (MOMAF, 2005,
Takayama and Ikeda, 1993). On the other hand, the mean value of
2  H max 
λ1 =1.2 −   (0.3 < H max / hs ≤ 0.6) (2b) friction coefficient between concretes was 0.75 and the standard
3  hs  deviation was the same as the former. To calculate the weight of a
λ1 = 0.8 ( H max / hs > 0.6) (2c) caisson, the statistical characteristics used in MLIT (2009) were
different for reinforced concrete, plain concrete, stuffed gravel and
sand. However, the bias of the variables related to the weight of a
STATISTICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF caisson was significantly small compared with other variables and
DESIGN VARIABLES the coefficients of variation (CV) of those were less than 0.04.
Wave forces Therefore, in this study, it is used for the integrated variable
Goda’s (1974) wave force formula was used to calculate the related to the weight of a caisson. The bias and CV used were 0.01
horizontal and vertical wave forces in the caisson breakwater. and 0.02 respectively.
However, the wave force calculated by Goda’s formula is larger
than the wave force measured by hydraulic test and also included Tidal level
the variation. Therefore, van der Meer et al. (1994) evaluated the The statistical characteristics of tidal level suggested by MLIT
uncertainty of Goda’s (1974) wave force formula by comparing (2009) can be expressed by using the ratio, rWL as follows:
with the measured wave force of the maximum individual wave
height, H1/ 250 . Oumeraci et al. (2001) then proposed the rWL = H .H .W .L./ H .W .L. (4)
uncertainty of Goda’s formula by reanalyzing the result of van der
Meer et al. as given in Table 1. To consider these uncertainties in where H.H.W.L. and H.W.L. indicate the higher high water level
the breakwater design, wave force, FD can be expressed as and high water level, respectively. If rWL is equal to 1.0, the CV
FD = rX i gFG (3) then was used as 0.2. When rWL is placed between 2.0 and 2.5, the
CV was 0.4. In Korea, while rWL on the eastern coast is distributed
where rX i is the ratio of the measured value to the calculated between 2.0 and 2.5, rWL on the southern coast locates between 1.0
value FG by Goda’s formula and followed the normal distribution. and 1.5. Finally, the CV of tidal level of MLIT was used. Because
Takayama and Ikeda (1993) examined that the mean and standard the bias is almost equal to 0.0, tidal level can be well predicted by
deviation of the ratio rFP were respectively 0.91 and 0.19 which various numerical models. Table 3 summarizes the statistical
were similar to Oumeraci et al. (2001). On the other hand, MLIT characteristics of design variables to be used in this study.
(2009) used the statistical characteristics of wave force and uplift
as shown in Table 2 which are somewhat different from the values
in Table 1.

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011

623

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Kim and Suh

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
To evaluate the reliability indices of existing structures using
FORM, the reliability function should be expressed as

G = [Wa − FB (WL) − FU ] f − FP (5)

where Wa is the caisson weight in the air, FB (= ρ 0 g (WL + h' ) B ) is

the buoyancy of caisson, WL is the tidal level, ρ 0 is the density of
sea water, h ' is the water depth from the bottom of caisson to
design water level, f is the friction coefficient, and FP and FU are
the horizontal and uplift wave force, respectively.
The characteristic values of wave forces corresponding to the
return period T (years) were calculated by using Goda’s (1974)
formula. Then, the mean and standard deviation for each design Figure 2. Relative frequency of reliability index
variable were also calculated to use the statistical characteristics in of existing caisson breakwaters in Korea
Table 3. In this study, the reliability index calculated was for life
time T (years) and both of return period and life time of structures
are the same as 50 years.
The statistical characteristics evaluated in the previous section
are used to calculate the influence factors using the Rackwitz
(1976) algorithm:

( ∂G / ∂X i ')*
αi = (6)
n

∑ ( ∂G / ∂X i ')*
2

i =1

where Xi stands for each design variable, and the prime indicates
the normalization of the variable. The subscript * indicates the
value at the most probable failure point.
The normalized value at the design point xi’ * is expressed as the Figure 3. Reliability index versus safety factor
product of the reliability index β and the influence factor αi : of existing caisson breakwaters

xi' * = − βα i (7) Table 4: Target reliability index depending on safety level of

structures
The most probable failure point is expressed as Safety level βT Application
High 2.33 Upper bound
xi* = σ X i xi' * + µ X i = µ X i − α iσ X i β (8) Normal 2.00 General structures
Low 1.65 Lower bound
Substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (5) and having the reliability function,
G to be zero, the initial reliability index was calculated. To find deviation of the reliability indices of existing structures in Japan.
the final reliability index, iteration process should be used until the Fig. 3 shows a relationship between the reliability index and
absolute value between the nth and (n+1)th reliability index safety factor for the existing structures in Korea. The relationship
become less than the allowable values as 0.005. is almost linear so that the reliability index can be easily estimated
Fig. 2 shows the relative frequency of reliability indices of corresponding to the safety factor. Moreover, the linear
existing caisson breakwaters (12 cross-sections) in Korea. The relationship means that the influence of mean value of design
mean value and standard deviation are respectively 2.0 and 0.66. variable is more important than the influence of other values (i.e.,
Analyzing from the breakwaters (31 cross-sections) in Japan, the standard deviation, coefficient of variation, parameters for non-
mean and standard deviation are also found to be 2.0 and 0.4. The normal distribution). In other words, it is possible to propose the
meaningful results were investigated in Fig. 2. First of all, the partial safety factors method because the mean value as a
variation of reliability indices is so large, that is, a significant representative value is dominant on the whole design process in
uncertainty is included in the existing structures constructed by the the caisson breakwater.
deterministic design method. Therefore, it is clear that the existing
structures include some possibility of over- or under-estimation in
PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS
economical point of view. It is also proved that the deterministic
design method is not sufficient to assess the stability of structures. Evaluation of partial safety factors
Second, the target reliability indices determined from the previous The MPFP (Most Probable Failure Point) of each load and
analysis of the existing structures are given in Table 4. The target resistance design variable Xi* can be express as the product of the
reliability index for the normal safety level was evaluated as a partial safety factor i and the characteristic value Xi
mean value of 2.0. For the high and low safety level, the target
reliability indices are also proposed respectively as 2.33 and 1.65. X i* = γ X i X i (9)
Those values are placed almost at plus and minus one standard

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011

624

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Reliability and Safety of Caisson Breakwater

Table 5: Partial safety factors evaluated by the present study

βT (PfT) γf γFP γFU γWa γWL

2.33 (0.01) 0.78 1.19 0.84 1.00 1.03

2.00 (0.02) 0.83 1.16 0.83 1.00 1.03
1.65 (0.05) 0.88 1.13 0.82 1.01 1.02

The characteristic values are now assumed to be the design values

(i.e. mean) in the deterministic design method. The reliability
function with the partial safety factors is expressed as

G = [ γ Wa Wa − FB (γ WLWL) − γ FU FU ]γ f f − γ FP FP (10)

Figure 4. Comparison of partial safety factors for horizontal

The partial safety factors are calculated by using the relationship
wave force between MLIT (2009) and present study
between the characteristic value and the value at the MPFP that is
satisfied with the target reliability index, βT on the failure surface
of reliability function. Eq. (11) explains that the reliability
function considering the partial safety factors is the same as the
reliability function with the values at the MPFP.

G = [ γ Wa Wa − FB (γ WLWL) − γ FU FU ]γ f f − γ FP FP
(11)
= [Wa* − FB (WL* ) − FU * ] f * − FP*

From Eq. (11), each partial safety factor of design variables is

evaluated as
W * ( β ) µ − αWa σ Wa βT µWa
γ Wa = a T = Wa = (1 − αWa δWa βT ) (12a)
Wa Wa Wa
WL* ( βT ) µWL − αWLσ WL βT µWL
γ WL = = = (1 − αWLδWL βT ) (12b) Figure 5. Comparison of partial safety factors for uplift force
WL WL WL
between MLIT (2009) and present study
F * ( β ) µ F − α FU σ FU βT µ FU
γF = U T = U = (1 − α FU δ FU βT ) (12c)
U
FU FU FU
Table 2). Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 show the comparison of partial safety
f * ( βT ) µ f − α f σ f βT µ f factors for horizontal wave force and uplift force between MLIT
γf = = = (1 − α f δ f βT ) (12d)
f f f and this study. In Fig. 4, the present partial safety factor of
horizontal wave force is larger than MLIT in the conditions of
FP* ( βT ) µ FP − α FP σ FP βT µ FP mild and steep bottom slopes because the characteristic value
γF = = = (1 − α FP δ FP βT ) (12e)
P
FP FP FP (mean value) is larger than MLIT. From this result, it was
where δ X i is the coefficient of variation for X i . investigated that the mean values have a significant role in
evaluating the partial safety factor as in Eq. (12e). In Fig. 5, the
Table 5 shows the representative partial safety factors for each present partial safety factor of uplift force is located between mild
design variable corresponding to each target reliability index. slope and steep bottom slope of MLIT. Therefore, the partial
These are proposed as averaging the partial safety factors of 12 safety factor calculated in this study is not considerably different
cross-sections in Korea, because the values can be different compared with MLIT so that these can be acceptable generally.
depending on geometries of structures and locality of coastal
environment. As the target reliability index increases, load partial
safety factors such as wave forces and tidal level increase and the Application of partial safety factors
resistance partial safety factors for friction coefficient and weight The width of caisson using the partial safety factors is calculated
of caisson decrease. Comparing with others, the partial safety by Eq. (13)
factor of the weight of caisson is close to 1.0 so that its influence γ FP FP
B= (13)
is little in the breakwater design. [( γ Wa ( h ' + hc ) ρ s g − ( γ WLWL + h ' ) ρ 0 g − γ FU FU / 2]γ f f

Comparison of partial safety factors
The partial safety factors proposed in this study were compared
with MLIT (2009). The present study and MLIT used the same
statistical characteristics of friction coefficient, weight of caisson
and tidal level so that the present partial safety factors were almost
the same as MLIT’s result according to the target probability of
failure. However, the statistical characteristics of wave forces are
different between MLIT (see Table 3) and the present study (see
With Eq. (13), the caisson widths were calculated by using the
partial safety factors corresponding to each target reliability index.
Then, the reliability index of the designed caisson was evaluated
in order to confirm that the calculated reliability index is similar to
the target reliability index. As the reliability index evaluated well
agreed with the target reliability index in Table 6, the proposed
partial safety factors in this study are reliable.

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011

625

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Kim and Suh

good agreement with the target reliability index. Therefore, it can

be said that the proposed partial safety factors are reliable and
reasonable in the design of caisson breakwaters.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was supported by the Project for Developmenet of
Reliability-Based Design Methods for Port and Harbor Structures
sponsored by Korea Ministry of Martine Affairs and Fisheries.
This work was conducted at the Engineering Research Institute of
Seoul National University.

LITERATURE CITED
Goda, Y., 1974. A new method of wave pressure calculation for
the design of composite breakwater. Proceedings of the 14th
International Conference on Coastal Engineering
(Copenhagen, Denmark), pp. 1702-1720.
Figure 6. Comparison of relative frequency of reliability index Goda, Y. and Takagi, H., 2000. A reliability design method of
among deterministic method, present partial safety factor caisson breakwaters with optimal wave heights. Coastal
method with βt=2.0, and the MLIT (2009) with βt=2.38 Engineering Journal, 42, 357-387.
MLIT, 2009. Technical standards and commentaries for port and
harbor facilities in Japan. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Table 6: Caisson width and reliability index calculated using the
Transport and Tourism (MLIT): Ports and Harbors Bureau.
partial safety factors in Table 6. Nagao, T.; Kadowaki, Y., and Terauchi, K., 1995. Evaluation of
βt=2.0 βt=2.33 safety of breakwaters by the reliability based design method
Name
B (m) β B (m) β (1st report: Study on the safety against sliding), Rep. of the
Okgye 20.77 2.02 22.72 2.35 Port and Hab. Res. Inst., 34(5), 40-70 (in Japanese).
Hwasun 31.06 2.02 34.80 2.35 Oumeraci, H.; Kortenhaus, A.; Allsop, W.; de Groot, M.; Crouch,
Donghae NG(af) 14.76 2.02 16.14 2.35 R.; Vrijling, H., and Voortman, H., 2001. Probabilistic design
Donghae NH(af) 14.77 2.01 16.16 2.35 tools for vertical breakwaters, Sweta & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse.
Donghae NI(af) 18.50 2.02 20.23 2.36 Rackwitz, R., 1976. Practical probabilistic approach to design,
Donghae NG(be) 19.46 2.02 21.29 2.35 Bulletin 112, Comite European du Beton, Paris, France.
Takahashi, S.; Shimosako, K.; Kimura, K., and Suzuki, K., 2000.
Donghae NH(be) 19.38 2.02 21.20 2.36
Typical failure of composite breakwaters in Japan.
Donghae NI(be) 25.53 2.02 27.93 2.36 Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Coastal
Uleung 18.17 2.16 19.86 2.48 Engineering (Sydney, Australia), pp. 1899-1910.
Ulsan A 21.02 2.19 22.99 2.51 Takayama, T., and Ikeda, N., 1993. Estimation of sliding failure
Ulsan B 19.71 2.20 21.55 2.51 probability of present breakwaters for probabilistic design,
Ulsan C 16.16 2.20 17.67 2.52 Rep. of the Port and Hab. Res. Inst., 31(5).
US Army Corps of Engineers, 2006. Coastal Engineering
Fig. 6 shows a comparison of relative frequency of reliability Manual: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (in
index between the deterministic method and partial safety factor 6 volumes).
method with βt = 2.0. The variation of reliability indices in the van der Meer, J.W.; d’Angremond, K., and Juhl, J., 1994.
deterministic method is much larger than that of reliability indices Probabilistic calculations of wave forces on vertical structures.
in the partial safety factor method. However, the reliability indices Proceedings of the 23th International Conference on Coastal
designed by the partial safety factors method are close to the target Engineering (Kobe, Japan), pp. 1754-1767.
reliability index so that the method is proved to be very reasonable. Yoshioka, T., and Nagao, T., 2005. Level-1 reliability-based
design method for gravity-type special breakwaters, Research
CONCLUSION report of NILIM.
The partial safety factors for sliding of caisson are proposed in this
study. Through analyzing the reliability indices of existing
structures designed by the conventional method, the shortcoming
of the deterministic design method was investigated. On the other
hand, the target reliability index for normal safety level was
determined by averaging the reliability indices of various
breakwaters. Depending on target reliability index, the partial
safety factors were evaluated using First Order Reliability Method.
As the present result was placed between mild and steep bottom
slope in MLIT (2009), the proposed partial safety factors were
verified to be acceptable by international standards. Moreover,
when the caisson breakwaters were designed by the partial safety
factors, the calculated reliability indices of the structures show

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011

626

This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Wed, 16 Dec 2020 03:19:21 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms