Brunn Pricipio

The Bruun Theory of Sea-Level Rise as a Cause of Shore Erosion
Author(s): Maurice L. Schwartz

Source: The Journal of Geology, Vol. 75, No. 1 (Jan., 1967), pp. 76-92
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30084988
Accessed: 09-09-2019 15:45 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30084988?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
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Journal of Geology
This content downloaded from 143.107.252.212 on Mon, 09 Sep 2019 15:45:46 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
THE BRUUN THEORY OF SEA-LEVEL RISE
AS A CAUSE OF SHORE EROSION1
MAURICE L. SCHWARTZ2
ABSTRACT
Laboratory and field tests have been undertaken in order to test the new theory
which offers dimensional relationships to the process of sea-level rise as a cause of sho
to the classic Johnsonian concept. Bruun holds that when an equilibrium profile is dev
shoreward displacement of the beach profile as the upper beach is eroded; (b) the mate
upper beach is equal in volume to the material deposited on the nearshore bottom; (c) t
shore bottom as a result of this deposition is equal to the rise in sea level, thus mainta
depth in that area.
In field investigations, the variation between neap and spring low tide was utilized as a short-term model
of sea-level rise in obtaining profiles on two dissimilar Cape Cod beaches. Scuba gear and a newly devised
profiling technique were employed to obtain precise control in this phase of the study. Laboratory tests were
conducted on two small-scale wave basins in coordination with the beach surveys. First-order determina-
tions, based on combined field and laboratory data, affirm the Bruun theory of predictable shore erosion
following a rise in sea level.
INTRODUCTION dicated that there is in operation a more

In a recent significant paper, Neiheisel limited and definitive process, which limits
(1965) cited the Bruun theory of sea-level marine wave abrasion (other than cata-
rise as a cause of shore erosion. That sea strophic events of low frequency) to depths
level has risen in recent times is a well- on the order of 5 fathoms below sea level.
documented fact (Disney, 1955; Fairbridge, The Bruun theory holds that, assuming
1960, 1961; Bruun, Morgan, and Purpura, a profile of equilibrium (Fenneman, 1902;
1962; Fairbridge and Krebs, 1962; Donn J. W. Johnson, 1949; Saville, 1950; Bruun,
and Shaw, 1963; Harris, 1963). Further- 1954a, 1954b, 1955), as sea level rises ma-
more, the glacio-eustatic factor influencing terial eroded from the upper beach is
this rise has been discussed by Miller (1964)deposited on the nearshore bottom down
and Russell (1964). The concepts embodied to a limiting depth between predominant
in Bruun's theory, however, have not al- nearshore and offshore material (fig. 1).
ways been agreed upon, and its validity Quantitative relationships in this exchange,
may even now require careful evaluation.
when an equilibrium profile is developed,
D. W. Johnson (1919) visualized, fol- are as follows:
a) There is a shoreward displacement of
lowing a rise in sea level, the eventual
formation of an abrasion platform 100 the beach profile as the upper beach is
eroded.
fathoms below sea level at its outer edge,
gently sloping up shorewards for some in- b) The material eroded from the upper
definite distance to a point where the beach is equal in volume to the material
deposited on the nearshore bottom.
gradually dampened waves had lost their
c) The rise of the nearshore bottom as a
ability to erode the shore any further.
result of this deposition is equal to the rise
Recent developments (Dietz and Menard,
in sea level, thus maintaining a constant
1951; Bradley, 1958; Guilcher, 1958, 1964;
water depth in that area.
King, 1959, 1963; Inman, 1960) have in- Longshore drift is not considered in this
1 Manuscript received November 8, 1965; re- exchange for along a straight coast without
vised September 19, 1966. man-made obstructions the amount of sedi-
2 Department of Geology, Brooklyn College, ment removed in any one profile is likely to
Brooklyn, New York 11210. be replaced in a cyclic fashion.
76
BRUUN THEORY OF SEA-LEVEL RISE 77
To test the validity of the Bruun theory STREAM TABLE
(Fairbridge, 1964), two small-scale labora-

For a more detailed description of the
tory-model studies and a field investigation
experimental procedure than is given in this
were made of the aforementioned relation-
section, the reader is referred to Schwartz
ships.
(1965a), a preliminary report dealing solely
The value of small-scale laboratory-model
with the stream table phase of the project.
studies as a means of arriving at a qualita-
tive fascimile of a natural phenomenon EQUIPMENT has

been expounded by Reynolds (1933), Hub-
The equipment used was a stream table
bert (1937), Krumbein (1944), Bagnold
(1946), Einstein (1948), J. W. Johnson constructed by the writer (Schwartz, 1962,
1963a, 19636, 1964a, 1964b, 1965a, 1965b;
(1949), Saville (1950), Bruun (1954a), King
(1959), Silvester (1960), Kemp (1961), and Stong, 1963) for Columbia University (pl.
Bruun and Kamel (1964). It should be borne 1,A). It proved to be satisfactorily adaptable
in mind that while the results are not actual to the small-scale model study at hand.
FIG. 1.-Shore erosion following a rise in sea level
model reproductions of any larger-scale nat- The wave basin measured approximately
ural processes (Rector, 1954), small-scale 81.25 X 115 cm.; and the wave generator
models do simulate with reasonable accu- provided waves with a period of 4 sec. + 5
racy the changes on natural beaches (King, per cent, an amplitude of 8 + 2 mm., and
1959). The value of such a small-scale mod- a length of 15 + 1 cm. The beach sand
el, therefore, is to reduce to a controlled ex-
consisted of washed and sorted white silica
periment the principles which appear to be with grain-size distribution as indicated

involved in a given situation. figure 2.
In the field investigation, the variation
PROCEDURE
between neap and spring low tide was uti-
lized as a short-term model of sea-level rise Since the development of the beach
in obtaining profiles on two dissimilar Cape file depends mainly on the characteristics
Cod beaches. As beaches are prograded dur- of both the waves and the shore material
ing reap tides and degraded during spring and the relative elevation of the water level
tides (Inman, 1960; Inman and Filloux, (Rector, 1954; Bruun, 19546), it was deemed
1960; U.S. Navy Department, 1960), the necessary to maintain the first two as con-
sediment transport involved provided a po-
stants and change the latter under varying
tential test of the aforementioned relation- conditions, such as bottom slope.
ships. Waves generated from the side of the
78 MAURICE SCHWARTZ
basin were refracted to break almost parallel in the equipment might tend to cancel
to the beach (Strahler, 1960; LeM6haut6 another. They were borne in mind, howe
and Brebner, 1961). In recognition of the when drawing conclusions from the data
scale factor as discussed by Hubbert (1937), collected.
J. W. Johnson (1949), Rector (1954), and In every test, the equilibrium pr
King (1959), a wetting agent was added toveloped subsequent to a water-level rise
the water during one set of tests to reduce showed a shoreward displacement relative
the surface tension. A water-level rise of to the equilibrium profile developed at the
10 mm. was taken as a standard, and the pre-rise water level. In only one test was
number of possible combinations were cal- there a loss of transported material over
culated. A similar approach was set forth the edge of the first developed outer beach
by Watts and Dearduff (1954). margin when developing a new profile with
a higher water level. Observations and
measurements made in the series of tests
involving a wetting agent did not reveal
any differences in profile developments as
compared with those tests conducted with-
out it.
DATA
The mean change in water depth and

mean increase in sand depth for each test
were recorded. Calculations indicate that,
when taking the means of measurements
across the beach during each test, the grand
means are: (a) change in water depth,
+0.208 mm., and (b) rise in profile bottom,
9.000 mm. These are considered to be ac-
Diameter, mm ceptable in consideration of the possible
FIG. 2.-Grain-size distribution of model
errors.basin
sand.
In view of the collected data and compu-
tations, it is apparent that following a rise
At the start of the individual in watertests,
level, (a) the
the water depth on the
desired conditions were set shelf up edge
andremained
a gentle constant, and (b) the
beach slope formed. A half hour of wave at-
shelf-sediment rise equaled the water-level
tack then developed an equilibrium rise.
profile.
After the initial beach-profile measurements
WAVE BASIN
had been recorded, the water level was
EQUIPMENT
raised the desired amount and the wave
generator set in motion for another half Upon completion of the stream-table
hour. When the wave generator was discon- model study, it was felt that it would be
tinued, measurements were made again upon desirable to continue the investigation with
the newly developed profile. equipment which would provide (a) larger
scale, (b) greater control, and (c) more vari-
OBSERVATIONS
ables. Toward this end, the writer construct-
It was felt that errors in reading
ed a the
wavemilli-
basin styled basically along the
meter scale or resulting from irregularities
lines of those described in the literature
PLATE 1
A, Stream table; B, wave basin; C, profiling instrument.
JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY, VOLUME 75 SCHWARTZ, PLATE 1
(Nartov and Levchenko, 1962; Samarin, against the profile that remained from the
1962; Inman and Bowen, 1963) (pl. 1,B). previous test, regardless of the relative posi-
Wave basin.-The wave basin was a rigid tions of the older and newer shorelines. This
steel tank with inside dimensions of 100 X procedure was adopted to more closely simu-
232.5 cm. Water was supplied by means of late natural conditions and was calculated
a flexible hose connected to a nearby faucetnot to be detrimental to the experiment in
and evacuated through the same hose to a view of Rector's (1954) findings on the ab-
drain using a submerged centrifugal pump. sence of effects due to initial slope.
Wave generator.-The wave generator An experimental run at a constant water
was of the swinging-shield type driven by levela over an 8-hour period revealed no sig-
-hp. electric motor. The shield was an alu- nificant changes in the beach between meas-
minum panel 25 X 90 cm. mounted on a urements made at 2-hour and 8-hour inter-
tubular aluminum frame pivoted at the bot- vals (Rector, 1954).
tom of the tank. Prior to each trial run, the drive mecha-
Through variability of both pulleys and nism was adjusted to produce the required
drive connection radii, it was possible to ob-
wave height and period, and the water level
tain 25-80 cycles per min. and strokes of was brought to the proper height. Waves
12.5, 15.0, 17.5, and 20.0 cm. were then generated for the prescribed num-
A wave damper behind the swinging ber of hours. At the end of the initial period
shield consisted of a perforated sheet of alu- of wave attack, measurements were made
minum sloping down into the water. on the beach thus formed. Water dept
Beach material.-The sand used in the sediment height were measured near t
wave basin was the same type of sand as shore edge of the developed shelf. Water-
that used in the stream-table study (fig.level
2). changes were made in accordance with
It formed a beach at the end of the tank the method outlined above in the section
opposite the wave generator end. concerning variables. Waves were then gen-
erated for the remainder of the designated
PROCEDURE
time, at the cessation of which the beach
Variable factors.-The variable factors
measurements werein-repeated. Observations
corporated in the wave-basin study were: and data were recorded for individual tests
(a) duration of time run, (b) water-level and the results progressively tabulated for
rise, and (c) wave height and period. the series as a whole.
Though equilibrium profiles appeared to
OBSERVATIONS
be established after a 1-hour run, the series
of tests were operated on a 2-hour and a Errors.-The inherent errors faced in the
5-hour basis to distinguish any difference earlier stream-table study, due to measure
between relatively shorter and longer peri- ments on a sloping bottom and water ab-
ods of operation.
sorption by the beach sand, were negated in
The water level was raised in different
the wave-basin study by the flat horizontal
increments and at various rates. Three- and
bottom and beach saturation through a con-
six-centimeter rises in water level were used.
stant body of basin water. The only notable
Both of these were instituted as a single
factor remaining was the possible human
rise, a two-stage rise, and a gradual rise.
error in reading the meniscus on the ruler
Wave period and height were varied by
changing the cycle and stroke. Periods thus
when measuring water depth and in noting
obtained ranged from | sec. to 2 sec. Heights the sediment-water interface when measur-
obtained were between 0.5 and 3.1 cm. ing the shelf height. While the attainable ac-
The variables outlined above, were im- curacy in both models was + .5 mm., the
plemented in various combinations shown amount of water-level rise in the wave-basin
in table 1. study increased three-to-sixfold over that in
Procedure.-Each test was conducted the stream table. The proportion of possible
80 MAURICE SCHWARTZ
error is then seen to be considerably re- the shelf before and after a water-level rise
duced. (table 1). It was to be expected that a
Experimental limitations.-Two limita- change in wave height would result in a
tions of an experimental nature became ap- corresponding change in water depth on the
parent after the wave-basin study was under shelf. That the measured observations of
way, one operational and the other pro- this parameter were virtually uniform under
cedural. varied wave heights would seem to indicate
In practice, it was foundthat, that the
within swing-
the range of wave parameters
ing shield-type wave generator contains an available when employing this equipment,
TABLE 1
WAVE BASIN DATA
Mean Change Mean Increase

Duration Rise Incre-
. Water Depth Shelf Depth
(Hr.) (Cm.) ment (Sec.) Dev.)
(% Dev.) (% Dev.)
2 3 1 75 8.3 1.7
2 3 2 75 4.5 1.6
2 3 G* 75 0.0 0.0
2 6 1 75 - 4.5 0.0
2......... 6 2 75 12.5 1.7
2 6 G 75 9.1 3.7
2......... 3 2 75 15.0 1.7
3 G 75 0.0 1.7
G 75 15.0
2.........
6 1.7
3 75 0.0
25.........
5......... 1 6.7
6 2 .75 0.0 4.1
2
2......... 3 1 1.25 5.4 2.0
2 3 1 1.25 2.5 6.7
2 3 G 1.25 5.0 5.0
2 3 G 1.25 0.0 0.0
2 6 2 1.25 0.0 0.5
6 G 1.25 0.0 1.8
5 3 1 1.25 0.0 0.0
5........ 6 2 1.25 2.5 2.7
Means 4.0 0.4
* Gradual.
inherent fault where tests involving water- the constancy and grade size of the sedi-
level rise are concerned. For a given drive- ment used imparts a dominant influence on
mechanism stroke, the linear distance of arc the profile formed.
traversed by the water surface segment of It becomes apparent, too, that given four
the shield is not as large at a low-water level
stroke lengths, several distinct wave periods,
as it is for a higher-water level. The result and numerous variations on water-level rise,
of this change is that a larger-wave height a great many possible test combinations be-
is induced with increasing water depth. In come available. Of these, a limited number
retrospect, it appears that a piston-type of divergent experimental combinations
wave generator as described by Nartov and were selected for testing and inclusion in
Levchenko (1962), Samarin (1962), and In- this paper (table 1).
man and Bowen (1963) would have been Profile translation and sediment loss.-An
more suitable to the demands at hand. upward and landward translation of the
An apparent anomaly exists in the almost equilibrium profile accompanied every pe-
constant water depth found at the edge of riod of wave attack following a rise in the
water level. This was, as mentioned earlier, On a typically calm summer day, small
found by Watts and Dearduff (1954) in waves
theirapproaching the breaker zone have a
laboratory study of tidal action. period of 8 sec. and a height of 30 cm. Wave
Sediment loss caused by excessive exten- approach is predominantly from the south-
sion of the newly developed shelf was not east during the summer, with resultant shore
observed. In each instance, the outer edge drift in a northward direction along the
of the pre-rise shelf was easily discernible beach. Sediment is supplied predominantly
downward and seaward of the post-rise shelf.by erosion of the glacial drift which forms a
cliff behind the beach. The nearshore bot-
DATA
tom slopes gently to a bar approximately
Presentation.-Preliminary data collected 1,500 feet offshore at low tide (Zeigler, per-
during the wave-basin phase of this investi- sonal communication). The most southerly
gation, together with the variable factors oflocated "protected beach" sign was taken
run duration, amount of water-level rise, as a starting point for all profiles.
rise increment, and wave period (T), are Herring Cove Beach.-Herring Cove Beach
seen in table 1. The percentage of deviation is located at the end of U.S. Route 6 in Prov-
from the value predicted by the Bruun the- incetown, Massachusetts. Though slightly
ory is given for the mean change in water cuspate, the over-all trend is about 300 west
depth and mean increase in sand depth re- of north. Comparatively protected, the
corded in each test. beach faces southwesterly onto Cape Cod
Empirical relationships.-The mean per- Bay.
centage of deviation for each of the parame- During a slight breeze, small waves ap-
ters measured was: (a) change in water proaching the breaker zone were observed
depth 4.0 per cent, and (b) rise in profile bot-
with 15-20 cm. heights in periods of 3 sec.
tom 0.4 per cent. Both values are less than The direction of wave approach during the
the percentage of error imparted by the summer is predominantly from the north-
aforementioned limitation of reading the west. Shore drift at this time is, conse-
ruler to an accuracy ol ± .5 mm. quently, toward the south. Sediment supply
It appears, then, that following a riseforin this part of the Cape was provided by
water level (a) the water depth on the shore
shelfdrift from the cliffs of glacial drift that
edge remained constant, and (b) the shelf- form the outer coast. The nearshore bottom
sediment rise equaled the water-level rise.
is characterized by a steep slope prior to
grading off to a gentler slope. Starting point
FIELD INVESTIGATION
for all profiles was the most northerly locat-
FIELD SITES
ed "protected beach" sign.
It was deemed advisable to conduct the
EQUIPMENT
field investigation on two dissimilar beaches
in order to obtain profiles under varied re- In order to obtain an accurate profile
gimes (Krumbein, 1961). Nauset Light from the upper beach to a point well below
Beach and Herring Cove Beach on Cape the water level, a new profiling instrument
Cod were selected for this purpose (fig. and
3).technique were devised and employed
Both sites are within the boundaries of the by the writer in this investigation.
Cape Cod National Seashore, administered Profiling instrument.-A profiling instru-
by the National Park Service. ment combining the prime requirements of
Nauset Light Beach.-Nauset Light Beach precision and one-man operation, independ-
is located at the end of Cable Road in East- ent of wave action and tidal movement, was
ham, Massachusetts. It is a relatively constructed (pl. 1,C).
straight beach, bearing 120 west of north, The instrument consists of an upright
exposed to the fetch of the Atlantic Ocean tubular member jointed at right angles to a
on the east. similar, though longer, horizontal member.
N
1
HERRING
COVE
BEACH
NAUSET
LIGHT
BEACH
FIG. 3.-Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Holes drilled into closed tubular sections ne-

tion at hand. In order to maintain a stable
gate any possible buoyancy. The freewalking end ofposition while working below sea
the longer member terminates in a slotted level, canvas shoes were used in place of
guide through which passes vertically a 5- swim fins, and excess weights (40 lb.) were
foot aluminum ruler. Both tubular upright carried to provide a definite negative buoy-
and ruler are equipped at their respective ancy. Other standard Scuba equipment was
bases with galvanized iron discs pivoted in employed in the conventional manner.
the longitudinal plane of the instrument. At-
PROCEDURE
tached to the horizontal member, near the
slotted guide, is a small bubble level and a Variable factors.-The variables sought
plastic slate. A combination depth gauge in the investigation at hand were a positive
and compass is fastened next to the slate. change in sea level and related sediment
Secured at the top and back of the ruler,transport. Tide tables (Coast and Geodetic
spaced to clear the back of the slotted guide,Survey, 1964) predicted differences in sub-
is a transparent plastic tube (Miller and sequent neap and spring low tides of ap-
Zeigler, 1958). The lower end of the plastic proximately 1-3 feet for the selected beaches
during the investigation period. Other
tube is closed with a small hole drilled in the
tube just above the end. A colored plastic short-term factors (Cartwright, 1963; Fair-
ball, placed inside the tube during the as- bridge, 1964; Shaw and Donn, 1964) which
sembling, is free to move vertically parallel might influence the anticipated levels in
to the ruler. either a positive or negative sense were
Operation of the instrument is much like steric changes (temperature, salinity
leveling with tape or chain. When the instru-teorologic effects (barometric pressu
ment is aligned along the profile being meas-oceanographic effects (wind stress).
ured, the horizontal member is brought to amained, then, to find the empirical differ-
level position. The slotted guide reading on ences between subsequent neap and spring
the ruler gives a value from which, by simplelow tides in relation to a stationary monu-
arithmetic, the difference in elevation be- ment.
tween the two end points becomes known. Once found, the negative change from
The base of the upright tubular member is one neap low tide to the next spring low
then moved along the profile line to the tide (Strahler, 1960, 1963), reflecting the
point formerly occupied by the base of the effective rise of the high-tide swash zone,
ruler, and the reading is repeated. Know- could serve as a short-term representation
ing the difference in elevation and distance of sea-level rise. Assuming a beach progra-
between consecutive points permits subse- dation at neap tide and retrogradation at
quent plotting of the profile. spring tide (Inman, 1960; Inman and Fil-
As the upright ruler and plastic tube be- loux, 1960; U.S. Navy Department, 1960),
come partially submerged, the water-air in- the model becomes complete and available
terface within the plastic tube, marked by for investigation.
the floating plastic ball, maintains a fairly Other considerations which could serve to
stable level indicating sea level at that posi-negate the efficacy of this model (the
tion despite wave action in the area. The "noise level" of Krumbein, 1961) are dis-
ruler level thus observed is then used to cussed under Limitations.
mark sea level on the profile when plotted. Procedure.-A list of neap and spring low
Scuba.-Conventional Scuba-diving tech- tides (Krumbein, 1961) was compiled
niques (C6usteau, 1953, 1963; Inman and through a perusal of the predicted low-water
Rusnak, 1956; Inman, 1959; Carrier, 1963; heights at the Boston reference station,
Seibold, 1963; U.S. Navy Department, noting dates when optimum heights pre-
1963) were not applicable to the investiga- vailed during July and August of 1964. To
84 MAURICE SCHWARTZ
this schedule was added the daylight-saving 1. Base of monument (Herring Cove and Nau-
low-tide time for each field site corrected set Light)
from Boston time by tidal-difference tables. 2. Swash zone (Herring Cove and Nauset Light)
On the appointed days, the profiling was 3. Mid-point under water (Herring Cove)
4. End of profile (Herring Cove)
begun approximately hr. prior to the time
of low tide. Starting at the "protected The subaqueous samples at Herring Cove
beach" sign, the profiling instrument was Beach were taken in the troughs between
oriented normal to the shoreline, compass the crests of oscillation ripples with the rec-
alignment noted, the horizontal member ognition that sorting distinguished the two
leveled, and the ruler reading recorded on (Inman, 1959; Seibold, 1963).
the plastic slate. The process was repeated, Grain-size distribution analyses were
placing the base of the upright on the im-made of all sediment samples collected using
print left by the base of the ruler as each sieves in the Wentworth scale series (Kru
forward move was made, carrying the sur- bein and Pettijohn, 1938; Twenhofel and
vey across the beach to a point near the up- Tyler, 1941). The degree of sphericity of
per limit of the swash zone. Measurements each sample was also noted and recorded.
were then halted while Scuba equipment A separate undertaking, carried out once
was adjusted. At low tide, the measure- at each field site, was the mapping of long-
ments were resumed. shore sand waves. This was done by meas-
In the swash-and-breaker zone, where uring eleven upper-beach to swash-zone pro-
the base imprints could not be observed, files spaced at 100-foot intervals centered on
distinctive pebbles or shells were noted as the standard profile monument. From this
reference points for forward placement of data, plan views of the longshore sand trans-
the apparatus. When a depth of approxi- port at the end of the investigation period
mately 4 feet was reached, the level of the were prepared (figs. 5 and 8).
ball floating in the plastic tube was recorded
next to the leveled-ruler reading for that OBSERVATIONS
position. As the diver began to draw on the Errors.-Theoretically, an accuracy of

compressed air supply and passed below the + 1 inch is attainable with the profiling in-
water surface, the imprints of the instru- strument described in this report. The simi-
ment bases could again be used for reposi- larity of plottings of measurements repeat-
tioning. The profiling process was continued ed along the same profile attest to the close
beneath the water surface in the same man- tolerances obtainable with this method.
ner as on the beach. A slight wavy pattern was imparted to
The predominance of heavy surf and the subaqueous portion of some of the Her-
constant limited visibility below water due ring Cove Beach profiles by the approxi-
to suspended organic matter at Nauset mately 3-inch-high crests of oscillation rip-
Light Beach precluded diving to obtain ples com- located under one end or the other of
plete profiles. Profiling at this site was ter- the instrument when repositioning. In addi-
minated in the breaker zone after sea-level tion, the presence of larger-amplitude mi-
determinations were made. Herring Cove grating waves or humps (Bruun, 1954,
Beach proved to be the most suitably adapt- 1962); LeMehaute and Brebner, 1961) may
ed to the technique used. The length of the be suspected. The slope of the bottom, how-
underwater survey here was up to a distance ever, is evident in these profiles.
of 380 feet from the shoreline. Eight profile Notwithstanding the above considera-
measurements were made at each field site tions, it is felt that the instrument and tech-
during the course of the investigation. nique herein outlined offer advantages over
A series of 8-oz. samples of sediment was surface-borne profiling methods which are
collected on each profile, numbered as fol- subject to the effects of wave action and tid-
lows: al movement. Inman and Rusnak (1956)
put forth a similar argument in favor Beach ofbeyond

di- the 1-fathom depth and the
rect measurements of the bottom configura- boulder-strewn bottom at Nauset Light
tion. As stated succinctly by Cousteau Beach at similar depths. Other sediment
(1953, p. 266), "... the conquerors of the transport is to be found in the longshore
shelf will have to get wet." sand waves moving northerly on Nauset
Limitations.-It is at once recognized Light Beach and southerly on Herring Cove
that several factors are at work simultane- Beach with wave lengths of approximately
ously in shaping the seashore profile. The 500 feet.
effects of varying sea state, direction of A recognizable upward and landward
wave approach, currents, and cusp activity translation of the profile was noted in the
are being carried out in conjunction intervals with
betweenthe neap and spring tides
changing tides. The most notable result is (figs. 4 and 7).
shore drift (i.e., beach drift and longshore
DATA
drift), evidenced in the form of longshore
sand waves (Shepard, 1950; Inman, 1960; Presentation.-The data collected were
Silvester, 1960; LeMehaut6 and Brebner, plotted as a series of profiles, plan views,
1961; Miller and Zeigler, 1964). As a result, and histograms. Since two profiles taken
the point is raised as to whether the effects a particular beach during the same neap o
of the parameter under consideration can spring period tend to be very similar, on
be separated from the others (Krumbein, one of the profiles (representative of bo
1961). Toward this end, the measurement is used when making comparisons over n
and projection of longshore sand waves is a to spring intervals. Composite histograms
means of accounting for, in part, the effectsof grain-size distribution at the same posi-
of the contemporaneous variables. tions during neap and spring tides are pre-
Since these variables cannot be eliminat- sented for each site. Figures 4, 5, and 6 per-
ed or corrected beyond the above-mentioned tain to Herring Cove Beach and figures 7,
limitation, it was not anticipated that the 8, and 9 to Nauset Light Beach.
neap-spring tide model would provide a per- Empirical relationships.-Sediment sam-
fect replica of the Brunn theory but, rather, ples (figs. 6 and 9) indicate that, as antici-
that it would reveal trends indicative of thepated, there is a decrease in median grain
process. size progressing landward and seaward from
Profile translation.-The profiles plotted the surf zone "step" (Miller and Zeigler,
from the measurements taken at each site 1958, 1964), and that the best sorting occurs
provided evidence of ample profile transla- on the beach side of the surf zone (Miller,
tion during the period under investigation. 1956). Microscopic inspection revealed an-
The greatest changes were wrought atgular Nau-to subrounded sand grains at both
set Light Beach where a more dynamic re- beaches suggestive of their glacial history.
gime is maintained, while the relatively There was, however, a greater trend toward
lower wave-energy expenditure at Herring sphericity in the samples taken at Herring
Cove Beach resulted in changes of smaller Cove Beach, which may be attributed to the
magnitudes. effect of longshore transport from the source
First-order sediment transport for
cliffs on the outer this
shore.
period occurred in the portion of
It is to the profile
be expected that the nodal highs
between the upper limit of andthe spring
the internodal high-
lows of the longshore
tide swash and a point in the vicinity
sand waves ofinthe
would result corresponding
1-fathom nearshore depth additions at spring low tide.
to or subtractions from the over-
This may be seen in the longer Herring
all beach profile. Cove
Longshore sand wave pro-
Beach profiles; the outer limit files and is
plansupported
views at the end of the investi-
by the repeatedly recognizable gation period objects on
reveal that the standard pro-
the nearshore bottom at Herring Cove file section at Nauset Light Beach was then
5 .7-I-f
5 S-IO-.~f+
r\J 6-.14AjL
FIG. 4.-Herring Cove Beach profiles
ONE UNIT = 100 FEET
FIG. 5.-Herring Cove Beach longshore sand waves
in an internodal low (fig. 8), and its coun-nearshore 1-fathom depth; with a reversal
terpart at Herring Cove Beach lay in a mi- in going from spring to neap tides (although
nor depression near a nodal high (fig.some 5). local progradation of the nearshore
Both profiles show an over-all landward bottom is seen in the August 19 profile of
translation at that time. Projecting this figure 4). A similar report in the literature
cycle backwards, the previous nodal high at is that by Inman and Filloux (1960) con-
Nauset Light Beach would have resulted in cerning their observations at Estrella Beach
an over-all seaward translation. That this on the Gulf of California.
was the case, with the other mid-nodal pro- With due regard to the various agents of
files lying largely in the zone between thelongshore sediment transport, it is apparent
extremes, is seen in figure 7. Applying a that a rise in effective mean sea level is fol-
FIG. 6.-Herring Cove Beach composite sediment analysis
projection backward (of the same order) at lowed by erosion of the beach thus brought
Herring Cove Beach would have placed a into the reach of wave and tidal action, with
similar earlier profile in an internodal low the transported sediment being distributed
resulting in an even more landward profileon the nearshore bottom down to a depth
translation. The mid-nodal profiles would limited by the prevailing wave energy.
then fall to the seaward side of both. This is
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
seen in figure 4.
The mid-investigation profiles shown in SUMMARY
figures 4 and 7 reveal that, progressing from The findings of this report are summa
neap to spring tides, there is a retrograda-ized by a review of the quantitative rel
tion of the zone extending from slightly tionships previously set forth:
above mean sea level to the upper limit of There is a shoreward displacement of t
the spring high-tide swash, and a prograda-beach profile as the upper beach is eroded
tion of the zone extending from slightly Observed in all of the laboratory tests co
above mean sea level to the spring low-tide ducted with the stream table and wave
S
N
S 8 2564t
FIG. 7.-Nauset Light Beach profiles
ONE UNIT - 100 FEET
FIG. 8.-Nauset Light Beach longshore sand waves
basin. The mid-investigation (mid-nodal) the field is seen in the observation that
profiles at both field sites reveal a landward
spring-tide eroded sediment was deposited
translation in the upper beach area at predominantly
spring within a zone bounded by
tide (figs. 4 and 7). the 1-fathom mark, thus correlating the
The material eroded from the uppervolumetric
beach relationship.
is equal in volume to the material depositedTheon rise of the nearshore bottom as a

the nearshore bottom.-This was observed of inthis deposition is equal to the rise i
the laboratory studies. Corroboration in level, thus maintaining a constant water
FIG. 9.-Nauset Light Beach composite sediment analysis
90 MAURICE SCHWARTZ
in that area.-Laboratory measurements in- rise as a cause of shore erosion properly de-
dicate that there is a one-to-one correspond-fines and gives dimensions to this geologic
ence between the magnitude of the water- process. The validity of applying it in coast-
level rise and the rise of the nearshore bot- al investigations (Bruun and Purpura, 1964;
tom. These same measurements reveal the Fairbridge, 1964; Neiheisel, 1965) being
constancy of water depth in the same region. thus confirmed, it is proposed that the con-
As has been mentioned previously, it was cept henceforth be known as "Bruun's
Rule."
not anticipated that the selected field model
would present a precisely quantitative meas-
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.-Funds for equipment
ure of the relationships being investigated.
and field transportation were generously pro-
It was observed, however, that a rise in
vided by the Geology Department of Columbia
effective sea level (mid-nodal spring tide)
University. I wish to thank the following per-
was accompanied by a rise in the bottom sons who have graciously assisted in this en-
sediment lying between the breaker zone deavor: Professor Rhodes W. Fairbridge for val-
and the 1-fathom mark (figs. 4 and 7). uable counsel in developing the research; Dr.
Per Bruun, Dr. John Zeigler, Professor Arthur
CONCLUSIONS N. Strahler, and Professor Warren Yasso for
useful advice and discussion; Superintendent
In view of the foregoing empirical affirma-
Robert F. Gibbs and the Rangers of the Cape
tion, it is concluded that to a first-order ap- for the many courtesies
Cod National Seashore
proximation Per Bruun's theory of sea-level extended on my behalf.
REFERENCES CITED
BAGNOLD, R. A., 1946, Motion of waves in shallow --- and PURPURA, J., 1964, Quantitative research
water, interaction between waves and sand bot- on littoral drift in field and laboratory: Conf. on
toms: Royal Soc. London, Proc., Ser. A, v. 187, Coastal Eng., 9th, Lisbon 1964, Proc., p. 267-288.
p. 1-18. CARRIER, R., and CARRIER, B., 1963, Dive: New
BRADLEY, W. C., 1958, Submarine abrasion and York, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 296 p.
wave-cut platforms: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. CARTWRIGHT, D. E., 1963, The delusion of "sea
69, p. 967-974. level": New Scientists, v. 20, no. 359, p. 35-36.
BRUUN, P., 1954, Migrating sand waves or sand Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1964, Tide tables, east
humps, with special reference to investigations coast North and South America including Green-
carried out on the Danish North Sea Coast: land: Washington, D.C., Coast and Geodetic
Conf. on Coastal Eng., 5th, Grenoble 1954, Proc., Survey, 285 p.
p. 269-295. C6USTEAU, J. Y., 1953, The silent world: New York,
---- 1954a, Use of small-scale experiments with Harper & Bros., 266 p.
equilibrium profiles in studying actual problems --- 1963, The living sea: New York, Harper &
and developing plans for coastal protection: Am. Row, 325 p.
Geophys. Union Trans., v. 35, p. 445-452. DIETZ, R. S., and MENARD, H. W., 1951, Origin of
--- 1954b, Coast erosion and the development of abrupt change in slope at continental shelf mar-
beach profiles: Beach Erosion Board, Tech. gin: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 35,
Memo. no. 44, 79 p. no. 9, p. 1994-2016.
--- 1955, Coastal development and coastal DISNEY, L. P., 1955, Tide heights along the coasts of
protection: Florida Eng. and Indus. Expt. Sta., the United States: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers,
Bull. Ser. 76, 30 p. Proc., v. 81, no. 666, 9 p.
--- 1962, Sea level rise as a cause of shore ero- DONN, W. L., and SHAW, D. M., 1963, Sea level and
sion: Jour. Waterways and Harbors Div., Am. climate of the past century: Science, v. 142, no.
Soc. Proc., v. 88, p. 117-130. 3596, p. 1166-1167 (Lamont Geological Observa-
--- and KAMEL, A., 1964, Prototype experiments tory. Contribution no. 663).
littoral drift in wave tank: Conf. on Coastal Eng.,EINSTEIN, H. A., 1948, Movement of beach sands by
9th, Lisbon 1964, Abs., no. 2.6. water waves: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., v. 29,
---, MORGAN, W. H., and PURPURA, J. A., 1962, p. 653-655.
Review of beach erosion and storm tide condi- FAIRBRIDGE, R. W., 1960, The changing level of the
tions in Florida 1961-1962: Florida Eng. and sea: Sci. Am., v. 202, p. 70-79.
Indus. Expt. Sta., Rept. no. 13, 104 p. --- 1961, Eustatic changes in sea level, in
physics and chemistry of the earth: Newmentary York, petrography: New York, Appleton-
Pergamon Press, p. 99-185. Century, 549 p.
--- 1964, Beach erosion and sea level changes, LEMEHAUTE, B., and BREBNER, A., 1961, An intro-
eustatic and others: Conf. on Coastal Eng., 9th,duction to coastal morphology and littoral proc-
Lisbon 1964, Abs., no. 2.4. esses: Queens' Univ. at Kingston, Ontario, C. E.
--- and KREBS, O. A., JR., 1962, Sea level and Research Rept. no. 14, 46 p.
the southern oscillation: Royal Astron. Soc., MILLER, M. M., 1964, Inventory of terminal posi-
Geophys. Jour., v. 6, no. 4, p. 532-545. tion changes in Alaskan coastal glaciers since the
FENNEMAN, M. M., 1902, Development of the profile 1750's: Am. Philos. Soc., Proc., v. 108, no. 3, p.
of equilibrium of the subaqueous shore terrace: 257-273.
Jour. Geology, v. 10, p. 1-32. MILLER, R. L., 1956, Trend surfaces: their applica-
GUILCHER, A., 1958, Coastal and submarine mor- tion to analysis and description of environments
phology: London, Methuen & Co., 274 p. of sedimentation. The relation of sediment size
--- 1964, Present time trends in the study of parameters to current-wave systems and physi-
recent marine sediments and in marine physiog- ography: Jour. of Geology, v. 64, p. 425-446.
raphy: Marine Geology, v. 1, p. 4-15. ---- and ZEIGLER, J. M., 1958, A model relating
HARRIS, D. L., 1963, Characteristics of the hurricane dynamics and sediment pattern in equilibrium in
storm surge: U.S. Weather Bur. Tech. Paper no. the region of shoaling waves, breaker cone, the
48, 139 p. foreshore: Jour. Geology, v. 66, p. 417-441.
HUBBERT, M. K., 1937, Theory of scale models as --- - - ---- 1964, A study of sediment distri-
applied to the study of geologic structures: Geol. bution in the zone of shoaling waves ove
Soc. Am. Bull., v. 48, p. 1459-1519. plicated bottom topography, in Papers in
INMAN, D. L., 1959, Wave-generated ripples in geology; Shepard commemorative volume: New
nearshore sands: Beach Erosion Board, Corps of York, Macmillan Co., p. 133-153.
Engineers, Tech. Memo no. 100, 41 p. NARTOV, L. G., and LEVCHENKO, S. P., 1962, Wave
--- 1960, Shore processes, in McGraw-Hill En- generators used in wave basins and hydraulic
cyclopedia of Science and Technology: New flumes, in Oceanographic methods and instru-
York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., p. 299-306. ments: Trudy, Morskoi Gidrofizicheskii Institut
--- and BOWEN, A. J., 1963, Flume experiments (Akad. Nauk SSSR), v. 26, p. 102-109 (translated
on sand transport by waves and currents: Conf. from Russian for am. Geophys. Union, 1963).
on Coastal Eng., 8th, Mexico City 1962, Proc., p. NEIHEISEL, J., 1965, Source and distribution of
137-150. sediments at Brunswick Harbor and vicinity,
--- and FILLOUX, J., 1960, Beach cycles related Georgia: Coastal Eng. Research Center, Tech.
to tide and local wind wave regimes: Jour. Geolo- Memo. no. 12, 49 p.
gy, v. 68, no. 2, p. 225-231. RECTOR, R. L., 1954, Laboratory study of equilibri-
--- and RUSNAK, G. A., 1956, Changes in sand um profiles of beaches: Beach Erosion Board,
level on the beach and shelf at La Jolla, Califor- Tech. Memo no. 41, 38 p.
nia: Beach Erosion Board, Tech. Memo no. 82, REYNOLDS, K. C., 1933, Investigation of wave-
30 p. action on sea walls by the use of models: Am.
JOHNSON, D. W., 1919, Shore processes and shore- Geophys. Union Trans., v. 14, p. 512-516.
line development: New York, John Wiley & Sons, RUSSELL, R. J., 1964, Techniques of eustacy studies:
583 p. Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, N.F., Bd. 8,
JOHNSON, J. W., 1949, Scale effects in hydraulic Sonderheft, p. 25-42.
models involving wave motion: Am. Geophys. SAMARIN, V. G., 1962, New naval hydrodynamics
Union Trans., v. 30, p. 517-525. laboratory in England, in Oceanographic meth-
KEMP, P. H., 1961, The relationship between wave ods and instruments: Trudy, Morskoi Gidro-
action and beach profile characteristics: Conf. on fizicheskii Institut (Akad. Nauk SSSR), v. 26
Coastal Eng., 7th, The Hague 1960, Proc., v. 1, p. 110-119 (translated from Russian for Am.
p. 262-277. Geophys. Union, 1963).
KING, C. A. M., 1959, Beaches and coasts: London, SAVILLE, T., 1950, Model study of sand transport
Edward Arnold Ltd., 403 p. along an indefinitely long, straight beach: Am.
--- 1963, An introduction to oceanography: Geophys. Union Trans., v. 31, p. 555-565.
New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 337 p. SCHWARTZ, M. L., 1962, Stream table construction
KRUMBEIN, W. C., 1944, Shore currents and sand and operation: Unpublished undergraduate re-
movement on a model beach: Beach Erosion search proj., Columbia University, New York,
Board, Tech. Memo. no. 7, 44 p. 37 p.
--- 1961, The analysis of observational data ---- 1963a, Stream table development of glacial
from natural beaches: Beach Erosion Board, landforms: Jour. of Geol. Education, v
Corps of Engineers, Tech. Memo no. 130, 59 p. p. 29-30.
-- and PETTIJOHN, F. J. 1938, Manual of sedi- --- 1963b, Stream table construction; supp. I:
92 MAURICE SCHWARTZ
Unpublished senior seminar proj., Columbia California: Beach Erosion Board, Corps of En-
Univ., New York, 44 p. gineers, Tech. Memo no. 20, 26 p.
SCHWARTZ, M. L. 1964a, Earth science stream SILVESTER, R., 1960, Stabilization of sedimentary
table study guide: Northbrook, Ill., T. N. Hub- coastlines: Nature, v. 188, p. 467-469.
bard Scientific Co., 32 p. STRAHLER, A. N., 1960, Physical geography: New
--- 1964b, Stream table construction and opera-
York, John Wiley & Sons, 442 p.
tion, in Encyclopedia of earth sciences, FAIR- ---- 1963, The earth sciences: New York, Harper
BRIDGE, R. W., ed., New York, Reinhold Pub- & Row, 681 p.
lishing Corp., in press. STRONG, C. L., 1963, How to construct a stream
---- 1965a, Laboratory study of sea level rise as a
table to simulate geological processes, in The
cause of shore erosion: Jour. Geology, v. 73, no.
amateur scientists: Sci. Am., v. 208, p. 168-179.
3, p. 528-534. TWENHOFEL, W. H., and TYLER, S. A., 1941, Meth-
----- 1965b, Field and laboratory study of sea
ods of study of sediments: New York, McGraw-
level rise as a cause of shore erosion: Geol. Soc. Hill Book Co., 183 p.
America Abs. for 1964, Spec. Papers no. 82, p. U.S. NAVY DEPARTMENT, 1960, Oceanography for
179-180. the navy meteorologist: Norfolk, Va., U.S. Navy
SEIBOLD, E., 1963, Geological investigation of near- Weather Research Facility, 128 p.
shore sand transport, in Progress in oceanog- ---- 1963, U.S. Navy diving manual, part I
raphy, M. Sears, ed.: New York, Macmillan, v. (Navships 250-538): Washington, D.C., Navy
1, p. 1-70. Dept. manual.
SHAW, D. M., and DONN, W. L., 1964, Sea level WATTS, G. M. and DEARDUFF, R. F., 1954, Labora-
variations at Iceland and Bermuda: Jour. of tory study of effect of tidal action on wave-
Marine Research, v. 22, no. 2, p. 111-122. formed beach profiles: Beach Erosion Board,
SHEPARD, F. P., 1950, Beach cycles in southern Tech. Memo. no. 52, 21 p.

Brunn Pricipio

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brunn Pricipio

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Bruun Theory of Sea-Level Rise as a Cause of Shore Erosion

Author(s): Maurice L. Schwartz

INTRODUCTION dicated that there is in operation a more

To test the validity of the Bruun theory STREAM TABLE

(Fairbridge, 1964), two small-scale labora-

tive fascimile of a natural phenomenon EQUIPMENT has

FIG. 1.-Shore erosion following a rise in sea level

periment the principles which appear to be with grain-size distribution as indicated

The mean change in water depth and

A, Stream table; B, wave basin; C, profiling instrument.

WAVE BASIN DATA

Mean Change Mean Increase

Means 4.0 0.4

FIG. 3.-Cape Cod, Massachusetts

Holes drilled into closed tubular sections ne-

position. As the diver began to draw on the Errors.-Theoretically, an accuracy of

put forth a similar argument in favor Beach ofbeyond

FIG. 4.-Herring Cove Beach profiles

ONE UNIT = 100 FEET

FIG. 5.-Herring Cove Beach longshore sand waves

FIG. 6.-Herring Cove Beach composite sediment analysis

ONE UNIT - 100 FEET

FIG. 8.-Nauset Light Beach longshore sand waves

is equal in volume to the material depositedTheon rise of the nearshore bottom as a

FIG. 9.-Nauset Light Beach composite sediment analysis

You might also like