Difference between revisions of "Floating breakwaters"
(→Floating breakwaters) |
(→Floating breakwaters) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Some of the conditions that favour FB are: | Some of the conditions that favour FB are: | ||
| − | + | #'' Poor foundation'' | |
| − | + | FB might be a proper solution where poor foundations possibilities prohibit bottom connected breakwater. | |
| + | #'' Deep water'' | ||
| + | In water depths in excess of 6 m, bottom connected breakwaters are often more expensive than FB. | ||
3. Water quality. FB present a minimum interference with water circulation and fish migration. | 3. Water quality. FB present a minimum interference with water circulation and fish migration. | ||
4. Ice problems. FB can be removed and towed to protected areas if ice formation is a problem. They may be suitable for areas where summer anchorage or moorage is required. | 4. Ice problems. FB can be removed and towed to protected areas if ice formation is a problem. They may be suitable for areas where summer anchorage or moorage is required. | ||
5. Visual impact. FB have a low profile and present a minimum intrusion on the horizon, particularly for areas with high tide ranges. | 5. Visual impact. FB have a low profile and present a minimum intrusion on the horizon, particularly for areas with high tide ranges. | ||
6. Breakwater layout. FB can usually be rearranged into new layout with minimum effort | 6. Breakwater layout. FB can usually be rearranged into new layout with minimum effort | ||
Revision as of 16:14, 30 May 2007
Floating breakwaters
Floating breakwaters (FB) represent an alternative solution to protect an area from wave attack, compared to conventional fixed breakwaters and can be effective in coastal areas with mild wave environment conditions. Therefore, they have been increasingly used aiming at protecting small craft harbours or marinas or, less frequently, the shoreline, aiming at erosion control.
Some of the conditions that favour FB are:
- Poor foundation
FB might be a proper solution where poor foundations possibilities prohibit bottom connected breakwater.
- Deep water
In water depths in excess of 6 m, bottom connected breakwaters are often more expensive than FB. 3. Water quality. FB present a minimum interference with water circulation and fish migration. 4. Ice problems. FB can be removed and towed to protected areas if ice formation is a problem. They may be suitable for areas where summer anchorage or moorage is required. 5. Visual impact. FB have a low profile and present a minimum intrusion on the horizon, particularly for areas with high tide ranges. 6. Breakwater layout. FB can usually be rearranged into new layout with minimum effort
