In phase II of the study the observer had been requested in estimating wave 

 heights to record the outer breaker. As a result, a comparison of LEO wave 

 height measurements and wave gage measurements in phase II gave a much better 

 correlation (see Fig. 14). 

 3.0 



2.5 - 



2.0 - 



1.5 



o 1.0 



0.5 



LEGEND 





+ 



♦ LEO within 1 hr of Gage Measurement (82 Obsns. 



) 



• LEO wittiin 1 -2 tir of Gage Meosurement ( 106 Ob 



sns.) 



a LEO wittiin 2-3 tir of Gage Measurennent ( 95 Obsns.) 1 



283 Observations taken during Dec. 76 



- Aug.77 



/ 



of Ctiannel Islands Harbor, California 









/ 







/ 







/ 







/ 







/ 



« 





/ 



& 



• /♦ 1 



e A 



/ 





♦ K 



V^ 



A 



/ 





• . »* *^ 



AAjMe A 



+A ♦ « 



. » A i * 



/ 









♦ 



A 





• + / 







»a + • A Me t** *tt» 



♦ + ♦ A 



e . / 



a e 





+ A e ^'^ «/+ A + 







+« A+A /9 b. + ^ 





• '^ 



+ « + 9«9 y « 



s 





'^TT';c^r^ : 



^ 





«* ®fl*s|!f?/42+ +aX «®a. a«ai« 



+ + 



A 



« A+ Atti^ eA»A9A * * 9 





+ 



^ /^ K 







^ +AA A • ® 







/ » » 







/. • 







/ " 







/ 







/ 







/ 







/ 







^ 1 1 



1 



1 



0.5 



2.0 



2.5 



1.0 1.5 



Significant Gage Height (m) 



Figure 14. Comparison of observed wave heights (LEO) to recorded 

 wave gage heights in phase II of study. 



Ihe strong dependence of the longshore energy flux on wave height 

 (Pjj^s ~ H^/^^ eq_ 7. p^^ , H, eq. 9) necessitated disregarding the LEO data in 

 phase I and using only the wave gage directional spectra for sand transport 

 correlations. 



In comparing the calculated values of longshore energy flux from the two 

 methods, the wave angle method (eq. 7), and the longshore current method (eq. 

 9) , it was found that the longshore current method led to higher values of 

 longshore energy flux during most data periods. The reason for this is unknown. 



28 



