as the first to be automatically processed (on a trial basis). These 

 particular stations were chosen because the two stations on the Atlantic 

 Coast are located near where cooperative beach erosion control studies have 

 been made or are in process, and near existing Beach Erosion Board wave 

 gauges, wave data from which could be correlated with the data taken by 

 visual observations. At the time of this writing, correlation in this 

 manner had not yet been accomplished. The station on the west coast was 

 selected because of its exposure to a wide range of surf heights and per- 

 iods. Data from these three stations for the 5-year period 1 January 1955 

 through 31 December 1959, were given to a contractor for automatic pro- 

 cessing on computing machines. The specifications of the contract required 

 that the observations for each day be punched and verified on a single 80- 

 column "Hollerith" card, that a program for processing be written and that 

 the Beach Erosion Board be furnished a hard copy of the computer program and 

 the following processed data: a) distribution of occurrence of breakers by 

 height and direction for each calendar month and for all observations; b) 

 distribution of occurrence of breakers by period and direction for each 

 calendar month and for all observations; c) distribution of occurrence of 

 breakers by height and period for each calendar month and for all observa- 

 tions; d) cumulative frequencies for each month and for all observations 

 expressed as percentages; and e) distribution of breaker height by type 

 for all observations. A Univac SS-80 computer was utilized by the con- 

 tractor to make the statistical computations. 



PRESENTATION OF SURF STATISTICS 



Tables 1 through 9 present surf statistics compiled by ADP at the three 

 selected stations. These tables do not represent the entire statistical 

 output from the automatic processing, but only selected statistics for the 

 over-all (5-year) period. It is not intended in this paper to offer an 

 analysis of the data, but certain facts are readily apparent. Yaquina Bay 

 (Tables 7 through 9) is exposed to surf with greater mean heights and periods 

 and has a greater range of both heights and periods than either Atlantic 

 City (Tables 1 through 3) or Hillsboro Inlet (Tables 4 through 6). The 

 direction of wave approach at Yaquina is also indicated to be more constant 

 with over 93 percent of observed occurrences arriving from the west. Like- 

 wise it is fairly obvious from Tables 1 through 6 that the frequency dis- 

 tributions of breakers by height alone at Atlantic City and Hillsboro Inlet 

 are very similar, but breaker periods are longer on the average at Hillsboro 

 Inlet. Also deep water waves were observed most frequently approaching 

 Hillsboro Inlet from the southeast while at Atlantic City the most frequent 

 direction of approach was from the east. 



The tabulated data for surf statistics at the three selected locations 

 are presented herein as possibly being of use and interest to many of the 

 readers of the BULLETIN. The cooperative program of surf observations is 

 continuing, and it is hoped that similar or even more extensive data may be 

 published in the future for these and other locations on the coasts of the 

 United States. 



26 



