Table 5. Test cycle calculations. 
Pop Ip Ks Kp E 
(J/m/s) | (N/s) | (m/s) 
2-201 | 0.6116] 0.5190] 0.2779 | 0.6604 | 
2-043 0.6889] 0.6058] 0.3373} 0.6686 
35232 0.8396} 0.3682 | 0.2598 | 0.3374 
3.615 0.6188) 0.2868; 0.1712} 0.4508 
0.789 0.7544; 0.7640 |} 0.9557 | 0.8997 
2-144 | 0.9966} 0.5042] 0.4648] 0.6815 
4.158 O23 IN Oe23.037 | Oli Sle | Onavisi 
3.918 0.3446} 0.1142) 0.0880] 0.4835 
4.286 Os 227 1 Ool8o2) | Ost 2 20 Oe SoM 
14.761 1.0605} 0.1285} 0.0718] 0.3764 
4.839 1.6328) 0.5550 | 0.3374] 0.6644 
2-948 1.1941} 0.5328}; 0.4051] 0.9190 
14 24 11.578 | 28.802 3.2938! 0.2845} 0.1144] 0.6112 
15 24 OG ARS) UG HSS 225502} 0.2756; 0.1884! 0.3934 
2e Calculation of Pope 
Equation (10) 
—2 
a pg fe 
Pop ( 8 c,cosa), sind, 
was used to calculate P,,;.- The term in the parentheses, like Sy >» was 
calculated at the toe of the beach. However, the sine term used the beesiker 
angle as measured from the photos of the breaking waves. The breaker angle 
used in the calculation was the average of the breaker angles collected 30 
minutes before and after the wave data were collected (see Fig. 14). Pep was 
calculated for each set of wave data, 24 values of P were calculated for 
the standard 24-hour test (see Appe E). The average of Pep for each test is 
listed in Table 5. 
3. Calculation of &. 
The surf similarity parameter of Kamphuis and Readshaw (1978) was 
presented in equation (17) as 
tan B 
(#4, / Lai 
For the data in this report, a different surf similarity parameter is needed 
since H will be substituted for Hp» as discussed at the beginning of this 
section. Therefore, the surf similarity parameter in the following analysis is 
noe 
g = tans (22) 
(H/ OO he 
36 
