Table 7 (Concluded) 



Stef 

 4 



Procedure 



Identify optimum 

 armor, type W cot 

 9 , and crest ele- 

 vation for each 

 alternative 



Design detailed 

 cross section for 

 each alternative 



Estimate wave 

 transmission char- 

 acteristics of each 

 alternative 



Estimate economic 

 losses with break- 

 water for each 

 alternative 



Estimate breakwater 

 damages for each 

 alternative 



Tabulate expected 

 costs for each 

 alternative and 

 identify apparent 

 optimum 



Verify predicted 

 damage and wave 

 transmission by 

 scale modeling 



Pertinent 

 Equations and Tables 



Equations 1* (or 2-8), 

 29* (or 30), and 

 Table 5* or 6 



Equations 1-9 



Equations 19 or 22, 



26», 27*, 28*, and 29* 

 (or 30) and Table 5* 

 or 6 



Equation 19* or 22, 31*, 

 and 33 



Equations 19* or 22, 14*, 

 (or 5, 6, 7, and 8 or 

 23 and 24), 18*, and 34* 

 and Table 3* 



Equations 35, 36, and 37 



Equations 1-8, 10-14, 

 and 26-29 



Available 

 Software 



BWCOMP (WES, CERC 

 1984b and Ap- 

 pendix B) 



MADSEN (Seelig 

 1980a and WES, 

 CERC 1984a) 



BWL0SS2 (WES, 

 CERC (in prep- 

 paration) and 

 Appendix C) 



BWDAMAGE (WES, 

 CERC (in prep- 

 aration) and 

 Appendix D) 



Conclusions 



111. The investigation which was conducted in order to develop the 



above optimization procedure led to the following conclusions regarding 



rubble-mound breakwater design: 



a. A systematic optimization procedure should be applied in any 

 rubble-mound breakwater design to assure that an alternative 

 with maximum cost effectiveness is proposed. 



71 



