The fill extended horizontally from the seawall for 20 m, was tapered for 

 several meters, then extended offshore with slope of 1/10 to meet the equi- 

 librium profile at a depth of approximately 1 m. 



The 21 days of pre-storm waves eroded the toe of the 0.25-mm sand berm to 

 create a small bar, whereas the 0.40 -mm beach configuration was effectively 

 stable under the mild waves . Berms for both sands were lowered during the 

 storm, but not to the extent of the existing beach case (Figure 5); the 

 artificial berm thus provided substantial protection, but should have been 

 higher or wider to prevent wave action from reaching the wall for this extreme 

 storm surge. The pre-storm bar was located slightly nearer to shore than in 

 the existing case simulation. Post-storm bars for both sands were located in 

 essentially the same position as for the corresponding existing beach cases. 



The recovery cross -sections for both sands were considerably different 

 than the existing beach cases because of the greater amount of sand in the 

 system. Although significant recovery took place for the finer sand beach, 

 sand was still trapped in the storm bar and effectively lost from the system. 

 Eroded material for the coarser sand beach was deposited closer to shore and, 

 during the recovery phase, the entire storm profile translated shoreward. 

 Although no recovery of the berm took place for the coarser sand, a signif- 

 icant volume of material remained very near to shore. 

 Bruun beach fill 



The Bruun beach fill, depicted in Figs. 7a and 7b, is characterized by 

 placement of the main portion of material over the subaqueous portion of the 

 profile, in accordance with the philosophy that the beach can best protect 

 itself if sand is placed over the full profile in an equilibrium shape. This 

 type of fill has been advocated by Bruun (e.g., Bruun, 1988), who uses the 

 term "profile nourishment" to conceptually differentiate it from nourishment 

 of only the subaerial profile. Thus, for comparison, the same volume of fill 

 as in the previous case (85 m 3 /m) was placed over the profile in an equi- 

 librium shape, as governed by Equation 1 for the particular sand grain size, 

 and tapered at the seaward end. This fill template positioned the shoreline 

 approximately 10 m further seaward than the artificial berm case. 



Simulation results show that subaerial erosion was reduced significantly 

 as compared to the existing beach cases, even though the entire profile was 



104 



