Sizing of riprap can be defined by either its average weight (W50) or average diameter/length (D50). Traditionally grading and size distribution of riprap is determined by cost efficiency and design stability. If the grading specification allows too many stones that are below the calculated size for achieving hydraulic stability (based on hydraulic forcing the riprap must endure) it will result in particle displacement, that could develop a failure or significant stability loss of the sea defences. On the other hand, a grading in which a significant fraction of the stones are larger than required stable size would result in a design that is not cost-effective. Thus, the gradation of riprap must ensure a relatively limited fraction of particles smaller than stable size and also a small fraction of rocks larger than it (Lagasse et al., 2006).
Referenties
- Riprap Design Criteria, Recommended Specifications, and Quality Control, Lagasse, Peter F., P. E. Clopper, L. W. Zevenbergen, and J. F. Ruff., 1 januari 2006.
Zie ook
- Fundamental Infrastructure in Reimerswaal. Measuring erosion resistance and bearing capacity of the rail trajectory
- Elastocoast, Compilation of the Technical Design Guidelines for Elastocoast
- A conceptual model of the morphological behaviour of the foreshore on the Houtribdijk
- Deltakennis Modelling Carrying Capacity
- Oesterdam sand nourishment - ecological and morphological development of a local sand nourishment
- Bijlage 6 Oesterdam bemonstering handleiding
- The efficiency of oyster reefs on coastal protection areas: Oesterdam case
- Modelling the carrying capacity of the Oosterschelde
- Biogeomorphology of Spartina anglica tussocks, GIS based comparison of contrasting sites at the Westerschelde and Blackwater estuary
- Ecosystem recovery after hypoxia: what can foraminifera indicate?
