Hang 10... or as they now say...hit the lip!

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Sand
Topic Summary: Definitive photographic evidence
Created On: 10/19/2017 11:30 AM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11/05/2017 08:15 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

K07, we agree with the beginning of your last post but respectfully disagree on your points in the back half.

We will agree with you that refraction plays a key role at many of the spots you've mentioned, with New Smyrna being a prime example of wave energy bending around on shoals and creating the peaks or "bowls" that you've mentioned.

We disagree that quality swell has been redirected away. We've see in person many, many days over the last several years where significant swell has been interacting directly with the jetty with little to no reflection occurring during that interaction. The only time that significant reflection has occurred has been during the time of year when there has been excess buildup of worm rock on the newer outer pilings. Furthermore, we can model the old and new jetty configurations and definitively prove that the baffle chamber created by the current configuration reduces the total reflected wave energy.

Regarding your last statement "Without the focus and the bowl you can't expect a quality wedge wave to be possible..." you're mixing two unrelated items, both of which aren't required for the peak to function.

Sure, we can debate focus and whether or not swell is being directed away. Regardless of that answer, we know that at least some swell energy is still making it to the jetty and if reflection was occurring as it previously had we should see improved wedges.

On the topic of "the bowl", you mentioned in your previous post that "Back in the day there were barrels to be had but there was that ultra-reliable perfectly groomed angled roundhouse bowl section on every set pretty much.  Then you did a snap and eyed the closeout section, now you hope for one good turn off the drop or the rare doggy door." This was initiated primarily by the reflected wave from the jetty interacting with the next incidental wave and, to a lesser degree, refraction of the combined incidental wave and reflected waves as they continued to break across the sandbar.

Being a knowledgeable person in a relevant field, we'd love to talk to you more about this. Please send us a PM so we can connect!

realsur4, interesting article. I'm sure our friends at Surfrider will be weighing in on this!



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org

 11/09/2017 04:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


K07

Posts: 25
Joined: 09/02/2012

Old 1st peak/other world class beach setups = initial/straight swell energy + refracted swell energy

1st peak now = initial/straight swell energy at best OR sapped swell energy to one degree or another

I am highly sceptical how much reflection can do on it's own... in any real world application TONS of energy is lost in reflection.

And an initlal/straight wave isn't going to go from closeout (or even semi-closeout) to perfect bowl just cause a jetty wedge is thrown in right before it breaks.  It has to already be forming well before the lineup via refracted energy sliding in this case north, into the initial energy, and bowling the lines up (or the wedge doesn't line up with a bowl it just bumps along the closeout like I think we've all seen).

Futhermore, wind swells can still get pretty fun at 1st with wedgy bowls but that's not what made it famous (the negative changes in bathymetry aren't felt as much by shorter period swells).  The mechanics that will still work on the right wind swell are not magnified when a good ground swell arrives but rather break down...

Sorry for the delay but this link at least proves my premise on the changes at Monster Hole: http://www.sebastianinletdistrict.com/pdf/State_of_the_Sebastian_Inlet_Report_2013.pdf

Read the last sentence on page 4 then look at those charts on pages 20, 21, and really 22.

 01/03/2018 09:21 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

Herein lies definitive photographic evidence that restoring First Peak has little to do with sand. The state of the reflective surface determines the quality of the wave.

 

 

 



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org



Edited: 01/03/2018 at 11:10 PM by TheFirstPeakProject
 01/04/2018 06:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tom

Posts: 5960
Joined: 07/25/2003

What does 1958 have to do with anything?

Here's 1975.  Probably closer to the correct period.  

Nice little swell rolling too.  

1975



1975.jpg
1975.jpg  (49 KB)

 01/04/2018 07:02 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


surfersensei

Posts: 504
Joined: 12/02/2003

The wave at Sebastian is an artificial wave no matter how you describe it. That should be obvious just because of the existence of the jetty and artificial inlet. There is no "natural" accumulation of sand because there is nothing "natural" about the wave. You can have either a good artificial wave or a crappy one. Right now it is a crappy wave. Installing the reflective panels as a demonstrator project is a cost effective way to determine if the idea is feasible. If it works we can have a great wave again.
 01/04/2018 07:03 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


surfersensei

Posts: 504
Joined: 12/02/2003

.
 01/04/2018 07:21 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Ppeterson

Posts: 18
Joined: 09/15/2011

As a practicing coastal engineer that has been at this for 30+ years both from the scientific side and the practical side, there are a few things that should be noted regarding the FPP as well as other beach work projects (since the original topic was sand):

1) Dredge and fill will always be the USACE/FDEP/County first course of action because it is the simpliest and most proven way to get sand on the beach quickly (e.g. post storm).  I don't agree with it, but the agencies don't like to mess with "new and innovative" ways to combat erosion - because they don't understand them.  It is extremely difficult to get them to try someting out of the envelope of acceptance.  And yes, it is very political -

2) We let this whole issue arise when we started letting people build within the long term erosional zones of the coastal systems, knocked down dunes, moved CCL's closer to the water, etc.  The only true cure is to retreat - which will never happen, so we are stuck with the problem.

3) Without a doubt beach fills  affect the surf, sometimes temporarily, sometimes long term.  I have lived in MB 35 years and remember exactly how the surf changed when they started doing regular beach fills.

4) Coastal Engineering is and always has been known to be a bit of "voo doo engineering".  The ocean does not always behave the way the models show they should.  We have spent $$$ on projects that never perform the way they did on the computer.  The ocean/coastal system is so dynamic that it is extremely difficult to ensure anything without a full blown physical model nowadays, and even that is not a given.

5) Regardingthe FPP - I applaud them for pursuing this course, but there are some un-foreseen hurdles coming your way - most importantly the actual engineering/construction portion should this move forward. 

The jetties were designed by a structural ocean engineer that developed a basis of design evaluting all of the forces acting on the structure - currents, waves, wind, impact, storm levels, etc. etc.  By altering the jetties and nearshore system (adding panels, inducing worm rock), it may render the basis of design invalid.  E.g. inducing reflection obviously requiers the structure to withstand the wave force instead of absorb it.

Bottom line, will the Engineer of Record (EOR), the Jetty owner, and the Federal Government allow you to "mess with thier jetty" from a structural standpoint alone?  If I was the EOR (I am not) I would formally present that I was no longer responsible for the design, and resign myself from all liabilty for the design once it has been altered.  Similar to overloading a plane not designed for that payload.

May I suggest that FPP address that issue in parallel with their other efforts to make this happen.  If you have not already, you should locate the basis of design documents that led to the jetty construction and see how your course of action may (or may not) affect it.

 01/04/2018 08:04 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


witchfindergeneral

Posts: 13
Joined: 10/18/2016

I agree with Peterson's 5th point, and I'm surprised the phrase "compromising structural integrity" hasn't been thrown around more. 

 01/04/2018 09:00 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

Ppeterson - We've reached out to you many times in hopes to give you and your firm a presentation. Will you consider checking your PM and replying to us?  Thank you for your comments and all are duly noted.  One little note... we respectfully disagree that we are partaking in any "voodoo" engineering.

Please consider these points:

1) Members of the team at FPP are also 30+ practicing coastal engineers as well.  Many of us have advanced degrees from FIT and spent our thesis work and dissertation work developing the State of the Inlet Reports.  From a scientific standpoint, we know that inlet like the back of our hand.

2) The USACE, via the CIRP has expressed interests in the FPP as an initiative to improve natural sand bypassing. Those discussions with the Corps and FIT are under way. However, as you well know, the Corps has little role in the management of Sebastian Inlet, so the State Park will need to work in concert with the Corps to move forward.

3) We have all the structural engineering documents from the rehabilitation. The panels simply do not add any significant loading. For example (as exact placement is not finalized) the panels would be 4' high centered at SWL and make the pilings 1' wider on either side. The maximum additional wave load that could impact the panels is from a 4' wave (any higher wave, the panels are overtopped), meaning each individual panel (one panel per piling) would add an additional 600 lb/ft2 of force or 4 psi to each individual piling.  The steel reinforced concrete pilings are rated for over 5,000 psi. How is there any structural harm to the jetty if our added force is three ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE below the loading limits of the jetty?  (We could be incorrect on the piling load rating, specifically at Sebastian Inlet as some pre-stress structural pile is rated for over 10,000 psi, but you get the point).

(Per the rehabilitation strutural design: The maximum force the jetty is designed to withstand is 4,021 lb/ft2 resulting from a 20' hurricane wave slamming the deck. A wave hitting the deck puts a moment arm on the pilings.  Our panels are at the base of the pilings, where no moment arm is resolved).

4) We would design our solution to average surfing conditions. This case above #3 represents a maximum panel size. Although we haven't completed the numerical modelling, we think we can get the panel size down to about 2' high.  Remember, this is Florida.  The average wave condition is 3' @ 6s. These are teeny-tiny waves compared to the world of coastal engineering.  To bring back 3' First Peak, we only need to reflect a 1' or 2' wave, anything more would over wedge the peak and undermine the surfing quality.  This is a very subtle and delicate undertaking.  Seriously...are we really worried that a 1' reflected wave is going to hurt our jetty? Come on now!

5) By using steel jackets or carbon fiber wraps our initiative further strengthens and protects the pilings.  There are many concrete piling restoration technologies on the market as concrete restoration is a mature industry. We've had a few firms look at the FPP give us bids and they all agree our project is very easy compared to more complicated restoration projects.

6) Also, worm reef grows on the base of the pilings.  The worm reef colonies add the same additional structural loading. If there really is a true concern to the structural integrity of the jetty, we should be very concerned about the added loads from the worm reef. In a way, the worm reef shows us that there are no structural integrity concerns. Think about it...a tube worm grows where we want to place some panels. How strong is the the worm reef? If you take one thing away from this thread, our bet is that worm reef is not stronger than carbon fiber, titanium, or stainless steel or else we should be in another business.

7) Ultimately, we want to attach the panels to the old/ interior jetty.  This old jetty continues to corrode. Meaning this interior structure qualifies as a disposable structure (remember the new jetty was built on top). Instead of letting the interior jetty continue to corrode and ultimately collapse, we can bolster it and design the panels to attach to the interior jetty. Literally we could close the gaps between the outer pilings and not set a finger on the outer pilings. To be clear, the outer pilings would experience ZERO additional load. The additional wave load (albeit insignificant) would be passed to the newly-restored interior pilings.

8) The new jetty is now 17 years old and displaying signs of corrosion.  If history repeats itself (and it does) then in another decade the "new" jetty will be in need of rehabilitation.  Will the plan be to build a third jetty over the top?  By being proactive now and using incredible technology, we can implement a program to protect and bolster the entire jetty structure. By letting the corrosion progress, solutions to protect the jetty become more costly and complicated.

9) We would apply for an experimental joint-coastal permit. Typically these permits allow for up to three years. All we need is one day (if the conditions are correct). If we can install panels for one day, one hour, even one set of waves and prove the concept of using wave reflection to restore the wave, how then will this have any effect on the sand?  Remember that the panel concept has FULL 100% CONTIGENCY, meaning we could remove it at any time for very little cost. In the world of coastal engineering, have you ever seen a real 100% cost-effective contingency plan?

10) Many of us at FPP grew up surfing First Peak, but more importantly, spending time at Sebastian Inlet.  We fish, dive, BBQ, kick it, and love Sebastian Inlet State Park.  It hurts our feelings sometimes when people think we would propose anything that would damage that jetty.  There exists a specific design that restores First Peak, strengthens the jetty, improves natural sand bypassing, and grows worm reef (which improves fisheries).  With the Corps, FIT, the State Park, FPP, and the host of coastal consultants all working together, we can do something incredible, and it is so easy to do. Please consider meeting with us or attending one of our public forums for more information.  We will PM you with our contact information again.

Thanks again for your comments. Please consider reaching out to us: reflection at firstpeak dot org



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org



Edited: 01/05/2018 at 03:37 PM by TheFirstPeakProject
 01/04/2018 09:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

Originally posted by: tom What does 1958 have to do with anything?

The signifcance of the 1958 photo is that the shoreline on the northside is in the exact same spot, almost to the day, more than 50 years later.

The quanitity of sand on the northside fluctuates. It builds up in the winter, erodes in the summer, and it's done the same thing even before they built the jetty.

Many people are of the opinion that sand filling up the north side is what runined First Peak.  Just go back and read this thread.  Yes, the sand can change the length of the ride, and where First Peak forms, but the wedge needs the side wave, and the side wave needs reflection.



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org

 01/04/2018 09:29 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Ppeterson

Posts: 18
Joined: 09/15/2011

I am not questioning you or FPP capabilities on any level.  If I was not intersted, I wouldn't be following along.  Just making sure you are checking off all of your boxes.

Remember I am old school and I am no longer technically savy with today's social media such as PM's, etc. so if you have tried to reach me, I probably missed it.

I think you know how to reach me.  Give me a shout after my lunch session while the wind still has some W in it.  Maybe it is time for a beer or two once the  north wind kicks back in.

 01/04/2018 11:36 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


dingpatch

Posts: 12524
Joined: 07/24/2003

Very good discussions here. Hopefully, something of substance will actually transpire. 1st peak really was a Wow Factor back in the day. But, in-the-mean-time, we all need to be aware of the bare fact that, as surfers, we are sucking hind tit when it comes to any other priorities in regard to the Inlet.
 01/04/2018 01:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

Originally posted by: dingpatch  as surfers, we are sucking hind tit when it comes to any other priorities in regard to the Inlet.

dingpatch - That's one way to put it..."hind tit"

But you're tapping into something real important here.  As everyone has seen or heard, Surfrider Foundation, the County, the State Park, FIT and even the Army Corps are willing to work together and come up with a solution (not to mention the dozens of partners we have listed on our website).  The problem, or at least the reason why no one is prioritzing First Peak, is the surfers. Nearly every surfer seems to have an opinion on the sand, or hallucinates that we're going to remove the end of the jetty, or suggests something completely uneconomical and irresponsible like dredging the northside; all of this unsupportive and uninformed commentary is killing this opportunity. And it's not just on this forum; it's all over Facebook, Instagram, and other discussion boards as well.

Until surfers publicly support the FPP by generating positive commentary, sharing our articles on social media, and by throwing some chips into the pot, surfing that wedge is a long way off.  If buying your next 6-pack is more important that restoring a legendary surfing spot...then why should any of the aforementioned groups prioritize this project?

To those of you who support the FPP or have donated, don't worry, we're not going to give up! It's just that many of our peers are not making it easy.  Be patient and stick with us; more is coming.



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org



Edited: 01/04/2018 at 02:19 PM by TheFirstPeakProject
 01/05/2018 06:31 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tom

Posts: 5960
Joined: 07/25/2003

"The signifcance of the 1958 photo is that the shoreline on the northside is in the exact same spot, almost to the day, more than 50 years later."

Sure, we all know sand moves.

But, how was 1st peak in the 1958 photo? 

I'm guessing absent. 

"definitive"?  Hmmmm.

 

 01/05/2018 03:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

Originally posted by: tom

But, how was 1st peak in the 1958 photo? 

 

tom - man, we've heard stories dude...  Before the causeway was built, Dick Catri would tell stories about paddling across the inlet from the Vero side and surfing a super wedge, sometime around late 50's early 60's. All of this occured AFTER the north jetty rock pile was built and BEFORE the "fishing pier" was built in 1970. 

Tabeling, Mann, Catri, Crawford, Pope...those guys all claim that the wedge used to come off the solid concrete jetty and the side wave was just as big, if not bigger, than the next incoming wave, making First Peak a monster over-wedge sometimes. We totally believe the old school guys when they say, "we have no idea how good it used to get."

Respect the legends!



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org

 01/06/2018 12:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


K07

Posts: 25
Joined: 09/02/2012

Well the bathymetric changes in the Sebastian Inlet system during the beach renourishment age have been documented, regardless of historic shoreline photos.

Thx Ppeterson for pointing out beach renourishment affects surf.

 01/07/2018 08:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

K07 - We agree with you. Look. We have accurate bathy data of the inlet dating back to 2007. It's pretty easy to correlate the bathy data from 2007-2017 to the location of the shoreline.  Then using historical photography that shows the shoreline, it's possible to "hindcast" or "reverse engineer" the seafloor topography (bathymetry) back to the 1940's. All good, not a big deal.

We appreciate you bringing up all these little technical sand details, but seriously man, you're overthinking this project.  All we want to do is go down to the inlet and install some panels, for one day, one hour, maybe even one set of waves.  That's it.  If we install the panels only for a day or two, then there is NO EFFECT on the sand. Do you see where we're going with this?  The jetty is over 600' long. Surfline predicts waves up to 17 days in advance. We can go down to the inlet in August, right before a perfect waist-chest high swell, and bring back the wedge for one day. No problemo.

Yes, all of us at the FPP have degrees in coastal engineering and all that college mumbo jumbo, but we're also from here. We know how to swing a hammer and turn a wrench. We've put up plywood for a hurricane before.  Can we focus on the simple panel solution for just for a couple threads?



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org



Edited: 01/07/2018 at 09:06 PM by TheFirstPeakProject
 01/08/2018 08:36 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tom

Posts: 5960
Joined: 07/25/2003

I thought you FPP guys were billing yourselves as scientists and engineers?

"man - we've heard the stories dude..." "Respect the legends!"

Really? 

Maybe you should stick to the "college mumbo jumbo" or the "voodoo engineering" parts...

edit:  And in 1958, Catri had just learned to surf, winter 1957 in Miami according to his biography.  Tabling was 11, Crawford was 6, Pope was 10.  I don't think we have an accurate idea of how surf was at first peak in '58 so using a aerial from then to support your premise really doesn't seem correct.  



Edited: 01/08/2018 at 09:01 AM by tom
 01/08/2018 10:59 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 33258
Joined: 07/22/2003

FPP, stay out of the weeds. Every comment has the potential to open another can of worms.

Set a best chance date in August, get the wood and the straps, then work on the fundraising when the test proves you right.





-------------------------
Human being
 01/08/2018 11:16 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


TheFirstPeakProject

Posts: 156
Joined: 01/12/2016

tom - you took the 1958 date out of context. The image from 1958 was strictly to show the shoreline being in the same spot as 2012. All the legends have different stories from different times, but all agree, pre-1970 (pre-"pier") First Peak was the best it ever was, and we believe them. Yes, we are scientists and engineers, but we're also surfers who want to bring back a wave we should not have lost. Cut us some slack for sounding human.

cole - We need overwhelming support from the surfing community to do the pilot project with removable panels. If we could have done the proof of concept without the surfing community's help, we would have done it a decade ago. Great advice on staying out of the weeds. We wish we could use this forum to bring the surfing community together to do something awesome, but more often its taking steps backwards.  We'll back-off our 2ndlight participation.

 



-------------------------

The First Peak Project is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization whose mission is to restore the legendary wave First Peak at Sebastian Inlet to its former glory. 


 


www.firstpeak.org



Edited: 01/08/2018 at 02:39 PM by TheFirstPeakProject
2nd Light Forums » Surfing » Sand

<< 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
Statistics
140306 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 12 users logged in.

FuseTalk Basic Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2018 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

Hello to Matt B