中外斜坡堤胸墙波浪力计算对比

Contrastive calculation for wave force of the rubble mound dyke’s crown wall based on Chinese and foreign codes

斜坡堤胸墙对于减轻越浪危害至关重要,国内外各胸墙波浪力计算方法的结果差异较大。基于国内外几种斜坡堤胸墙波浪力计算方法,结合工程案例和试验数据进行对比研究。结果表明:1)特定条件下,我国规范计算的水平波浪力压强分布高度远小于Jensen法和Pedersen法结果,后两法计算结果与实测高度一致。2)Jensen法和Pedersen法计算的水平波浪力及浮托力均比国内港工方法大,也大于实测值。3)港工规范计算的总水平波浪力比实测值小,其计算出的浮托力与实测值较为接近。4)Jensen法考虑了掩护棱体肩台高度的作用,Pedersen法考虑了掩护棱体肩台高度与宽度的影响。此二法考虑得相对全面,但其按深水波长计算0.1%超越概率的波浪力,计算结果偏于保守。5)建议重要工程以模型试验结果为准。

The rubble mound dyke’s crown wall is critical to reduce danger of wave overtopping,and the calculated results of wave forces by several Chinese and foreign codes vary greatly.Based on several wave force calculation method of rubble mound dyke’s crown wall from Chinese and foreign codes,combined with the engineering cases and the experimental data,the comparative study is carried out.The results show that:1)Under certain conditions,the distribution height of horizontal wave impact pressure calculated by Chinese codes of port is far less than that calculated by Jensen method and Pedersen method,and the results of the latter two methods are consistent with the measured height.2)The horizontal wave force and uplift force calculated by Jensen method and Pedersen method are larger than those calculated by domestic harbor engineering method,and also larger than the measured value.3)The total horizontal wave force calculated by Chinese codes of port is smaller than the measured value,and the calculated total uplift wave force is close to the measured value.4)Jensen method takes into account the height of armor berm,and Pedersen method takes into account the height and width of armor berm.The two methods are relatively comprehensive,but the wave force with 0.1%exceedance probability is calculated according to the deepwater wavelength,and the calculation results are more conservative.5)It is suggested that the important project should adopt the physical model experiment results.