Archive for July, 2013

Long-Buried New Jersey Seawall Spared Coastal Homes From Hurricane Sandy’s Wrath

Posted on: by Melissa

National Science Foundation Press Release 13-126: July 16, 2013

Built in 1882, then hidden by drifting sands, seawall mitigated 2012 hurricane’s effects

Picture two residential beach communities on the New Jersey shore: Bay Head and Mantoloking. They sit side-by-side in Ocean County on a narrow barrier island that separates the Atlantic Ocean and Barnegat Bay.

Before Hurricane Sandy landed on Oct. 29, 2012, a motorist traveling north would pass through Mantoloking into Bay Head. He or she would note few changes in residential development, dunes, beaches or shoreline.

The difference, however, was hidden under the sand.

A long-forgotten, 4,134-feet-long seawall buried beneath the beach helped Bay Head weather Sandy’s record storm surges and large waves, says geoscientist Jennifer Irish of Virginia Tech.

The stone structure dates to 1882. Its reappearance in 2012 surprised many area residents, underscoring the difficulties transient communities have in planning for future threats along their shores, Irish says.

“It’s amazing that a seawall built nearly 150 years ago, then naturally hidden under beach sands and forgotten, would have a major effect under the conditions in which it was originally designed to perform,” says H. Richard Lane, program director in the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Division of Earth Sciences.

NSF funded the research through a rapid response award following Hurricane Sandy.

“This finding should have major implications for coastal planning, as sea level rises and storms increase in intensity in response to global warming,” says Lane.

The results, published online this week in the journal Coastal Engineering, illustrate the need for multi-levels of beach protection in coastal communities, Irish and colleagues say. Irish is the paper’s lead author.

“Once we got to the site, we immediately saw the seawall,” Irish says.

“The beach and dunes did their job to a certain point, then the seawall took over, providing significant dampening of the hurricane waves.

“It was the difference between houses that were flooded in Bay Head and houses that were reduced to piles of rubble in Mantoloking.”

With recovery efforts underway and storms still circulating through the area, Irish and Robert Weiss, also a geoscientist at Virginia Tech, along with Patrick Lynett, a civil and environmental engineer at the University of Southern California, assessed the area, documenting high water marks, damage, overwash and breaches of the barrier island.

All oceanfront homes in the two boroughs were damaged, ranging from ground-floor flooding to complete destruction.

As measured by waterlines in the interiors of homes, flooding was similar in both boroughs.

The difference was the extent of the storm’s effects.

In Mantoloking, an entire dune nearly vanished. Water washed over a barrier spit and opened three breaches of 541 feet, 194 feet and 115 feet, respectively, where the land was swept away.

In Bay Head, only the portion of the dune located seaward of the seawall was eroded. The section of dune behind the seawall received only minor local scouring.

Later, using Google Earth to evaluate aerial images taken two years before and immediately after Hurricane Sandy, the researchers looked at the area’s houses.

They labeled a structure with a different roofline as damaged, one that no longer sits on its foundation as destroyed and the remaining houses as flooded.

The scientists classified 88 percent of the oceanfront homes in Bay Head as flooded, with just one oceanfront home destroyed.

In Mantoloking, more than half the oceanfront homes were classified as damaged or destroyed.

Despite the immense magnitude and duration of the storm, a relatively small coastal obstacle–the seawall–reduced potential wave loads by a factor of two.

The seawall was the difference between widespread destruction and minor structural effects, the researchers say.

“We are left with a clear, unintentional example,” says Irish, “of the need for multiple levels of defense that include hard structures and beach nourishment to protect coastal communities.”

Additional researchers include Wei Cheng and Stephanie Smallegan of Virginia Tech.

-NSF-

Media Contacts
 Cheryl Dybas, NSF (703) 292-7734 [email protected]
John Pastor, Virginia Tech (540) 231-5646 [email protected]

Flying high with kite aerial photography

Posted on: by Melissa

The Martha’s Vineyard Times: July 2, 2013

by Michelle Gross

Jon Shabica has found a way to combine an interest in photography and a passion for kite flying. He uses a GoPro camera to capture bird’s-eye views, most recently of Oak Bluffs.

A coastal engineer by profession from Illinois, Mr. Shabica said he’s always had a knack for photography.

“At home, when we photograph our projects, we’re typically shooting at low elevations that are maybe 20 feet off the ground,” he said.

He also has a passion for kites. “My father was a kite addict,” Mr. Shabica said. “So I’ve always been around kites. It was a big part of my childhood.”

While looking for creative ways to combine his talents, an idea dawned, and camera and kite in tow, he set out to do something different.

Using a Hero 2 GoPro—a lightweight high-definition camera with a protective waterproof case—Mr. Shabica sets the camera to fire continuously, every ten seconds within a specified time, and rigs it to the tail of his kite. Minutes later, with the kite soaring a few hundred feet in the air, Mr. Shabica waits anxiously to see what it would come back with.

“The first time I did it, I was blown away by how clear the pictures were,” Mr. Shabica said. “It’s one hundred percent to the credit of the technology. All I have to do is put it in the air. That’s the hard part.”

The timer can be set in two, five or ten second intervals. The camera is hung on a suspension system designed to keep it from spinning on the kite’s line. It is that simple.

A Chicago native and seasonal Oak Bluffs resident for the last 42 years, Mr. Shabica is the vice president of Shabica & Associates—a coastal engineering and consulting firm that helps build and restore beaches and ravines. Or, as he likes to put it, he “builds beaches.”

“Because my dad grew up out here, my family has always loved the beach. It’s fun for us, we love the water,” he said.

With a degree in medical illustration and photography from School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Mr. Shabica said his interest in aerial photography was born out of the necessity to survey the coastlines that he helps build. Now, he does it just for fun.

“It’s great for my line of work because I’m out on the water,” he said. “You get that unique perspective. But I don’t do it [kite photography] professionally.”

Although he has four kites of all shapes and sizes, his favorite is a six-foot-long inflatable penguin. “People are really drawn to this one,” Mr. Shabica said as he held the penguin kite pre-flight while standing in Ocean Park last week. The kite comes equipped with a large yellow beak and matching waddling feet. He affectionately refers to it as Betsy.

“The aim is to keep the line out of the camera’s sights,” Mr. Shabica said as he began releasing the kite’s spool. “But the picture from above is amazing.”

Mr. Shabica, now somewhat of a kite photographer aficionado, said some of his favorite photos are the ones where he can be seen in a part of the frame. A technique otherwise known as photobombing.

“I call it the Where’s Waldo factor,” Mr. Shabica said. “Although kids these days probably don’t know what that means.”

The kite’s flight time lasts no more than five to ten minutes and at its higest elevation can reach one thousand feet. But what goes up must come down, and among Mr. Shabica’s biggest concerns is safety.

“The challenge is you have to fly it over open areas, not over roads or crowded places. It’s a liability; I just don’t want to hurt anybody,” Mr. Shabica said.

How it works

There are several ways a camera can be attached to a kite. Typically, on kites like Betsy, a small and lightweight camera is secured to an adjustable rig and suspended from a line at a close distance. This distance helps reduce excessive movement between the kite and camera. The camera is also set to a high shutter speed to reduce motion blur. A wide-angle lens is preferable in order to achieve the maximum impact of each photo. Gravity helps to keep the rig level, irrespective of the angle of the kite line. Generally, single-lined kites are used, as they allow longer spool lengths and need less intervention from the person who is flying it.

Not so new

While it’s become an increasingly popular alternative to more traditional forms of photography, Kite Aerial Photography (KAP) actually dates back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries. A camera enabled to operate either remotely or automatically was rigged to a kite whose machinery ranged anywhere from extremely simple to more complex.

According to the website of Charles Benton, a professor of architecture at the University of California, Berkeley, this form of photography was used to provide new perspectives for how people visualized the world from both a practical and aesthetic point of view.

KAP has been used for everything from military reconnaissance and disaster assessment to scientific surveys. George Lawrence, an early pioneer of aerial photography, is the man responsible for taking the iconic “San Francisco in ruins” photograph using a series of kites and wires after the earthquake destroyed a large part of the city in 1906.

Following World War II, aeronautical engineering was applied to kites, parachutes, balloons, hang gliders, and other flying devices.

For those interested in learning more, Mr. Benton, a self-proclaimed kite photography enthusiast, runs a Kite Aerial Photography website and discussion forum that is dedicated to all things KAP.