KENNEDY POINT MARINA S 92 RESPONSES

Transcription

1 KENNEDY POINT MARINA S 92 RESPONSES Appendix 5 - MetOcean Solutions Wave & Wind Analysis Page 24

2 METOCEAN CLIMATE AT KENNEDY POINT, WAIHEKE ISLAND Ambient and extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Kennedy Point Marina location Report prepared for Kennedy Point Boatharbour Limited

3 MetOcean Solutions Ltd: Report P September 2016 Report status Version Date Status Approved by RevA 22/09/2016 Draft for internal review Thiebaut RevB 26/09/2016 Draft for client review Beamsley It is the responsibility of the reader to verify the currency of the version number of this report. The information, including the intellectual property, contained in this report is confidential and proprietary to MetOcean Solutions Ltd. It may be used by the persons to whom it is provided for the stated purpose for which it is provided, and must not be imparted to any third person without the prior written approval of MetOcean Solutions Ltd. MetOcean Solutions Ltd reserves all legal rights and remedies in relation to any infringement of its rights in respect of its confidential information. PO Box 441, New Plymouth, New Zealand T: E:

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction Data sources and analytical methods Bathymetry Winds Wind hindcast model Wind extreme value analysis Waves Wave parameters Wave extreme value analysis Ambient wind climate Ambient wave Climate Extreme metocean statistics References MetOcean Solutions Ltd ii

5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Bathymetry map of the Tamaki Strait showing the Kennedy Point Marina location on Waiheke Island. The red dot indicates the representative reporting site where the metocean statistics are provided in this report Figure 2.1. Sources and areas of raw bathymetry data Figure 3.1 Annual wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming Figure 3.2 Winter wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming Figure 3.3 Spring wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming Figure 3.4 Summer wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming Figure 3.5 Autumn wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming Figure 4.1 Annual wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach Figure 4.2 Winter wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach Figure 4.3 Spring wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach Figure 4.4 Summer wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach Figure 4.5 Autumn wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach Figure 4.6 Density plot of the significant wave height (H s ) vs the peak wave period (T p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each H s - T p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (m.s) Figure 4.7 Density plot of the significant wave height (H s ) vs peak wave direction (D p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each H s - D p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (m.deg) Figure 4.8 Density plot of the peak wave period (T p ) vs peak wave direction (D p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each T p - D p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (s.deg) Figure 5.1 Comparison between omni-directional empirical and fitted Weibull cumulative distribution functions (top graph) and diagnostic plot of goodness of fit (bottom graph, R2 = R-squared, MRAE = Mean Relative Absolute Error) for wind speed at the proposed Marina location MetOcean Solutions Ltd iii

6 Figure 5.2 Comparison between omni-directional empirical and fitted Weibull cumulative distribution functions (top graph) and diagnostic plot of goodness of fit (bottom graph, R2 = R-squared, MRAE = Mean Relative Absolute Error) for H s at the proposed Marina location Figure 5.3 Contour plot of omni-directional bi-variate return period values (ARI 1, 10, 50 and 100 years) for significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. The dark crosses correspond to the estimated deterministic H s and associated T p return period values for each ARI indicated in the legend MetOcean Solutions Ltd iv

7 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Table 3.5 Table 3.6 Table 3.7 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Table 4.8 Table 4.9 Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Annual and monthly wind speed statistics at the proposed Marina location Monthly and annual wind speed exceedance probabilities at the proposed Marina location Annual joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location Winter (Jun-Aug) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location Spring (Sep-Nov) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location Summer (Dec-Feb) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location Autumn (Mar-May) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location Annual, seasonal and monthly significant wave height statistics at the proposed Marina location Annual, seasonal and monthly peak wave period statistics at the proposed Marina location Monthly and annual significant wave height exceedance probabilities (%) at the proposed Marina location Monthly and annual peak wave period exceedance probabilities (%) at the proposed Marina location Annual joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location Winter (Jun-Aug) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location Spring (Sep-Nov) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location Summer (Dec-Feb) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location Autumn (Mar-May) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location MetOcean Solutions Ltd v

8 1. INTRODUCTION Kennedy Point Boatharbour Limited has commissioned MetOcean Solutions Ltd to undertake a wind and wave hindcast study and provide a summary of metocean conditions at the proposed Kennedy Point Marina, Waiheke Island (Figure 1.1). An overview of the wind and wave conditions is required to provide an initial characterisation of the environment from a design and marine operability perspective, plus identify potential hazards and document the important aspects of the environmental conditions that may require further attention. Analysis of the modelled wind and wave data will be used to assess the viability and feasibility of installing an outer floating pontoon to protect the marina. A nearshore site situated on the outer limit of the proposed Marina (WGS E, S) in approximately 6 m water depth has been chosen as a representative location to characterise the metocean conditions that will affect the floating pontoon (Figure 1.1). A summary of the numerical data sources and analytical methods is provided in Section 2. The site specific wind and wave results are provided in Section 3 and 4, respectively. Extreme statistics are reported in Section 5. The references cited in the report are listed in the final Section 6. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 1

9 Figure 1.1. Bathymetry map of the Tamaki Strait showing the Kennedy Point Marina location on Waiheke Island. The red dot indicates the representative reporting site where the metocean statistics are provided in this report. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 2

10 2. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 2.1. Bathymetry Bathymetry data was collected from multiple sources and in various different formats as illustrated in Figure 2.1. These data sources include ENC (Electronic Navigation Charts), Fare sheets, LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), depth recorded from QTC VIEW surveys, single-beam and multibeam data and SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) topography data. Sources included Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Waikato University, the Department of Conservation, NIWA and LINZ. Data was supplied in various horizontal projections and different formats, including WGS84; decimal degrees, degrees and minutes, degrees minutes and seconds, NZTM and NZGD The data vertical datum varied between lowest astronomical tide (LAT) and mean sea level (MSL). Each dataset was converted to a common horizontal projection/datum and the local mean sea level (MSL) respectively. Bathymetry data in the Tamaki Strait is a combination of ENC and QTC data. Figure 2.1. Sources and areas of raw bathymetry data. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 3

11 2.2. Winds Wind hindcast model The near surface wind field was prescribed by a 37-year regional atmospheric hindcast. The WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model was established over all of New Zealand at 12 km resolution, with a nested domain over central regions at 4 km resolution. The WRF model boundaries were sourced from the CFSR (Climate Forecast System Reanalysis) dataset distributed by NOAA (Saha et al., 2010). These data span 37 years ( ) at hourly intervals and 0.31 spatial resolution. While the WRF hindcast produced atmospheric parameters at hourly intervals, only the near surface wind field (i.e. 10 minute mean at 10 m elevation) has been used in the present study Wind extreme value analysis Omnidirectional return period values were calculated from the 37-year hindcast time series. A Peaks over Threshold (POT) sampling method was used for event selection, applying the 95 th percentile exceedance level as the threshold with a 24 hour window. For extreme value analysis, the selected events were fitted to a Weibull distribution, with the location parameter fixed by the threshold and the Maximum Likelihood Method (MLM) used to obtain the scale and shape parameters Waves Wave parameters Due to the location of the proposed Kennedy point Marina and the configuration of the Tamaki Strait, the wave climate is entirely dominated by fetch-limited sea states. Therefore, an analytical solution based on wind speed/direction, fetch length and mean water depth over the fetch zone was used to replicate the wave regime over 37 years ( ). The significant wave height (H s ) and peak period (T p ) were calculated using equations 3.39 and 3.40, respectively, of the US Army Corps of Engineers (1984). The peak wave direction (D p ) was assumed to be the same as the incident wind direction Wave extreme value analysis Omnidirectional return period values were calculated from the adjusted 37- year hindcast time series. A POT sampling method was used for event selection, applying the 95 th percentile exceedance level as the threshold with a 24 hour window. For extreme value analysis, the selected events were fitted to a Weibull distribution, with the location parameter fixed by the threshold and the MLM used to obtain the scale and shape parameters. The methods described here require a sufficient number of storm peaks, which is arbitrarily chosen to be at least 10, to properly fit these events to a distribution. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 4

12 Bivariate return period values were calculated for H s and T p. The method of Repko et al. (2005) was used, which considers the distribution of H s and wave steepness, s. Contours of the return period values were constructed from the joint PDF using the Inverse FORM method (Winterstein et al., 1993) at the required average recurrence interval (ARI). For a given significant wave height, the maximum individual wave occurring during an observation period may be considered as a random variable, which follows a Rayleigh distribution with a most probable value H m = H s 1 ln (N) (2.1) 2 where N is the number of individual waves observed. Using the typical hourly number of storm waves at the location of interest (i.e. N=1000), the hourly maximum wave height (H max ) is defined as being; H max = 1.86H s (2.2) Note that while individual wave heights may exceed the H max value, this probability of exceedence is generally accepted within the offshore engineering design codes (see HSE, 2002; Dermirbilek and Vincent, 2002). MetOcean Solutions Ltd 5

13 3. AMBIENT WIND CLIMATE The wind climate is described for the nearshore area of interest. Note that the wind directions are reported in the coming from convention. A summary of the wind speed statistics for the 10-minute mean at 10 m elevation is provided in Table 3.1. The annual mean wind speed is 5.97 m.s -1, while the windiest month is October (mean 6.48 m.s -1 ) and the least windy month is February (mean 5.44 m.s -1 ). The monthly and annual wind speed exceedance probabilities are provided in Table 3.2, and indicate that wind speeds exceeding 16 m.s -1 can occur throughout the year, with March, June and July having the highest occurrence of strong wind events. Joint probability distributions of the wind speed and direction are presented in Tables for the annual and seasonal conditions. The same data are presented in the wind rose plots in Figures , showing the annual predominance of winds coming from the WSW sector (predominant at all seasons). Stronger but let frequent winds typically come from the N quadrant at all seasons, while strong SE winds are also noted in winter and autumn. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 6

14 Table 3.1 Annual and monthly wind speed statistics at the proposed Marina location. Parameter U 10min (m/s) Mean Std. dev. P90 P95 P99 Max (m.s -1 ) (m.s -1 ) (m.s -1 ) (m.s -1 ) (m.s -1 ) (m.s -1 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual MetOcean Solutions Ltd 7

15 Table 3.2 U 10min (m.s -1 ) Monthly and annual wind speed exceedance probabilities at the proposed Marina location. Exceedance (%) January February March April May June July August September October November December Year > > > > > > > > > > > > MetOcean Solutions Ltd 8

16 Table 3.3 Annual joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location. U 10min (m.s -1 ) Wind direction (degt, from) Total Total Table 3.4 Winter (Jun-Aug) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location. U 10min (m.s -1 ) Wind direction (degt, from) Total Total MetOcean Solutions Ltd 9

17 Table 3.5 Spring (Sep-Nov) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location. U 10min (m.s -1 ) Wind direction (degt, from) Total Total Table 3.6 Summer (Dec-Feb) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location. U 10min (m.s -1 ) Wind direction (degt, from) Total Total MetOcean Solutions Ltd 10

18 Table 3.7 Autumn (Mar-May) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the wind speed and wind direction at the proposed Marina location. U 10min (m.s -1 ) Wind direction (degt, from) Total Total Figure 3.1 Annual wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 11

19 Figure 3.2 Winter wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming. Figure 3.3 Spring wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 12

20 Figure 3.4 Summer wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming. Figure 3.5 Autumn wind rose plot at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which wind is coming. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 13

21 4. AMBIENT WAVE CLIMATE A summary of the significant wave height statistics at the proposed Marina location are provided in Table 4.1. The largest significant wave height over the hindcast period was 1.56 m, while the mean annual significant wave height was 0.14 m. The annual 99 th percentile non-exceedance level (P99) is 0.64 m (i.e. on an annual basis, for 99% of the time the significant wave height is less than 0.64 m). A summary of the peak wave period statistics at P4 is provided in Table 4.2. The monthly and annual significant wave height exceedance probabilities are presented in Table 4.3, while the monthly and annual peak wave period exceedance probabilities are provided in Table 4.4. The annual joint probability distribution of significant wave height and peak spectral wave period is provided in Table 4.5, while the seasonal results are presented in Table 4.6 to Table 4.9. A wave rose for the annual and seasonal conditions for the significant wave height are presented in Figure 4.1 to Figure 4.5, showing the predominance of waves incoming from the SW and WSW sectors at all seasons. Note however that strong winter and autumn storm events also generate high waves coming from the SE sector. Density plots are provided for significant wave height vs peak wave period (Figure 4.6), significant wave height vs peak wave direction (Figure 4.7) and peak wave period vs peak wave direction (Figure 4.8). These density plots provide a bi-variate representation (distribution) of the total number of hindcast data for each of the pair of variables. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 14

22 Table 4.1 Annual, seasonal and monthly significant wave height statistics at the proposed Marina location. Period (01 Jan Dec 2015) Significant Wave Height (m) Significant wave height statistics (m) Non-exceedance Percentile for Significant Wave Height (m) Min Max Mean Std. Dev (1) Notes: Main directions are octants with greater than 15% occurrence and represent sectors from which the waves approach. Main Directions (1) January N SW February E SW March E SW April E SW May SW W June SW W July SW W August SW W September N SW W October N SW W November N SW W December N SW W Winter SW W Spring N SW W Summer N SW Autumn SW All SW W MetOcean Solutions Ltd 15

23 Table 4.2 Annual, seasonal and monthly peak wave period statistics at the proposed Marina location. Period (01 Jan Dec 2015) Tp (s) Peak wave period statistics (s) Non-exceedance Percentile for Tp (s) Min Max Mean Std. Dev (1) Notes: Main directions are octants with greater than 15% occurrence and represent sectors from which the waves approach. Main Directions (1) January N SW February E SW March E SW April E SW May SW W June SW W July SW W August SW W September N SW W October N SW W November N SW W December N SW W Winter SW W Spring N SW W Summer N SW Autumn SW All SW W MetOcean Solutions Ltd 16

24 Table 4.3 H s (m) Monthly and annual significant wave height exceedance probabilities (%) at the proposed Marina location. Exceedance (%) January February March April May June July August September October November December Year > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MetOcean Solutions Ltd 17

25 Table 4.4 T p (s) Monthly and annual peak wave period exceedance probabilities (%) at the proposed Marina location. Exceedance (%) January February March April May June July August September October November December Year > > > > > > > > > MetOcean Solutions Ltd 18

26 Table 4.5 Annual joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. H s (m) Peak wave period T p (s) Total Total Table 4.6 Winter (Jun-Aug) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. Peak wave period T p (s) H s (m) Total Total MetOcean Solutions Ltd 19

27 Table 4.7 Spring (Sep-Nov) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. H s (m) Peak wave period T p (s) Total Total Table 4.8 Summer (Dec-Feb) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. H s (m) Peak wave period T p (s) Total Total MetOcean Solutions Ltd 20

28 Table 4.9 Autumn (Mar-May) joint probability distribution (parts per thousand) of the significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. H s (m) Peak wave period T p (s) Total Total Figure 4.1 Annual wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 21

29 Figure 4.2 Winter wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 22

30 Figure 4.3 Spring wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 23

31 Figure 4.4 Summer wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 24

32 Figure 4.5 Autumn wave rose plot for the significant wave height at the proposed Marina location. Sectors indicate the direction from which waves approach. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 25

33 Figure 4.6 Density plot of the significant wave height (H s ) vs the peak wave period (T p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each H s - T p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (m.s) -1. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 26

34 Figure 4.7 Density plot of the significant wave height (H s ) vs peak wave direction (D p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each H s - D p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (m.deg) -1. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 27

35 Figure 4.8 Density plot of the peak wave period (T p ) vs peak wave direction (D p ) at the proposed Marina location. Note the density plot provides a visual representation of the total number of houry hindcast data (37 years) per each T p - D p bins, normalised by the bin sizes to obtain a unit of (s.deg) -1. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 28

36 5. EXTREME METOCEAN STATISTICS The return period values for wind and wave extremes at the proposed Marina location are given in Table 5.1 to Table 5.4 for the 1, 10, 50 and 100-year return periods. The comparisons between the omni-directional empirical and fitted cumulative Weibull distributions for wind speed and significant wave height are presented in Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2, respectively. The fitted distributions faithfully replicate the empirical distributions of the hindcast wind and wave data. The bi-variate (H s - T p ) extreme contours are presented in Figure 5.3. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 29

37 Table year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location. Direction (degt, from) 1-year return period Symbol Units Omni 10-min averaged wind speed U 10min m.s Significant wave height H s m Associated peak wave period T p s Maximum individual wave height H max m Table year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location. Direction from (degt, from) 10-year return period Symbol Units Omni 10-min averaged wind speed U 10min m.s Significant wave height H s m Associated peak wave period T p s Maximum individual wave height H max m MetOcean Solutions Ltd 30

38 Table year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location. Direction (degt, from) 50-year return period Symbol Units Omni 10-min averaged wind speed U 10min m.s Significant wave height H s m Associated peak wave period T p s Maximum individual wave height H max m Table year ARI extreme wind and wave statistics at the proposed Marina location. Direction (degt, from) 100-year return period Symbol Units Omni 10-min averaged wind speed U 10min m.s Significant wave height H s m Associated peak wave period T p s Maximum individual wave height H max m MetOcean Solutions Ltd 31

39 Figure 5.1 Comparison between omni-directional empirical and fitted Weibull cumulative distribution functions (top graph) and diagnostic plot of goodness of fit (bottom graph, R2 = R-squared, MRAE = Mean Relative Absolute Error) for wind speed at the proposed Marina location. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 32

40 Figure 5.2 Comparison between omni-directional empirical and fitted Weibull cumulative distribution functions (top graph) and diagnostic plot of goodness of fit (bottom graph, R2 = R-squared, MRAE = Mean Relative Absolute Error) for H s at the proposed Marina location. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 33

41 Figure 5.3 Contour plot of omni-directional bi-variate return period values (ARI 1, 10, 50 and 100 years) for significant wave height and peak wave period at the proposed Marina location. The dark crosses correspond to the estimated deterministic H s and associated T p return period values for each ARI indicated in the legend. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 34

42 6. REFERENCES Dermirbilek, Z., Vincent, L., Water wave mechanics, in: Coastal Engineering Manual, Part II, Hydrodynamics, Engineer Manual. Washington, DC, p. Chapter II-1. HSE, Environmental considerations. Offshore technology report 2001/010. Prepared by Bomel Ltd for the Health and Safety Executive, Colegate, Norwich. Repko, A., Van Gelder, P., Voortman, H.G., Vrijling, J.K., Bivariate description of offshore wave conditions with physics-based extreme value statistics. Appl. Ocean Res. 26, Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Pan, H.-L., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., Tripp, P., Kistler, R., Woollen, J., Behringer, D., Liu, H., Stokes, D., Grumbine, R., Gayno, G., Wang, J., Hou, Y.-T., Chuang, H.-Y., Juang, H.-M.H., Sela, J., Iredell, M., Treadon, R., Kleist, D., Van Delst, P., Keyser, D., Derber, J., Ek, M., Meng, J., Wei, H., Yang, R., Lord, S., Van Den Dool, H., Kumar, A., Wang, W., Long, C., Chelliah, M., Xue, Y., Huang, B., Schemm, J.-K., Ebisuzaki, W., Lin, R., Xie, P., Chen, M., Zhou, S., Higgins, W., Zou, C.-Z., Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Han, Y., Cucurull, L., Reynolds, R.W., Rutledge, G., Goldberg, M., The NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 91, doi: /2010bams US Army Corps of Engineers, Shore protection manual, Volume 1. Coastal Engineering Research Center, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg Mississippi. Winterstein, S.R., Ude, T.C., Cornell, C.A., Bjerager, P., Haver, S., Environmental parameters for extreme response: Inverse FORM with omission factors, in: Proc., ICOSSAR-93, Innsbruck. MetOcean Solutions Ltd 35