•
•
OCEAN HAZARDS AT BANDON, OREGON
AND
SCENARIO FOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
•
by
Roger William Torstenson
•
Special Project
•
Submitted To
•
Marine Resource Management Program
College of Oceanography
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331
May 1991
•
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of
Master of Science
•
•
•
Commencement June 1991
•
•
•
•
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Dr. Paul Komar for providing the opportunity to work on this project,
particularly with the added time constraints imposed upon him. His guidance and
resourcefulness paved the way for the scope and originality of this research. Larry Ward, city
planner for Bandon, initially broached the topic to Paul and provided several contour maps of
the area; his assistance is greatly appreciated. Shuyer-Ming Shih assisted Paul and myself with
the surveying; in fact it could not have been accomplished without Ming.
Others who assisted in the completion of this work include Lori Broderick and Lois Burns,
both of the Corps of Engineers in Portland. It was through their help that wave data and jetty
diagrams were obtained.
As always, during my two years at Oregon State, Dr. Jefferson Gonor came to my aid when
I needed him. Without Jeff and Kathryn Howd, who was always eager to help, I may not have
made it through this sometimes trying period; they made it worthwhile and enjoyable. Thanks
also to Bob Smith for serving on my graduate committee, especially with such short notice.
•
•
•
•
I owe a special gratitude to my wife, Karen, who in spite of long, difficult separations over
the past twenty months, continuously offered her support and encouragement. Finally, it is
through the hospitality of Karen's parents, that I am able to complete this manuscript in the
comfort of their Virginia home.
•
OCEAN HAZARDS AT BANDON, OREGON
AND
•
•
•
•
•
SCENARIO FOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
•
•
I must go down to the seas again,
For the call of the running tide
Is a wild call and a clear call
That ?nay not be denied ...
Masefield, Sea-Fever
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CONTENTS
Introduction
1
Physical Setting
3
River Settlement
3
Flooding
4
Jetty Construction
5
Marine Terrace
Ocean Hazards
•
Storm Waves
11
Tsunamis
15
Sea Level Changes
18
Land Level Changes
21
Erosion
31
Conclusion
37
References
40
Appendix I -- Wave Data
Appendix II -- Survey Profile
•
11
•
INTRODUCTION
•
The community of Bandon is located on the southern half of the Oregon coast, 140 kilometers
•
north of the California border and 40 kilometers south of Coos Bay (Figure 1). Part of the city
occupies the low-lying (average 3-meter elevation) area along the south bank of the Coquille River,
while another portion is positioned on a generally flat terrace having elevations of 25-30 meters
•
(Figure 2).
In a 1963 development study, the Bandon Planning Commission wrote: "the long sandy beach
below the bluff, the high rocks offshore, the mouth of the river flanked by rock jetties -- these are
•
features that help to give Bandon its special quality." Bandon's 'special quality' remains to this day.
There has been only a small population growth since the early 1960s, increasing from 1653 inhabitants
in 1960 to 2490 in 1989, primarily a result of tourism and the subsequent retirement by individuals
•
who found Bandon an agreeable place to live. One local business that has catered to the tourist trade
is the cranberry industry, with Bandon the nation's fifth-largest producer. The fishing and timber
•
industries, once mainstays, have declined significantly over the last decade. Reduced employment for
young adults has resulted in many having to leave Bandon. The lack of replacement industries has
accentuated the image of Bandon as a tourist resort.
•
With its natural charms, the city of Bandon now appears to be approaching a crossroads. With
an increasing reliance on tourists, there are growing pressures for development. This has sparked
controversy, particularly over the possible development of a land parcel located on the low-lying
•
0
accreted land between the south jetty at the mouth of the Coquille River and the terrace (bluff area)
•
•
•
•
Wt 111ASIGO
SOUTHWEST OREGON REGION
COOS COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
LEGEND•
•
CITY SIZE
...I
• Can
0
•
t.000.4.1.,
•
.000.10.000
WOOS sae Owen
stAii.g IA riuts
•
Figure 1 (from Bandon, Oregon: A Plan for
Development, 1963)
•
•
•
•
50 km
•
Cat and Kittens 0
o 0 Rocks
op
o op
cp
Coos Bay
to
0
Roseburg
•
Bandon
Cape
Blanco
OREGON
Face Rock
•
Medford
Brookings
CALIFORNIA
•
Figure 2. Bandon's two distinct entities (from Komar, 1991)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 3. The accreted land parcel (from
Public Works Dept., City of Bandon, 1973)
0
•
•
•
2
•
(Figure 3). The north portion of the lowland, immediately adjacent to the jetty, is county park
property; the rest is privately owned. Specific attention is focused on the property immediately behind
the dune ridge. Development of this site could bring condominiums, motels, and high-density housing.
•
Longtime residents -- and a good many newcomers -- decry the developers' intent to build new resorts
on privately held ground that they would prefer to see left in a more natural condition [Halliday,
1991].
•
If development does occur, whether on the accreted lands or on the terrace periphery, what
are the potential ocean hazards implicit in this scenario? This report will survey the coastally-oriented
•
parcels of property in the city of Bandon in order to judge the resistance of the land to withstand the
forces of the ocean. Included among the hazards are winter storm waves and their accompanying
erosional patterns, the changing level of the sea relative to land levels which are also shifting due to
•
tectonic activity, the potential for severe earthquakes, and the occurrence of tsunamis generated by
seismic events. In short, this study will attempt to ascertain the degree of harmony between the city
of Bandon and the forces of the dynamic ocean. New development must be reasonably sure of a
•
•
•
•
•
lasting presence.
3
•
PHYSICAL SETTING
•
The purpose of this section is to define the geomorphic and environmental setting of Bandon.
An awareness of this setting is important to an understanding of the potential ocean hazards that will
be discussed in the next section.
•
As noted in the introduction, there are two distinct geomorphological regions within the city
of Bandon, the low-lying area adjacent to the Coquille River and the zone of higher elevation on the
•
25-30 meter terrace. The low-lying area is composed of former beach material that accreted in recent
times (post- jetty construction), while the terrace, as will be explained later, is tens of thousands of
years older.
•
River Settlement
•
The first human settlement in Bandon was along the river. The first white men to arrive in
this area, in 1851, came upon 200 Indians living on the present Bandon town site; "their dwellings,
•
in an irregular straggling course, reached from Wash Creek at the bottom of Prospect Hill to Ferry
Creek" [Bennett, 1927] (Bennett's accounts were actually written about 1895 but published in 192728). In 1986, a utility company laying cable on the corner of Bandon and First Streets unearthed the
•
ancient remains of seven Coquille Indians. Archaeological work done by Oregon State University
researchers between 1986-1990 has confirmed that Indians inhabited the Bandon site for approximately
1800 years. A permanent village is known to have existed on the north bank of the Coquille where
•
•
Bullards Beach State Park is now located [Western World, 1990].
•
4
•
According to Bennett, the city was first settled in the 1850's when gold was found in the area.
The black sand beach mines at Whisky Run, north of the mouth of the Coquille, were discovered in
1853 and provided the richest gold strikes on the entire Oregon coast. Bandon Beach became popular
as its sands also yielded the precious metal. The influx of white gold diggers did not always lead to
harmonious relationships with the local Indians and periodic fighting occurred. The massacre of 1856
drove the Indians from their homeland to an area upriver of Bandon, leading to white colonization of
•
•
the Bandon site in 1859.
Flooding
The Bandon area does not have a recent history of being much affected by either ocean or
•
stream flooding, except in 1939 when heavy rains and possibly high tides combined to flood the
downtown area. A 'medium' El Nino event occurred in 1939; it is not known whether it contributed
to Bandon's flooding. The early settlers mention a 'tidal wave' in December 1861 [Bennett, 1927].
•
This probably indicates river flooding and high tides associated with high winds and waves. This
storm was actually the second in a seven day period and created a new entrance to the Coquille River.
•
Such an occurrence indicates the potential flooding problems inherent in this location, although Bandon
proper evidently escaped damage. This channel change was from the Rackcliff Rock on the north to
the previously mentioned bluff on the south. The land which was cut through is the accreted land of
•
this study -- then of about forty acres in extent. Figure 4 shows the channel location as it was prior
to December 1861, and Figure 5 renders the altered landscape as it appeared in 1876.
In January 1890, Bandon was deluged with a series of storms, resulting in 52.7 centimeters
of precipitation for the month. George Bennett reports "there wasn't much harm done in Bandon, or
•
•
•
•
Figure 4. Coquille River channel (from Corps of Engineers, 1860)
•
•
Figure
5.
•
•
•
•
The altered Coquille River channel after 1861.
(from Corps of Engineers, 1878)
•
•
•
•
5
•
in the entire precinct; the water did not come into our streets, nor even reach to the top of the wharf
by upwards of two feet" [Bennett, 1928]. This was after a rise of 1.5 to 1.6 meters above the storm
of 1861. "The rise at Bandon did not exceed that of some tides that occasionally occur," relates
•
Bennett. [Here, it must be pointed out that the Coquille estuary is fully exposed to waves at its throat.
The mean tide range is 5.2 feet (1.6 meters) with a diurnal range of 7.0 feet (2.1 meters) and an
extreme range of 10.0 feet (3.1 meters); Percy, 1974]. Recent conversations with long-time Bandon
•
residents confirm that water has not risen further than street level in the last half century. This
includes the 1964 tsunami emanating from the Alaska earthquake. While much of Crescent City, 160
•
kilometers to the south, was destroyed Bandon did not even experienced flooding. Eight months later,
in December 1964, Coos County experience its greatest flooding of the century; Bandon again escaped
damage. The widening of the Coquille as it nears the ocean enables the transport of a high volume
•
of floodwater with little river rise relative to the narrower upstream channel which occasionally spills
its banks. This has allowed Bandon to be spared while Coquille city has at times (eg. 1964, 1974)
been isolated.
•
•
Jetty Construction and Shoreline Changes
Bandon began to expand in the 1870s and 1880s as a port town serving the early settlements
in the Coquille River Valley [Bandon, Oregon: A Plan for Development, 1963]. The Coquille River
•
was Bandon's main street and southern Coos County's only 'highway' at this time. The Coquille did
have a bar at its mouth which impeded the ingress and egress of shipping. The channel cut by the
1861 storm had a narrow mouth and abounded with rocks, making navigation hazardous, as evidenced
•
•
•
6
•
by Figure 5. Also, Lizarraga and Komar [1975] state that prior to jetty construction the river mouth
shifted position considerably, the eroded bluff to the south indicating its southernmost migration.
Consequently, the U.S. Engineers (now the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) surveyed the
•
mouth of the Coquille and in 1880 Congress began appropriations for harbor improvements. Jetty
construction began on the south side of the channel in 1884 and a 500-meter length was completed in
1887, as shown in Figure 6. The purpose of a jetty is to concentrate and accelerate water flow at the
•
mouth of a river. This concentrated water flow scours out sand deposits and stabilizes the river
channel. When combined with periodic dredging, jetties provide a safe route from ocean to river
•
[Corps of Engineers, 1986]. The Coquille was essentially forced into its pre-1861 channel alignment
with an increased depth. Vessel insurance rates and freight charges were materially reduced after the
jetty construction.
•
With the completion of the first jetty and subsequent additions (Figure 7) major readjustments
of the shoreline occurred; this is not unusual even on a coast, such as Oregon's, with zero net littoral
drift (Figure 8). The accretions noted in Figure 7 are primarily a result of coarse sedimentary
material from the Coquille River. The Coquille drains an area of 1960 sq. km., transporting 100,000
tons [Percy, et.al., 1974] of sediment to the estuary per year. Clemens [1987] estimates the volume
•
of this sediment to be 2.21 cu. km. per year. The Corps of Engineers must dredge the entrance
channel annually; between 1959 and 1969 (excluding 1968) the average quantity removed was 62,250
cu. yds. [Johnson, 1972].
Since jetty construction narrowed and deepened the channel entrance, river surge during tidal
ebbs (particularly after a storm) can be great. The sediment plume may then be seen beyond the jetty,
circling around to the beach area. The net transport of sediments from the Coquille, including fine
•
•
to medium sand, seems to be to the south, with accretion being dominant adjacent to the south jetty.
•
SURVEYED UNDER DIR EC T/ON Or CAI l • T.W. SYMONS,
CoRR.s oft rAVINZES,S, U. S. A.
John R.Savage, Asst En(
AUCUST , 1691.
.044,24 14000
40
Sesewel: .ane
44e ...4i Me .1K./ kw 4•44,e.
elfetweee:se "Ne £*
44.4
GiaerI N. CIS
se
(IS G
a
C.Ssessy
Figure 6. South jetty construction and revamped channel (to 1860 configuration).
(from Corps of Engineers, 1891)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 7. Compilation of shoreline surveys showing the effects of
jetty construction on the Coquille River. The high tide
shoreline is given as a dark line and the low tide as a
thinner line.
(from Lizarraga-Arciniega and Komar, 1975)
/880
COQUILLE RIVER JETTIES
Based on Corps of
Engineers surveys.
Tupper Rock Quarry
0
1000
1=••===.1===.
meters
•
•
A. NET LITTORAL DRIFT
•
,0
',..
--
4b
net littoral
.4........m
drift
•
•
•
B. ZERO NET DRIFT
•
•
OCEAN
wave crests
.....A.w."._ ,,qq1
erosion
erosion
deposition
deposition
•
-o0
ots
•
•
Figure 8. The accumulation of sand and erosion on coasts where
net littoral drifts exist (A) as opposed to jetty
construction results on the Oregon coast (B).
(from Komar, 1991)
•
7
The shoreline south of the jetties extends further seaward than that to the north, indicating an
independence between the two, an indication that the jetties and river are acting as a barrier between
the two pocket beaches [Lizarraga-Arciniega and Komar, 1975]. The El Nino of 1982-83 further
emphasized this discrepancy, widening the beach adjacent to the south jetty and eroding the beach
north of the north jetty. An El Nino event is associated with the southward displacement of the normal
winter storm systems and higher wave energies, resulting in an unusually high northward drift of sand
(Figure 9) [Komar, 1986]. Much of the coarse sand brought by the 1982-83 El Nino may still be
present just south of the south jetty, contributing to the high slope found there.
Bandon's jetties were essentially complete in 1908, constructed primarily of blueschist stone
from the blasting of Tupper Rock, a huge monolith at the base of the bluff (Figure 10). There have
been occasional repairs since then and a 230-meter extension to the east end of the north jetty was
added in 1951. The main channel was completed in 1933 to a depth of 4 meters for 2.1 kilometers
upriver from the entrance (Figure 11). In the early years following initial construction of the south
jetty, Bandon became the busiest port between San Francisco and Astoria, exporting timber, fish,
wool, and coal. Soon after 1910, however, Coos Bay's much larger harbor became the main focus
of urban development and Bandon declined in importance.
Before the great fire of 1936 which destroyed nearly the entire city, Bandon presented a rather
congested appearance along the waterfront with 450 homes and some 50 business and industrial
establishments. The inferno, which occurred in September 1936, fed voraciously on the Irish gorse
vegetation rampant in the area and enveloped the town of 1800, leaving 11 dead and 1500 homeless;
few structures were left standing [Petty, 1985]. So strong were the easterly winds fanning the blaze
that Table Rock, 0.3 km offshore, is said to have caught fire. In 1937, plans were drawn up
proposing a reduction in the density of the city to provide better , services, and probably to lessen the
•
CAPE FOULWEATHER
N
1 km
Sand Accumulation
and Shoreline Buildout
BEVERLY
BEACH
1982-83 Longshore
Sand Transport
Sand Losses with
Beach Erosion
YAOUINA
HEAD
AGATE
BEACH
Sand Accumulation with
Shoreline Buildout and
Dune Development
Figure 9. An example of El Nino effects along a
central Oregon
typical pocket beach on,
coast (from Komar, 1986)
•
CQ-I-19
733 5
Figure 10. Jetty construction and accretion on eastern end (1905).
(from Corps of Engineers, 1905)
164
174.•
99
It .. /--------1 Cn/m...,.„_
silt 114
4614 :
4.61k-::.iLs.,
• • .. 94
101..‹z
from d le /rewire' end .14,97 deify ,e sehmeyed
;4
...
of A/Z.L.11( 4.2977 Aik
is de freven / Ife
s4
'5.--..._ 44 14 '.4.‘, l°9 94 ,
IS
ono'
end Zr shove
f helween oh?C
ni I , / , m. 94 104 tot
131 in'V
'6.-"14 "4, 2:z
i:lin,u3
164
I7
10. j",,r2olt
1 9
54 St H si
141
17
.1it.4.:61:34,:t7i 93:6,9:$4
34
i 11:1A 5: 4
31 34 SI 34 91 41
17 17 " IC 0
A A. A 7
134 I%
21
is, ie..
to io
84 in
Ck
34
6
H 64 64 II 7 31
' 44 144 16':1: - ,17'. .1:4
44 ii at 3 SI 64 64 14 44 3 6 5
14 14
44 Si 41
'31 ' 49 Ilk 17:1.:1-141‘n,,:7
Ct 1 74 Si 91 7 6
Ai 4 3
t.
t
If.
43,z1.3.,.1,..,:loit: nis II ,713.9nn
9 -ti
"Ii: I1.14..i.i.!).9..634,07144t 11, 4t Ial 1,04 1041
64 7 s 7 ,n 7 4
lot
, II n 104 1st 101 10 tot
,k nn_ i
to 13
it
ot
44
nI 1,4; :I
.3;17;:i3d...147,,,,1,423::::":,,
44 44 3
9%
10
si
,,
t
,
,
l
gee Cross/ill
a
3:
Si
134
:
74:
t ;:i12:::e1
,:64",,,:;•::. ;4... :,,,, I:
C^,;fr-..
, 7. ii:::17,..4 no: ,7
4
3:17::i14,1193/4
9 914, 010 9%10
:. 7130.9;114;4
. t‘ 1.1 "' ':..r5e//
0
7411:40:411
C,C,I;2:10 ii ii
b
'Z''' 11 114 III ;4, ,
ilitsql4 jc6 4.10.4 124.
*9 141 .,
11 14
4.-16-n.... 15 Nib 114:,,,149 144 at Di nt IN
14
IA 13 IS 1
14 14 14114 13 14
1144 IN 444 IS
94
9„9 II ,
.... 2 % 41
3 40 Inn
de
1%
- 14... 3■111 .i0:1 - • Mt 14 16
4 t"
7t 04 IAA, ; .. 11.414.4r11 ".ii 3:14
496 III .1
144194
r
1415473 S41417964 1
63 44
.
:t69 64 44 94 9 tat 'VI I; :7" 9 so a,.
1: :664 ;SI 41
II
nom`
a 1
907-1.1•15.1? .* 44.11,1
,741nr/I,41,331j141i9
44,
•-•
'''''''' 9- 9" :94 sst et
14 It
3 6 414s 37 4 7 44 7 g 1 4
°CO
Lookout'
1.939
;
•
i
7%
7%
7
44
637
1
4-422;
414 1.!1144
,4
A
44
4---.---4$..!
- ;.4 34 6 543
15434 I9 19
c, ne.k, .4
s 11:::
'1.
/
C
76
7917 1 , 1 I13l Y.4
174.4‘44.41, ow' Ill ONO
99, 5 7454
31 1
I
11 9r2 11 '10 1:st 15461
I
r .
44.
„,.:,,,,,,,.:
Able
South c/oh , hohreren Arad
.,,ir1.--.?,1,-,;;......T,.? I
14
AVWeed end
is
75
tedmeriete
Me; tram AfsI , C/a D,
ei•h" /kJ, k/#4 sndHl&N//is delween NI
12. 1.3
ono' AIN& and thew NNW 6-.0m se, 0/of
Phee, NA Ufa , fo ond 41/40 .
Nail, paid; .4 on Norlh oho' South
c/ehkr Pre lohji•ef to 'miler eeereehene when o6•
sereslions ere /eke",
/cover ran-e46.
N
Figure 11. The completed 'entrance channel.
(from Corps of Engineers , 1934)
A
floor*.
rtf
Corftv. deon,h °horror hoe- onefir .4012rf
if deer o heft% 100 fere' .
Soonehhir ors b thof ono' .rhow dopfh II Aato
The moon heyhf Ms kihof hip roofers shovo
/he piths rolerence ft 40.
efeha4 Ala*: 74o of span rhirso, or/- pelf of k/Y
of /her to/honor the cloak of &hat. Rov /471idors A I L.Liff
Depthto-ver.r ore "hewn Moo: /2 - - - ft — 24 ----, loft. —
CO-300-t/105
K-5-10I
•••"22•9:.?""/"W.1900Maier"-
'UNDIMENSIONED DRAWING,THIS COPY FOR REFERENCE ONLY REI)UCT/6"
ENTRANCE TO
COQUILLE RIVER, OREGON
SURVEYED MARCH 22-27, 1934
U. S. boom* Or Pict, Po ''''' o ,0119609.DISTRICT
4990454.1.
9.9.05364
„
A1916.140934
Fie
4• I
Irs..6119 J. I. 14.
CQ-I-103 7/
8
possibility of another fire leaping from unit to unit. Although a new town was proposed for residential
property, scores of homeowners went their own way to build indiscriminately on the marine terrace
area (the high bluff overlooking the old town site) or southward along the new coast highway
(completed in 1932) connecting Bandon with other coastal communities.
The marine terrace, mentioned in the introduction, is generally thought of as the site of the new
Bandon with businesses and luxurious resorts joining the increasing array of homesites. Even
Bandon's city offices have climbed the hill, as the businesses in Bandon's 'Old Town' now cater
primarily to the tourist trade.
Marine Terrace and Tectonic Setting
The bluff overlooking Bandon (see Figure 3) originated as an uplifted marine terrace. The
marine terraces are the remnants of past sea floors elevated by tectonic activity. The marine terraces
closest to the sea are the lower-most and youngest of a series that document the tectonic rise of the
Pacific Northwest coastline. They have a complex origin and may vary in age from 30,000 years to
as old as 1.8 million years. Muhs, et al. [1990] have assigned an age of approximately 83,000 years
to the Whiskey Run terrace at Coquille Point in Bandon (Figure 12; Table). This estimate is based
on a uranium series age for fossil corals, and correlates with a high stand of sea level prevalent at that
time; Chappell [1974] suggests that sea level then was roughly 20 meters lower than at present.
Along the coast of Coos County the terraces form flat surfaces extending inland for 0.8 to 8.0
kilometers. These terraces consist of flat expanses of medium-grained, horizontally-bedded sand, with
thicknesses of a meter to 30 meters or more locally. Generally, the soils are compact and deeply
weathered, posing a suitable resource for development with minimal erosion hazards over large areas.
•
27'30"
SEVEN DEVILS‘4)
FAULT ZONE
SOUTH
SLOUGH
\ SYNCLINE
FIVEMILE
POINT
WHISKY RUN
12 '3W
-12'30"
COQUILLE
FM
UD
COQUILLE
FAULT
BANDON
44‘2* COQUILLE
(3 POINT \
Z
•7
4.
e
-
■QQ
0
- 5'
I
2
KM
- 43'2'30"
43°2'30"
37'30"
124•22'304
17'30"
Figure 12. The distribution of late Pleistocene marine
terrace sediments for the four extensively
preserved surfaces near Bandon.
(from McInelly and Kelsey, 1990)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Table. Characteristics of Marine Terraces, including Whisky Run.
(from McInelly and Kelsey, 1990)
Terrace
Whisky Run Radiometric
Age, ka
80a
Preservation and
Occurrence
Platform
Elevation
Range, m
Backedge
Elevation
Range, m
Terrace
Sediment
Thickness,
m
well preserved, regionally extensive
0-35
0-31
3-20
Pioneer
well preserved, regionally extensive
5-60
15-60
4-20
Seven Devils
well preserved, regionally extensive, moderately
dissected
moderately well preserved,
regionally extensive,
highly dissected
poorly preserved,
extremely limited, highly
dissected
43-104
50-91
3-18
Metcalf
Arno Peak
Aluhs et a!. [this issue] and Kennedy et a!. [1982].
87-167
169-?
3-16
212
?
17 (?)
Faults Cutting
Terrace Platforms
Miner Creek
Yoakam Point
Bastendorf Beach
Barview-Empire
Sunset Bay
Coquille (?)
Miner Creek
Charleston
Yoakam Point (?)
Sunset Bay (?)
Miner Creek
Seven Devils
Miner Creek
Hayward Creek
?
•
•
•
9
•
An upper unit of clean sand is indicative of Pleistocene marine deposits and consists of uplifted beach
and dune sands [Komar, 1991]. The Bandon silty loams have a sediment thickness of about 15 meters
and exhibit a lower infiltration rate than do most marine terraces, though water permeability still poses
•
problems in bluff areas.
The heights of the marine terraces along the coast must reflect the long-term difference
between the tectonic uplift and the abrupt lowering during a seismic event [Komar, 1991]. The marine
•
terraces form part of the forearc (extending from the subduction zone to the volcanic arc--the
Cascades; generally at least 150 km wide) region of the Cascadia subduction zone (Figure 13). This
•
zone is a tectonic structure which runs offshore from Vancouver Island to Cape Mendocino,
California, marking the region where a piece of ocean floor known as the Juan de Fuca plate is slowly
converging with the North American plate [Monastersky, 1990]. Most of the marine sediments
deposited on the oceanic plates are scraped off during the subduction process and are accreted to the
continental plate [Komar, 1991]. This leads to both the westward growth of the continent as well as
to the uplift of the coastline. The physical characteristics of the Cascadia subduction zone resemble
those of other subduction zones that have experienced large shallow earthquakes [Heaton and Hartzell,
1987]. Muhs, et al. [1990] state that the varying uplift rates present along the Oregon coast probably
cannot be used as an indicator of the potential for great earthquakes.
The southern Oregon coast sits on the upper plate of the Cascadia subduction zone about 60-70
km east of the base of the continental slope. Any terrace deformation is most likely related to active
subduction of the Juan de Fuca plate. To assess the severity of deformation in this region wave-cut
platforms are used. Figure 14 portrays the use of this source in assessing terrace rates of uplift.
Since the angle of the wave-cut platform and a sea cliff is roughly horizontal, in a shore-parallel sense,
at the time of formation, deformation can be determined [Kelsey, 1990]. Precise leveling surveys
•
•
FUCA
PLATE
‘t
Willopa Bay AMERICAN
Cdumbia River
V Ti :rook Bay
V
Siletz River
V
.Siuslow River
Ec:oos, B.a..
PLA E
••• h Slough
V cape !Bandon
v
I.
ORE ...___
CAL.
y Crescent City
Figure 13. The Cascadia subduction zone
(broken barbed line) and compression vector
representing the motion of Juan de Fuca plate
relative to North America.
(from Riddihough, 1977)
•
•
• Yachats
Heceta
Head
•
Florence
(4
C
•
top of terrace
wave-cut platform
•
0
01
42.1
• Coos Bay
• Bandon
•
Port Orford
•
Gold Beach
•
Figure 14. Wave-cut platforms to assess terrace rate
of uplift. (from Komar, 1991; Kelsey, 1990)
•
•
•
•
10
•
along the Oregon coast indicate that deformation is occurring between Crescent City, California and
Astoria, Oregon [Vincent, 1989]. There is, for example, abundant evidence of uplift, folding, and
faulting in the Cape Blanco region -- about 30 km south of Bandon. Localized folding is dominant
•
at Cape Arago, 25 km north of Bandon, although regional uplift and regional landward tilting of wavecut platforms is lacking. This folding is thought by Adams [1984] to be related to the tightening of
the underlying, north-trending South Slough syncline. At Bandon itself, there is an abrupt gain in
•
elevation at Coquille Point, accompanied by a distinctive change in platform tilt from southwest to
west. This may correspond to an onshore extension of the informally-designated Coquille fault (see
•
•
Figure 12). The extrapolated southeast extension of the fault intersects the coast at the mouth of the
Coquille River [Mclnelly and Kelsey, 1990].
•
11
•
OCEAN HAZARDS
•
Storm Waves
•
Meteorological disturbances are greatest in winter, and have the greatest effect where they act
on shallow seas [Pugh, 1987]. While this is a general oceanographic statement, it pertains very much
so to the Oregon coast where winter waves are normally short and choppy and have a destructive
•
influence on coastal beaches. Winter storm systems bring heavy rain and southwest winds, with waves
as high as 8 meters and having periods of 10 to 14 seconds.
To measure wave heights pertinent to Bandon, two monitoring systems have been deployed.
•
They are operated and maintained by the Ocean Engineering Research Group at the Scripps Institution
of Oceanography. One is an accelerometer buoy which is anchored in 68 meters of water and 18
kilometers offshore from the mouth of the Coquille. This buoy moves with the waves and measures
•
vertical acceleration to provide a record of wave elevation which is transmitted to a shore-based
receiving station, near the south jetty, where wave data is recorded in real-time. Another monitoring
system, and the one accessed for data in this study, is called an array. It is a subsurface pressure
sensor stationed in 16 meters of water and 0.8 kilometers offshore; wave information is transmitted
directly to Scripps Institute in San Diego, California. The array is used for nearshore wave direction
•
and energy measurements, as well as providing data on significant wave heights and wave periods.
Array data for significant wave heights, wave energy, and wave periods are listed (normally
at 6-hour intervals) in monthly and annual reports distributed by the Coastal Data Information Program
•
•
-- a cooperative venture formed by the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the California Department of
•
12
•
Boating and Waterways. From this published data, it is possible to determine both the average and
maximum significant wave heights on a monthly basis. To a somewhat lesser degree, average monthly
wave periods can also be determined -- since the wave period data are expressed in time percentage
•
band limits they are more open to individual interpretation. The resulting figures for the Coquille
array, in the representative (for wave activity) year of 1984, and method used to determine actual
shore breaking heights, are given in Appendix I.
Figure 15 shows the breaking heights, or significant heights converted from deep water. The
high waves associated with the winter months contrast dramatically with those of summer when high
pressure persists and weather systems become more localized. Wave periods (Figure 16) also
correspond to this seasonal cycle. Their importance relates to the wave velocity and breaking height - the longer the period at a certain Hs, the more power the waves deliver to the shore.
Storms arise from the atmospheric requirement to balance inequalities in air mass pressure
[Carter, 1988]. Water will try to equalize the pressure by moving from a region of high pressure into
a region of lower pressure [Beer, 1983]. This water parcel movement will be deflected due to the
influence of the Coriolis force. The resulting geostrophic deflection is clockwise in the Northern
Hemisphere, or shoreward for those winter southwesterlies on the Oregon coast. The level of the sea
surface on the coast is actually higher during times of low pressure, adding to the heights of storm
waves. The energy of ocean waves parallels the seasonality of storm winds because the strength of
those winds is the primary factor in causing the growth of waves [Komar, 1991].
In Coos County the average winter wind velocity is 15 miles per hour, characterized by steady
offshore breezes from the south and southeast and occasionally strong onshore gales from the
southwest [Beaulieu and Hughes, 1975]. While the average velocity is actually less than that of the
summer months, it is the gales which far surpass anything seen in the summer. Other factors are
•
•
•
•
•
•
1984 AVERAGE & MAXIMUM BREAKER HEIGHTS
JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JU LY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
Figure 15. Wave data fm Coquille array.
•
•
13
involved in these intense gales besides wind speed. One is the duration of the storm -- the longer the
winds blow the more energy they are able to transfer to the waves; another is fetch, the area over
which the storm-winds are effective (Figure 17 a). Normally the largest waves are those from storm
systems originating in the North Pacific and the Gulf of Alaska. There is a strong correlation in storm
intensities as measured at different locations on the Oregon coast. Microseismometer wave gauge
•
readings, for example, at Newport have been shown to adequately reflect the array pressure sensor
readings obtained off Bandon during storm systems. This is because of the long fetch as compared
to the short distance between Bandon and Newport (Figure 17 b). Thompson, et. al. [1985] indicate
•
a relative uniformity in wave-generating conditions affecting the Oregon coast. During the summer
months, the lower wave conditions and more localized wind events cause measurement discrepancies
along the coast.
•
A simple correlation between wave height and beach erosion or deposition does not take into
account the effects of longshore currents and rip currents [Fox and Davis, 1978]. In general,
however, the coarser the grain size of the beach sand, the larger the changes in profile in response to
•
varying wave conditions. The storm waves not only cut back the coarser beach to a greater degree,
but also erode the beach at a much faster rate. The beaches fronting the accreted land in Bandon have
•
a high slope and and are generally composed of coarse-to medium-grained sand. Some foredune
undercutting by winter storm waves is evident. These waves are normally steep so are able to
transport sand back into deeper water. They contrast with the relatively low summer waves(see Figure
•
15), eg. swells, which bring material in from the water just offshore of the beach and deposit it just
above the water line [Earle and Bishop, 1984]. This is enhanced by the short periods (see Figure 16)
associated with them. Figure 18 shows the effect erosion could have on a narrow dune area such as
Bandon's -- an El Nino event could conceivably erode the southern segment of the foredune, while
•
•
Figure 17.
•
STORM
GENERATION
REGION
FETCH
DISTANCE
•
WIND
SMALL
WAVELETS
ROUGHENED
SEA
FULLY DEVELOPED
SEA
SWELL
SURF
•
17. (a) Wind wave growth with fetch to full-development
showing sea, swell, and surf.
(from Earle and Bishop, 1984)
•
17 February 1976
•
•
(b) Storm system of 17 February 1976 that generated
6.5 meter wave breaker heights, demonstrating the
vastness of storm systems affecting the entire
Oregon coast.
(from Komar and McKinney, 1977)
•
•
Figure 18. Action of storm waves.
(from Earle and Bishop, 1984)
Profile B — Initial attack of
storm waves
Profile A
„m,„
Storm Tide
Crest
Lowering Profile C — Storm wove attack
of foredune
Crest
Recession
M.H.W.
Profile D — After storm wave ottock,
normal wove action
•
14
•
piling sand against the south jetty to the north (the jetty reduces the current necessary to carry this sand
further along the beach). Increased sea levels also accompany the El Nino phenomenon due to the
intense low pressure coincident with them (such a rise was indicated at Newport -- Figure 19). Beach
•
profiles of the southern foredune segment have been altered as a result of wave action by as much as
two meters over one or two days on occasion; at times this has occurred at the base of the foredune.
Wave overtopping has occurred at both the north and south ends of the dune.
•
Perhaps the main danger to Bandon from storm waves is to the jetties themselves. Local
Bandon residents tell of boulders, which mark the parking lot perimeter next to the south jetty, being
moved 6-8 meters during a single storm. Erosion to the inner portion of the south jetty is evident.
This is where waves have concentrated their energy, funneled along by the lessened bottom resistance
of the deep channel entrance. Additionally, rip currents normally prevail next to jetties during the
•
winter months; they stimulate erosion of beach material protecting the jetty wall.
Onshore winds, such as Oregon's winter gales, tend to pile up water along the shore. This
•
is greatly aided by the geostrophic motion previously mentioned. Onshore winds allied to wave effects
create storm surges. A storm surge may be defined as the rise of sea level above predicted tide levels.
The magnitude of the surge depends on bottom gradient, shore slope, position of the coast relative to
the storm center, and harbor configuration, in addition to low barometric pressure and wind speed.
Tide levels can be very different from their expected values due to changes in wind and atmospheric
•
pressure.
Along the Oregon coast, storm surges are generally less than 0.5 meters and rarely exceed 2.0
meters. This, however, along with surface currents can cause flooding of the lowlands on the
•
Coquille, upriver from Bandon, as the channel narrows. Surface currents primarily follow wind
•
0
•
70
it
60
50
•
40
30
20
•
10
I
I
I
MJJA
1982
1
SON
D
J
F
M
A
M
1983
Figure 19. Monthly average sea levels, the 1982-83 values
(heavy curve) generally exceeding the mean and
maximum ranges measured in previous years.
(from Huyer, et. al., 1983)
S
•
•
15
•
direction and flow from south to north in the winter off Coos County with a component directed
toward shore. Acting in harmony, tides, winds, and currents can produce surface currents with
velocities as great as 3 or 4 knots [Beaulieu and Hughes], which may be faster than the surplus water
111
can return seaward along the bottom. Bandon, outside of a few instances of wet streets and some
basement flooding, has not been victimized by storm surge (ocean) flooding.
Tsunamis
•
Tsunamis are wave events generated by seismic activity and as such fall outside the two
principle categories of forces responsible for sea motions: tides and the weather [Murty, 1977; Loomis,
1978]. The popular description of them as 'tidal waves' is a misnomer because they lack the regularity
•
associated with tides and are not produced by the same forces [Pugh, 1987]. A somewhat more
descriptive term for tsunamis would be 'seismic sea waves,' since they are produced by a displacement
of the sea floor at the time of an earthquake or explosive volcanic eruption.
•
Tsunamis are difficult to detect at sea, having wavelengths of 150 km or more and amplitudes
of less than a meter. A tsunami traveling at a velocity of 640 kilometers per hour, which is common,
may still have periods in excess of 15 minutes. Although the arrival time of a tsunami can be
predicted accurately, the amplitude of the wave (which creates the intensity of impact) hitting a
particular length of coast is much less certain [Pugh, 1987]. This is because in shallow coastal waters
•
the wave undergoes reflection and refraction, depending on bathymetry. As a tsunami approaches
land, the shallower depths cause the wave to increase in height. The first arrival of the disturbance
may be seen as a recession of the sea; another tsunami may make its presence known by a sudden rise
•
•
16
•
in sea level, depending on the nature of the earthquake. The waves that eventually come crashing over
land are commonly 15 meters or higher.
The Pacific Ocean and its coastlines are vulnerable to tsunamis because of the seismically
active surrounding plate boundaries. The most common source of significant tsunamis reaching the
Oregon coast are earthquakes in and around Alaska. Schatz [1965] diagrammed the heights of the
tsunami arriving at various sites along the Northwest coast during the 1964 Alaska earthquake (Figure
0
20). It is seen that the first wave of a tsunami is not necessarily the largest. Run-up, the elevation
on land that a tsunami may reach, is very important; it is measured relative to prevailing sea level at
•
the time of tsunami arrival. The long-wave periods account for long run-up distance -- the major cause
of destruction from tsunamis. Run-up is a product of local bathymetry and topography, angle of
incidence, bottom slope, bottom permeability in shallow areas, and by the nature of the material
0 underlying the lowland areas [Beaulieu and Hughes, 1975]. It has been estimated that along the coast
of Coos County, run-up height is approximately equivalent to the height of the tsunami as it breaks
nearshore along the headlands where a tsunami's energy is normally focused (due to shallow water
•
funneling), and greater than the breaker height (perhaps 1.5 times as great) along the coves and
beaches. Tsunamis would tend to dissipate in Oregon estuaries, and run-up is probably less than the
local breaker height owing to the damping effects of local marshes [Beaulieu and Hughes].
The 1964 tsunami generated by the Alaska earthquake might serve as an accurate prototype
for future events, except in those coastal areas which have experienced high population growth --
•
property loss would be much greater in the future. First, that quake registered 8.3-8.6 on the Richter
Scale and involved vertical displacements of regional extent in the nearest zone of tectonic
convergence, a factor which favors the generation of destructive tsunamis [Isaaks, et. al., 1968].
Secondly, it coincided with high spring tides, and thirdly it exhibited directional propagation toward
•
•
•
•
NEAH BAY - 4.7(RR)
---1,
Y!
• LAPUSH- 5.3 ( R )
1
1
%
ROHR.-1.7(R)
\
I
TAHOLAH - 2.4 ( R )
‘ \
i WRECK CREEK-1,4.9(R 1
APPROX. LOCATION a TIME
OF CREST OF SPRING TIDE
2.3( R) FIGURES ARE HEIGHTS lift (I)
OF MAXIMUM TSUNAMI WAVE
BASED ON RISE IR OR
FALL( F 1 ABOVE TIDE LEVEL
DATA FROM SPAETH AND
BERKMAN, 1967 SCHATZ,
•1 CI .1964; HOGAN, •t 01,1964
WHIPPLE 8 LUNOY, 1964,
U.S. COAST GUARD
BREMERTON
OCEAN SHORES-9.7(R
GRAYS.HARBOR
•
WILLAPA BAY
WASHINGTON
SEAVIEW
)
ILWACO - 4.5 ( R
CAPE DISAPPOINTMENT
5.7 (R)
WAVE HEIGHT ABOVE MEAN HIGH WATER
FEET
110
I0
•
10
1i 1
a TILLAMOOK ----„, TILLAMOOK R.
■
4
•
•
0
0
OEPOE BAY
i
o
g
ts
U'
o
40 NEWPORT
•
.
YAOUINA BAY
0I
.,
I TOLEDO
•
CORVALLIS
”.SEA BAY
/
ElliGENE
,
I
WINCHESTER BAY
1
,i
,'
i
SIUSLAW R
10
1.
10
11- 1.,
[
I0
■ - ■
r I LI I
110
1
I
•
I
I
I0
L
I
110
.1 0
110
UMPOUA R.
I.
1 I ■
I
B
I0
-11 00
COOS BAY
r
COQUILLE R I
1... 11-I all ll
I
1
I ■i
II is
..
I
1°0
110
CHETCO R
r
07
I
I
I
/0
13
12
10
11
09
08
TIME IN HOURS - G.M.T. MARCH 28, 1964
OREGON
CALIFORNIA
•
•
Figure 20. Wave height above mean high water along Oregon
and Washington coast.
(from Schatz, 1965)
•
•
Epicenter of the Prince William Sound
Earthquake, March 28, 1964
Valdez
0.
• Cordova
•
Gulf of Alas a
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 21. Refraction of the tsunami.
(from Schatz, 1965)
•
17
•
the Oregon coast (Figure 21). One drawback to this prototype is it assumes that future tsunamis will
be generated in or near Japan and the Aleutian Islands, and will follow great circle paths to the Oregon
coast, thereby leading the disturbance through shallow depths where they dissipate. Schatz [1965]
states "the fact that tsunamis at least approximately follow great circle paths has probably been a life
and property saving factor to the U.S. Pacific Coast." Proximity to the source of a tsunami is also
not necessarily a criterion as to the resulting wave height.
Results from the 1964 tsunami show wave heights of 1.2 to 4.2 meters (4 to 14 feet) above
prevailing mean high water (see Figure 20) in Oregon, with downtown Bandon experiencing a mild
•
rise and no flooding. A comparable recurrence could present elevations of 5.3 meters above mean sea
level in some coastal areas, with runups to elevations of 8.0 meters (1.5 breaker height) possible in
some beach areas. This would inundate Bullards Beach State Park, and structures near Bandon's south
jetty would be subject to great damage, if not destroyed. It is not known what effect the Coquille
Bank shoals would have on a tsunami -- whether amplify or dissipate its intensity. Bandon's 'Old
Town', elevation of 3 meters above sea level, could be subject to flooding depending on the directional
•
propagation taken. Unlike some coastal towns, Bandon probably has fewer inhabitants 'downtown'
now than in 1964. It would seem that Bandon would be at great risk only with a superposition of a
tsunami and extreme high tides (highest predicted tide and highest observed storm surge); this is highly
improbable.
There is now an early-warning system that assesses whether an earthquake has the potential
•
for generating a tsunami [Komar, 1991]. It is ironic that this could pose a threat in itself, should the
local populace and tourists be tempted to flock to the beaches to see the 'monster wave' -- drownings
could occur. The public needs to be informed of the very real danger imminent; this awareness should
•
•
extend to the fact that a tsunami consists of many waves over a period of several hours.
•
18
•
Sea Level Changes -- Past. Present, and Future
Sea level has risen some 120 meters beginning about 20,000 years ago as the glaciers began
to melt. The rate of sea level rise slowed about 5000 to 7000 years ago, until the sea achieved nearly
•
its present level about 2000 years ago (Figure 22) [Kennett, 1982]. Over the last 5000 years, the
average world climate has varied only slightly, and sea-surface fluctuations have been correspondingly
small, probably no more than three feet (one meter) in terms of a global average [Milliman, 1989].
•
However, analyses of tide-gauge records indicate that the level of the sea is still rising [Hicks, et.al.,
1983]. Data derived from tide-gauge stations throughout the world indicate that the mean sea level
•
rose by about 12 centimeters in the past century (1880-1980) [Gornitz, et.al., 1982]; this equates to
1.2 mm/year.
Gornitz, et.al. attribute this rise to the thermal expansion of the upper ocean, a product of
•
global warming. They obtained the global mean sea level curve by averaging fourteen regional mean
sea level curves and weighting each region equally, excluding Scandinavia which is still undergoing
dramatic isostatic uplift (weight removal from glacial recession). The estimates are based on tide
•
gauge data from 193 stations divided among the fourteen regions; all stations had records for more
than 20 years. The present sea level change appears to be linear with temperature, and according to
•
Hansen, et.al. [1981] the thermal expansion of seawater may raise sea level 20 to 30 cm in the next
70 years if scenarios of predicted future temperatures due to greenhouse warming are correct.
Gornitz, et.al. add that if "slow ice sheet melting increases this by the same factor as in the past 100
•
years, a sea level rise of about 40 to 60 cm (1.5-2.0 feet) would occur by 2050, even without a rapid
collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet."
A National Research Council study, conducted in 1983, concluded that atmospheric carbon
•
dioxide levels would probably double by the late 21st century, causing an increase in average
•
•
•
22.
(a)
THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE PRESENT
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
•
100
17.
200
-
a.
300 -
/
/
•
—
/
/
thi
0
400
otter Curroy (1965)
THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE PRESENT
(b)
8
7
•
6
5
4
3
2
0
1
present sea level
•
•
0
10
20
30
•
•
otter
• 1
1
I
Shepard and
(1967)
I
1
Curroy
1
I'-
o.
0
40
50
Figure 22. (a) illustrates sea level change associated with
the previous advance and retreat of glaciers
(b) represents the level of the sea over the past
8000 years (the slowing period of rise)
•
•
•
(from Komar, 1991)
•
19
•
temperatures of 1.5-4.5 degrees Celsius. The report warned of global sea-level rise in the
neighborhood of 70 cm (over 2 feet) over the next 100 years, based on a warming of 3 or 4 degrees
Celsius; this would approach post-glacial (20ka-5ka period) rapidity. The rise would be more rapid
•
if the West Antarctic ice sheet should begin to disintegrate [Ryan, 1983]. This tends to collaborate
Gornitz's contention that the current growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide and trace gases predicates
that the 'sharp global warming trend' will continue.
Literature pertaining to global warming and sea level rise is not necessarily dominated by
pessimism. For example, Solow and Broadus (1989) state that there is no clear evidence yet of a
•
human-induced greenhouse warming. Milliman [1989] states "there appears to be no scientific
evidence to indicate that sea level rise has accelerated as the concentration of atmospheric carbon
dioxide has increased." Milliman argues that the number of predictive models seems to be rising at
•
far greater rates than sea level itself. His premise is that it is still not clear how quickly ocean volume
responds to a rise in atmospheric temperature, despite knowing the coefficient of thermal expansion;
"there seems to be no more basis for saying that world sea level will rise by three feet by the year
•
2100 than to say it will rise by a foot." However, Hoffman, et.al. [1983], while not ruling out rises
of under one meter by 2100, believe that a global rise of between 144 cm (4.8 feet) and 217 cm (7
•
feet) is the most likely scenario. This would be enough to overcome even Scandinavia's tectonic rise.
Notwithstanding the predictive models, it is evident that world sea level is currently rising at
a rate between 1 to 2 mm/year [Hicks, 1978; Barnett, 1984]. The effect this rise has on coastlines
•
depends on the local tectonics. In areas where the land has been subsiding, there is much concern over
sea level rise and the resulting impacts from coastal erosion. The effect on the Pacific Northwest
would be less as the sea level is generally dropping with respect to the land. This tectonic rise will
•
•
be covered more extensively in the next section.
20
The Oregon coast offers an interesting variance on relative sea levels. Until about 5000 years
ago, the rise in sea level was much more rapid than tectonic uplift along the Oregon coast. The sea
level rose 120 meters over a period of 15,000 years (20 ka to 5 ka). This has been determined by
dating methods using fossils and coral and calculates to an average increase of about 8.1 mm/yr.
Presently, the Crescent City (Calif.) to Coos Bay region is experiencing a continental uplift of about
1.7-2.7 mm/yr, as opposed to the current 1-2 mm/yr rise in sea level. This indicates an average net
rise in land level of 0.7 mm/yr, as measured by the tide gauge at Crescent City. Hicks [1978] found
a relative figure of 0.7 mm/yr with an error potential of 0.4 mm over the period 1933-1975. In
northern Oregon, Astoria exhibits a slightly lower tectonic rise of 0.0-0.5 mm/yr relative to sea level;
Hicks gives a figure of 0.1 mm/yr for Astoria with the 0.4 mm error potential over the 1925-1975
period. The central coast of Oregon, in comparison, is undergoing very slow tectonic uplift and
appears to be losing ground to the sea at > 1 mm/yr.
The lowering of sea level in reference to land combined with the lack of net sand transport in
the Bandon area bodes well for the avoidance of the scourges typically associated with sea level rise - erosion, ocean flooding, and saltwater intrusion of groundwater. A reduced water level may cause
offshore features, such as bars to emerge, causing perturbation of wave and tide systems [Carter,
1988]. Development of bedforms at the mouth of the Coquille could inhibit channel transit. The high
slope of the beaches with coarse to medium-grained sand, could be affected by future wave
undercutting due to reduced water level.
Though there seems to be no immediate cause for alarm on the south Oregon coast, the
possibility exists that sea level rise could ultimately surpass the tectonic uplift rate, particularly if the
West Antarctic ice sheet should be affected. This ice sheet appears to have been a permanent fixture
over the last 4.8 million years, surviving climates that globally were at least two degrees (Fahrenheit)
•
21
•
warmer than at present [Kerr, 1987]. Any threat to Bandon, at least over the next half century, would
likely come from the actual cause of world sea level rise -- that of the greenhouse effect. It is widely
thought that temperature increase would likely be accompanied by dramatic changes in precipitation
•
and storm patterns, such as occur at times of El Nino. The Oregon coast would enter a phase of
stronger storms and higher wave energy, depending on the climatic alteration; what form the alteration
may take is not known. Higher temperatures in themselves pose a threat, lowering humidity and
enhancing the risk of fire. The Irish gorse surrounding Bandon, including parts of the accreted land
in question, is particularly susceptible to this hazard, as evidenced by the 1936 inferno.
•
Land-Level Changes and Major Earthquake Events
•
The tectonic rise of the marine terraces has not taken place simply in a vertical direction, but
has instead been part of a rotation with the pivoting line being inland within the Willamette Valley
[Reilinger and Adams, 1982; Adams, 1984; Kelsey, 1990]. The further west from the pivot line --
•
the closer to the coast -- the more rapid the rate of uplift. Analyses of repeated surveys north-south
along the Oregon coast demonstrate that the smallest rates of uplift are occurring along the central
•
coast between Newport and Tillamook, with progressively higher rates further south to as far as
Bandon and on into California, and to the north toward Astoria [Vincent, 1989].
Vincent's analysis of the geodetic surveys undertaken along the length of the Oregon coast in
•
1931 and 1988 indicates that the central portion of the coast is actually losing over 1 mm/yr relative
to sea level. Figure 23 graphs the data, using Crescent City as a benchmark. Crescent City, itself,
is shown to be tectonically rising at an average rate of 0.7 mm/yr relative to sea level over the 57-year
span. Data in the Bandon area are very similar to Crescent City, while Astoria's net tectonic increase
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
200
3 >-
100
LL
73
M 0
m
•
•
• _
%b
Z
0 cc)
—
I–
<
co
a,
•
_
•
••
_
•
C
O
1:7
O
0
0
W
-300
••
•• • ••
0.
•
•
z- - 2 -I
W
••i —
441.
• •ip
:tepo
•
• $1° •• •
- I
o
44
45
oo •
-1 0
-3 W
-4
-5
43
co
w
0 --I J E
- 2 1w E
41,4,0
••
data from Vincent (1989)
42
W>
0
••
-100
–I -200
3
2
0
m
–1
46
LATITUDE
Figure 23. Geodetic survey data, based on 1931 and 1988 findings,
indicating relative rise in sea level, and to Crescent
City, of locales on the Oregon coast.
(from Vincent, 1989; K omar, 1991)
-
-2
w - -3
I–< --4
a
r‘
•
22
•
is a lower 0.1 mm/yr [Hicks, 1978]. Vincent's data corresponds very closely to that of Hicks, though
Hicks gives no information for the central coast. When the central coast is compared to the Bandon
area in Figure 23, Newport is losing elevation (relative to Bandon) by 2 mm/yr. This means that any
•
nonrelative tectonic rise on the central coast is likely less than 0.5 mm/yr if it exists at all. Weldon
[1991] indicates that varying elastic strain accumulations of the earth's crust may account for these
differences. This accumulation may be due to locking of the Cascadia subduction zone, with varying
•
focal points along the coast.
The uplift along the coast measured during historic times (that is, the last 100 years) is
•
interpreted as resulting from the accumulation of strain within the coastal rocks due to subduction of
the oceanic Juan de Fuca plate beneath the continent. Subduction zones have spawned many powerful
earthquakes, including those in Chile (1960) and Alaska (1964) [Monastersky, 1990]. Two plates may
•
lock together, building up strain for hundreds of years until a sudden slip occurs, generating a massive
quake (Figure 24 a&b). Though seismometers in the Cascadia region have not detected any tremors
originating from the interface between the Juan de Fuca and North American plates, this may only
•
indicate that the plates are currently locked and not safely gliding past one another.
The Northwest coast is anomalous in the respect that there have been no historic earthquakes
•
which can be attributed to plate subduction (Figure 25). Tom Yelin [1991] of the U.S. Geological
Survey, mentioned a large quake in 1873 originating in the Mendocino Fault zone -- not the subduction
zone -- which may have registered an 8.0 (Richter Scale) in Port Orford; this extreme intensity seems
•
unlikely, since no record is made of it in the Bandon history for 1873, just 25 miles north of Port
Orford. Coos Bay evidently received a jolt of approximately 4.8 intensity in 1922, also a result of the
Mendocino Fault. Beaulieu and Hughes [1975] mention a moderate-intensity quake of about 4.3 in
•
North Bend in 1938, with an epicenter a short distance off the coast of Douglas County -- minimal
•
24.
(a)
BRITISH
COLUMBIA
A
•
A
A
4'
•
qt.
g
k
e
45•
1
6.4.% 4.,
WASHINGTON
A
AA
\r
*
JUAN DE •
►
1,,
FUCA PLATE 0,
e
►
04
ECtu
AO
4'
OREGON
A .
•
Kimmel.
"40'
C3
PACIFIC
PLATE
•
3
41C
Fracture 2
n°0::: 44.:ded::
I CC
z
II
CALIFORNIA 1: CI
41'
'N,
90'
Figure 24.(a) indicates the approximate location of the
subduction' zone (trench axis)
•
•
•
(b)
Oceanic Plate
•
1 interaelamic
Strain Accumulation
2 CoselsmIc
Strain Release
Continental Plate
"•*.
.
(b) diagram of vertical coastal tectonics
associated with (1) coupled strain
accumulation and (2) coseismic shear
dislocation between a subducting
oceanic plate and an overriding
continental plate.
•
(from Darienzo and Peterson, 1990)
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
4
•
•
•
44
4
44.
•
•
•
•
•
4
•
45
•
••
••
•
•• • • •
.
...
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •♦ •
•
Cope
Mendocino
•
160•
•
7.0 Magnitude
•
6.0 —
6.9 Magnitude
•
5.0 —
Magnitude
•
4.0 — 4.9 Magnitude
sir
I V
.7
Relative fault movement
Direction of spreading at ridge
Approximate base of Continental Slope
0
k
300
Figure 25. Past seismic activity in the Pacific Northwest; note
lack of epicenters near subduction zone.
(from Heaton and Hartzell, 1987)
•
23
•
coverage was give in the local papers; this event may have been associated with the subduction zone,
but very little reference to it has ever been made. The giant jolt of a subduction zone earthquake, if
they do indeed occur, has not happened in the Northwest for about 300 years. Atwater [1987] had
•
said that subsidence events recur about 600 years apart on average (ranging from 300 to > 1000
years). Using the 300-1000 year interval, and assuming the plates are currently locked, the present
strain cycle could be anywhere from 30% to nearly 100% complete. Peterson [1991] mentions a plate
•
convergence rate of 3.5 cm/yr and a seismic/total slip ratio of 1:1, meaning that a severe subsidence
would happen all at once, not over a period of gradual shocks. In other words, when the built-up
•
strain from the locked plates is released, the coast will suddenly drop down. Evidence for this exists
from the marine terraces.
The Juan de Fuca ridge is situated to the west of the subduction zone (see Figure 25). Plate
•
material from this spreading center, over millions of years, has been accreted to the North American
plate as subduction of the oceanic plate occurs, resulting in Oregon being pushed upward and the
coastline slowly growing westward. At the same time, the level of the sea has gone up and down to
•
cycles of growth and melting of continental glaciers. A series of marine terraces has resulted from
the process, with the older terraces having the highest elevation. The lower-most marine terraces have
•
been reliably dated, as previously mentioned; consequently, earlier stands of sea levels can be
determined for those terraces placed at 105,000 and 125,000 years before the present.
Given the fact that global sea level is rising at approximately 1.5 mm/yr and that the Crescent
City figures, arrived at by both Hicks and Vincent, show net tectonic uplift of 0.7 mm/yr, we may
assume that Bandon is being tectonically raised by about 2.2 mm/yr. This figure should be constant
(barring deformation folds) over hundreds of thousands of years; the figure discounts seismic reversals
(subsidence). It is based on the continuous movement of the spreading ridge and simultaneous plate
•
24
subduction. This uplift rate is actually conservative when compared to recent estimates as high as 3
mm/yr. Whisky Run terrace at Bandon has been dated at about 83,000 years. With an uplift rate of
2.2 mm/yr, that terrace should then be 163 meters above sea level (based on a high sea level stand of
•
about 20 m below present at 83 ka) instead of the 25-30 meters it is actually at. The implication is
that the land must periodically drop down, either gradually or cataclysmically (the 'all-at-once' stress
release), possibly by as much as 2 meters.
•
Atwater [1987] supports this reasoning of apparently conflicting tectonic rates/ terrace ages.
The uplift measured at tide gauges and bench marks -- on marine terraces -- (2 to 3 mm per year
average over the last 50 years for westernmost Washington) is much faster than that inferred from
Pleistocene marine terraces (<0.5 mm/yr average during the past 100,000 years) [LaJoie, 1986]. But
these rates need not conflict if, as part of the cyclic-related deformation [Thatcher, 1984], coseismic
•
subsidence has nearly negated cumulative interseismic uplift (of which tide-gauge and bench-mark
uplift data would be a modern sample). Atwater calculates a rapid tectonic subsidence of 0.5 to 2.0
meters for each occasion, based on his evidence that sections of the Washington coast have subsided
•
as many as six times over the last 7000 years. (While this seems to argue against shorter subsidence
intervals, there may have been several other occurrences over this span which have not left traces, or
have yet to be discovered.) This, along with terrace erosion from waves, streams, rain, and wind, and
the fact that uplift hasn't occurred in an entirely vertical direction, should allow for the difference
between predicted and actual marine terrace levels.
•
Recent evidence suggests the temporary locking of the plates. Since no written records exist
for the past 150-200 years to indicate a subduction zone earthquake in Washington or Oregon of
magnitude > 7.5, Atwater began his search for material evidence in estuarine marsh sediments. He
•
•
found muds deposited directly on top of soil layers, suggesting that the lowland areas suddenly dropped
•
25
below the high-tide level and were quickly covered by mud (an indication of coseismic subsidence);
a slower subsidence would have been seen as a gradual transition between the soil layers and the
overlying mud. Atwater also describes a thin sheet of sand packed between the soil and mud layers
•
in some of the subsided sediments. He believes this can be explained only by a series of enormous,
quake-generated waves (tsunamis) washing over a subsided section of coastline and depositing the sand
which quickly became submerged in mud. Tsunami evidence is present in at least three of the six time
•
periods investigated. Atwater's studies are interpreted as positive evidence for active subduction
tectonics (including coseismic subsidence) along the central Cascadia margin -- really the first such
evidence.
Darienzo and Peterson [1990] reported on saltmarsh subsurface deposits on the northern
Oregon coast, which also reveal six events of marsh buried in the last several thousand years. Their
findings correlate closely with Atwater's -- recurrence intervals between subsidence events range from
possibly less than 300 years to at least 1000 years, with the last event 300-400 years before present.
The alteration of coastal uplift and abrupt coastal subsidence, together with tsunami deposition,
•
provides a potentially unique record of interplate paleoseismicity in strongly coupled subduction zones.
Using a reverse approach to the tectonic uplift/seismic subsidence theme, Darienzo and Peterson write
•
that the four youngest subsidence events should total 4-5 meters in vertical displacement (in the
Netarts, Oregon area). The measured distance is only 2.3 m, accounting for just one-half of the
expected displacement from abrupt subsidence events. They say that much of this section shortening
•
(on the order of at least 0.5 m per event) must be taken up by tectonic uplift between successive
subsidence events. A minimum uplift rate of 1.4 mm/yr was calculated for the most recent
interseismic period. Although this conflicts with the < 0.5 mm/yr tectonic uplift determined for the
•
•
central coast, the rate is possibly the result of local folding (deformation) which may actually play a
•
26
•
role in the formation of bay areas such as Netarts. In these areas it is thought that offshore
deformation may have been extrapolated to shore.
•
Deformation occurrences:
We have mentioned tectonic uplift and the very real evidence of sudden land subsidence
accompanied by tsunamis in the Northwest. As seen, different sections of Oregon's coast are uplifting
•
or possibly even subsiding (relative to sea level rise) to varying degrees. As stated by Weldon [1991],
elastic strain accumulation may account for the difference. Peterson [1991] states that we see only
•
about 10 % of the displacement in terraces that may be expected due to synclinic non-elastic
deformation. Deformation is occurring on the south and south-central Oregon coast encompassing the
Bandon area. Earthquakes not only leave records of sudden land subsidence in estuaries and beaches
•
but are shown to be a recurring process by the deformation of marine terraces.
Leveling surveys have been used to monitor crustal deformation in seismically active regions
of the world. Relative elevation changes or regional tilt signals can be an indication of elastic strain
•
accumulation. This has been summarized with respect to Vincent's [1989] work. To briefly
synopsize, 1987-88 data compared to a 1930-33 survey revealed a pronounced increase in downward
•
tilt toward the Newport-Tillamook (about 100 km long) region with time, from both
Crescent City on the south and Astoria on the north (see Figure 23). Downward tilt from Coquille
city (just east of Bandon) to Newport is quite steep, considering Coquille is essentially on the same
•
plane as Crescent City. A point 100 km north of Coquille (to the south of Newport) is dropping down
(relative to Coquille) at a rate of roughtly 1.7 mm/yr. Similarly, a point 100 km south of Astoria
(vicinity of Tillamook) is moving downward (relative to Astoria) at a rate of about 2.4 mm/yr
•
•
[Vincent].
27
Three east-west lines were also resurveyed, but many of the benchmarks (Willamette Valley
region) used in earlier surveys along these three east-west leveling routes are missing. The east-west
signals are not demonstrative of tilting but suggest a down-to-the-east tilt (Figure 26); the Newport
to Albany east-west line does show less probability of tilt than do the lines north and south of it. This
could indicate a pivoting point for uplift activity resides in the central Willamette Valley. Reilinger
and Adams [1982] seemed much more certain than Vincent concerning east-west leveling lines -- they
"indicate landward tilting of the coastal ranges over the past 10 to 50 years and give tilt rates and
directions in agreement with those from tide gauge analysis, tilted marine terraces, and deformed
sedimentary strata;" the Bandon-Coquille profile was consistent with this.
The north-south leveling surveys indicate that long-wavelength, north-south deformation is
occurring along the Oregon coast. Deformation across a plate boundary like the Cascadia subduction
zone can be divided into three different modes and time scales: interseismic, coseismic, and permanent
[Vincent, 1989]. In a typical seismic cycle, interseismic deformation is the accumulation of both
permanent and temporary (elastic) strain, whereby most of the elastic portion of the strain is recovered
(released) in one or more large earthquakes, producing coseismic deformation. What strain is not
recovered in coseismic deformation is preserved as permanent deformation. Vincent feels that the
north-south leveling signals can be interpreted as interseismic deformation. The fact that there has
been no interplate seismicity, with the possible exception of that moderate 1938 quake off Douglas
County, suggests that significant elastic strain is accumulating and large coseismic deformation can be
expected for coastal Oregon. The Newport-Tillamook area is experiencing less uplift than areas to the
north and south which would be relatively closer to a locked zone.
Repeated geodetic measurements currently provide the only reliable means to determine
interseismic (temporary) strain accumulation in seismic regions of the world [Vincent, 1989]. Relative
.10
I
•
•
•
300
300
200 E
•
•
(1917.1931)
200 -
1
(a)
•
(b)
1
100 -
100 •
0
•
0
'71
•
-100 -
•
•
•
• ••
•
-100 -
-200
•
Run Dist. (kin)
•
a
0
a
600 SOO 400
300 200 100 0
20
-
-
40
60
60
100
• • • •
•
•
•
•
20
0
-
(1941.1930)
0
r-
40
60
••s•
Run Dist. (kin)
•
O
•
V
•
•
600 500 400
300
200 100 0020
40
100
60
60
60
100
Figure 26. Evidence of down-to-the-east tilt emanating (in this example) from southern
Oregon.
(from Vincent, 1989)
•
28
vertical movements or tilt can be an indication of accumulating elastic strain. Adams [1984] suggested
that the eastward (landward) tilt of the terraces at Cape Arago, just north of Bandon, is largely due
to progressive tightening of the underlying South Slough syncline. In light of the uncertainty
•
surrounding the response of the Cascadia forearc to subduction, the distinction between a deformation
event restricted to a few folds near Cape Arago and a more regional deformation event that includes
•
local folds is significant [Mclnelly and Kelsey, 1990]. It is not known whether the South Slough
syncline is an example of coseismic synclinic growth [Goldfinger, 1991]. Vincent argues that the high
calculated tilt rates of smaller-wavelength (eg. 5 km long) structures, such as the South Slough
•
syncline, are mainly due to flexural slip on bedding planes and not to broad-scale uplift of the marine
terraces as Adams [1984] claimed. Tilt rates from leveling surveys were not typical of longerwavelength marine terrace deformation along the coast. Adams used the rates to argue for subduction
•
continuation beneath Oregon and Washington despite the lack of shallow thrust earthquakes.
Studies of marine terrace elevations reveal that tectonic warping and faulting can have a
considerable effect on the level at a specific location [Kelsey, 1990]. In the case of landward tilted
•
terraces, such as those in Oregon, the height of the shoreline angle, relative to the rest of the wave-cut
platform, may have been reduced by landward tilt [Muhs, et.al., 1990]. The terrace platform at Cape
•
Blanco, just south of Bandon, reportedly has the greatest uplift rate of any marine platform on the
Oregon coast [West and McCrumb, 1988]. Kelsey believes that a storm berm here has been
tectonically uplifted at an average rate of 6-10 mm/yr over the past 2000 years. The deformation at
•
Cape Blanco is an on-land expression of a fold belt that trends north-northwest on the continental shelf
of Oregon. It is possible that the berm uplift occurs coseismically with earthquake events that tighten
the fold belt on the continental shelf offshore. Folding of the marine terraces at Cape Arago, 55 km
•
to the north, and tilting of the oldest two marine terraces at Cape Blanco are both consistent with the
•
29
•
deformation trend in the fold belt [Kelsey]. It appears that if stress is growing along the coast of
Oregon, Cape Blanco could be the north-south compression axis.
In the case of the southern Oregon coast, the variability in uplift rates probably reflects local
•
structures in the overriding plate, and the rate of uplift cannot be used as a simple index of the
potential for great earthquakes along the southern Cascadia subduction zone [Muhs, et.al., 1990].
Muhs, et. al. note uplift rates (relative to sea level rise) of 0.45-1.05 mm/yr for Coquille Point at
Bandon compared to the faster 0.81-1.49 mm/yr for Cape Blanco. At Cape Arago maximum rates
of uplift for wave-cut platforms range from 0.5-0.8 mm/yr. The uplift rate between Cape Arago and
•
Cape Blanco has produced the most extensive and best preserved marine terraces on the southern
Oregon coast (see Figure 12 & Table). Uplift rates derived from those terraces show little
relationship to the style of plate convergence, although information can be gained about deformation
•
in the overriding plate.
The cause of the deformations in the Cape Blanco and Cape Arago areas is still a subject of
conjecture. Mclnelly and Kelsey [1990], for example, state that though the late Quaternary folds at
•
Cape Arago need not develop during great subduction-related earthquakes, the folds do not preclude
the possibility of great earthquakes whose deformation would include the Cape Arago portion of the
•
Cascadia subduction zone. Historically, the most notable strain pattern during great subduction
earthquakes has been regional vertical movement. Both Cape Arago and Cape Blanco exhibit wave-cut
platforms with both landward and seaward tilt (east-west trending). At Bandon, wave-cut platforms
•
south of the Coquille River generally dip west, except the Whisky Run platform at Coquille Point
where it is slightly back-tilted. The abrupt gain in elevation at Coquille Point is accompanied by a
distinctive change in platform tilt from southwest to west [Mclnelly and Kelsey].
•
•
•
30
•
The Cascadia subduction zone seems most similar to subduction zones in southern Chile,
southwestern Japan, and Colombia where comparably young oceanic lithosphere is also subducting
[Heaton and Hartzell, 1987]. Very large subduction earthquakes, of 8.0-9.5 magnitude, have occurred
•
along all those zones. Despite evidence to the contrary (eg. Atwater; Darienzo and Peterson),
the observed strain in south coastal Oregon lacks the regional vertical uplift and uniform landward tilt
of the platforms, such as southwest Japan exhibits, which is normally associated with the great
subduction-related earthquakes the world is familiar with. For example, University of Washington
seismologist Robert Crosson thinks that pre-historic earthquakes probably did cause the submergence
•
features found along the coast, but thinks they may have been moderate offshore quakes instead of
huge subduction shocks [Monastersky, 1990]. Other disagreements include the strength (and,
therefore, ability) of the portions of the interface to build up enough strain for a huge earthquake. A
•
few fundamental questions remain unresolved: (1) is the Cascadia subduction zone locked or unlocked?
-- most recent evidence suggests the former (otherwise the subduction zone could be so hot that slip
along this boundary is occurring as aseismic creep); (2) can large ( > 8.0 Richter) subduction
•
earthquakes occur here? -- Heaton and Hartzell suggest that, if the zone is locked, an enormous
earthquake (c. 9.0 Richter) would be necessary to fill the gap caused by the stress of strain energy
•
over the 1200-km Cascadia subduction zone; (3) does a high rate of uplift indicate increased potential
for strong earthquake intensity? -- it is still uncertain whether the subduction causing the deformation
in the areas of the greatest uplift is steady (called episodic or interseismic), aseismic (also called
•
nonseismic, meaning weakly coupled if at all), or seismic (also called coseismic); because of this,
earthquake intensity in these areas need not necessarily be more severe than on other parts of the coast
(witness the evidence for destruction wrought in the Netarts area, in the region of lowest tectonic rise
•
•
on the Oregon coast).
•
31
•
Whatever the outcome may be, even a moderate quake could issue a tsunami of damaging
proportions depending on its propagation. Lowland areas may have as little as 10 minutes warning
should a tsunami occur, the subduction zone lying only about 100 km from most of the Oregon coast.
•
Erosion and Instabilities
•
The lowland:
•
This area occupies accreted land of approximately 3 meters elevation adjacent to the south jetty
and approximately 1.0 km west of the area considered 'Old Town Bandon' (see Figure 3). This land
extends in a south-southwest direction from the jetty for approximately 0.5 km to the bluff previously
•
alluded to; the average width of 0.3 km includes a small freshwater pond.
According to Bennett [1895], in 1861 this piece of land was partly overgrown with brush. The
rest was grazing land which included a "small lake" which must have been wiped out by the 1861
•
channel alteration; it is not evident in 1876 (see Figure 5) nor 1878 channel diagrams. It is possible
that, after the initiation of jetty construction in the 1880s, resulting accretion occurred as a beach
•
ridge, trapping a low area and forming a pond (possibly in the same area as Bennett's lake); this is
evident in Figures 6 and 7. While the pond subsequently disappeared from the jetty area diagrams,
possibly due to excessive accretion (see Figure 10) or dredging (see Figure 11), it is present today
•
(in a marsh setting) in much its former locale. The presence of the pond indicates that there has been
continued beach buildup since the completion of the main channel in 1933. Bird [1985] claims that
there has been beach progradation on both sides of the jetties.
•
•
Today the lowland is well-vegetated and has the appearance of a deflation plain or river
•
32
•
floodplain (Figure 27). Bennett refers to this very area as the location of the breach that occurred as
a result of two severe storms in 1861 -- "a channel was forced through this piece of land ... a spit was
formed which ran south toward the bluff and through flowed the river (the Coquille) and the ebb flow
•
of the tide." Bennett makes no mention of the presence of dunes or indicates the width of the beach
at that time.
Fronting the property on its seaward side is a foredune well-vegetated with beach grass, with
•
an average height of 3 meters as measured from its base (Figure 28); the height decreases to only
about 2 meters toward the southern end (Figure 29). Ternyik [1990] mentions that the foredune is
classified as an active foredune due to continuing aeolian (wind-driven) sand deposits from the ocean
beach. He states that the crest and backslope has a mixed vegetative cover of plant species and is
completely stable from effects of wind erosion. The foredune, though, is only about 20-35 meters
•
wide at its base with its mid-section only 10-15 meters in width; the foredune crest is a mere 4 meters
across. Komar [personal communication, 1990] believes that this foredune is vulnerable to wave
erosion and breaching.
•
Wave erosion can be much more severe than that of the wind. Accordingly, the shoreline and
dunes were surveyed and profiled as part of this study. The survey was conducted on March 28,
•
1991, by the author, Paul Komar, and Shuyer-Ming Shih. The data gathered are presented in
Appendix II, which contains:
(A) all survey data, including a profile taken at the low-sloping beach below the bluff at
•
Coquille Point.
(B) diagram of all transects made on and across the dunes at Bandon Beach (scale in feet).
(C) a three-dimensional block diagram of the dune ridge.
•
•
(D) east-west transect profiles of the ridge at all Bandon Beach locations.
•
■
•
•
•
•
•
•
■
•
Figure 27. 1975 air photo of Bandon, showing the lowland as well
as the level marine terrace.
(from Corps of Engineers, 1975)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 28. The dune ridge backing the beach on the accreted lands.
(Upper photo) looking north toward the jetties.
(Lower photo) looking south toward the terrace bluff.
( from P. Komar, 1991)
Dune elevation at Bandon
30
20
10
0
-500
SOUTH
-250
0
250
Longshore distance ( f t )
Figure 29. Longshore dune ridge profile.
(from Komar, 1991)
500
750
NORTH
•
33
•
Based on the survey, the toe of the foredune (Figure 30) generally has an elevation of 5.2-5.7
meters above mean sea level. The beach slope is calculated by dividing the difference in height
encountered along the transect by the linear distance covered. The resulting number is the tangent of
•
the beach slope angle. Bandon Beach has a general slope of 4-4.5 degrees, which is considered high.
Figure 30 is a cross-profile of the tidal range versus the dune elevation. Mean sea level is
considered to be 4.11 feet (Figure 31), or 1.26 meters (with respect to mean lower low water); on this
•
graph mean sea level equates to 0.0. Therefore, the highest measured tide, normally given as 12.63
feet, is shown as 8.52 feet -- or 2.6 meters above mean sea level. Extreme high tide is the sum of
the highest predicted tide and the highest recorded storm surge, or 14.6 feet. This would be equivalent
•
to 10.5 feet (3.2 meters) on the graph. It may readily be seen that there is a difference of 3.0 meters
(ave. 5.6 - 2.6) between the dune toe and high tide. This small difference can be easily covered by
•
wave action based on the following calculations:
Significant wave heights (Hs) of 3 meters -- a conservative average figure over the winter
season (see Figure 15) -- produce a wave setup of 51.0 cm [3.0 x 0.17 Hs factor (Guza and Thornton,
•
1981)]. Bandon Beach at high tide exhibits a width of only 10-15 meters, and a slope ratio of 1:13
(based on 4.0-4.5 degrees). A wave setup of 51 cm on a 1:13 beach slope would move the water line
6.6 meters (51 cm x 13) landward. Kobayashi, et.al. [1991] demonstrated that significant runup (Rs) -
•
-the average of the highest one-third runup heights -- should be on the order of 2 x Hs based on a
steep 1:3 slope (about 18 degrees). This would result in a total water movement of 57.2 meters (6.6
•
meters x 2 x 13/3 for the slope variance used by Kobayashi) for Bandon Beach. There is an actual
increase of runup elevation, as determined by these figures, of 4.4 meters (57.2 meters divided by 13)
calculated as if the beach had continued past the dune line.
•
•
•
•
8
1
•
•
•
•
1
•
•
•
•
I
1
I
I
BANDON,
foredune
•
_
OREGON
5:I vertical exaggeration
6
dune toe
5.6m elevation
E
beach
tan p = 0.077
0
2
backshore
ave. slope =2.7°
R = 4.4°
w 4
0
projected tide plus storm surge
z0
*4
local hummock
highest measured tide
2.6m
meters
2
5
w
no exaggeration
0
10
meters
-10
0
40
WEST
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
meters
Figure 30. Profile (5 to 1 vertical exaggeration) across the beach and
dune ridge, approximately at midway point of accreted land area.
(from Komar, 1991)
-50
EAST
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•••••••■•••■■•••••■•■••■•■■•••■•■•••■••••••
TIDAL ELEIATIONS 03 THE ollEcoN COAST
STATE OF OREGON
DIVISION OF STATE LANDS
let Sew./ .etisat
SOM.
chwa orate
Tido
SinicrLf
lel
sit.Lvt
t• It • me Tint c.a. - The hneust penseesed I.J. that tan awl y 1/.111
11,1 1k. SUM . 11 Ohl,
hojlto11 IN yekt WI tide and the lip/NM tecontal sw
swim wile. Such in ...en veld
sv
be •atattlett so have a %any lone tattat 'Ince owervel. In some location,, Ihe .thick la
a rain induced !reshot TIM aka be taken under Catttrast 'WM. The ttatierna high
tide level it vied by eneineess lot the design of harbor tliueluies.
12.63 Highest Measured Tide ■ The bigot tide actually observed on the tide staff.
/10.3 Highest Predicted Tide -. Niihau tide predicted by the Tide Tables.
0.30 Mean Higher High Water - The overage height of the higher high tides ohserved
over a specific Aim interval. The Intervals are related to the moon's many cycles
which range born 20 days to 18.0 years. The time length chnsen depends upon the
refinement required. The datum plane of MIIHW is used on National Ocean Survey
charts to ',IMMO rocks awash and navigational clearances.
• •
7.62 Man High Water - The average of el observed high tides. The average Is of both
the higher high and of the lower high tide recorded each day over a specific time
period. The datum of MHW is the boundary between upland and tideland. It k used
on navigational charts to reference topographical feature,.
4.50 Mean Tide Level - Also called half4lds level. A level midway between mean high
water and mean low water. The difference between mean tide level and local mean
sea level reflects lho asymmetry between local high and low tides.
•
/ 4.61 Lacs, Mean Sea Level -. The average height of the water surface for all stages of the
tide at a particular observation point. The level Is usually determined from hourly
height readings.
4.11 Mean Sea Level - A datum based upon observations taken over s number of years
al various tide stations along the west coast of the United States and Canada. It it
officially known as the Sea Level Datum of 1020, 1047 adj. and is 11w most
common datum used by engineers. MSL is the ',kroner for eievtirons on U.S.
Geolog ical Survey Chiendrangles. The difference between AtS1. and Local hISI.
reflects numerous factors 'angina from the 'acetic:on of the lids staff within en
estuary to 'lobe, weather patterns.
1.54 Mean Low Water - The average of all observed law tides. The average is of both lb:
lower low end of the higher low tides recorded each day over a specific time period.
The datum of MI.W it the boundary between tideland end submerged land.
of the lower low tides observed over
e X specific time Interval. The datum plane is used on Patine coast nautical charts to
reference soundings. , .
.
0.00 Mean Lewer Low Water - The average height
-4.9 Lowest Predicted rats — The lowest tide predicted by the Tide Tables.
Note: Specific "Watkins ars based on six years of side observations et she Oregon State University
Marine Science Center Dock on Yequena Soy. Values have ban reduced by the National Ocean
Surve y (formerly the Coast and G eodesic Sunrey ).Tha elevations differ from estuary to estuary
end horn different points within an estuary. The exception Is MLLW which is aero by definition.
- 3.14 Lowest Measured Tide .. The lowell tide actually observed on the tide staff.
- 3.5 Litre me Low Tide .- The lowest estimated tide that can occur. Used by
navigational and harbor In
Figure 31. Definition of tidal elevations on the Oregon coast.
(from Division of State Lands)
•
34
Runup height is certainly dependent on a range of factors, including wave height, wave period,
wave form, angle of wave approach, beach slope, beach roughness, water depth at the beach toe, and
inshore wave interference [Carter, 1988]. However, our Hs of 3.0 meters is a lower than average
daily figure during much of the winter season (see Figure 15) as measured by the array off the
Coquille. It is not difficult to see why wave-undercutting is observable at some points along the
foredune. Additionally, two or three locations have become susceptible to pedestrian traffic (Figure
32) with an actual breach at one location near the southern end. Indeed, local residents have observed
wave 'overtopping' at both ends of the foredune expanse. This is to be expected considering daily
significant wave heights of > 4.0 meters are common during winter. Certainly a well-directed severe
storm, let alone a tsunami, could leave the lowland behind the dune temporarily flooded. Significant
wave heights in excess of 4 meters could, at high tide, be sufficient to cause washing over at the
highest part of the dune. Most months have maximum Hs numbers > 4, with 6 meters not
uncommon.
Palmer [1990] expressed concern primarily for the prospects of future sea level rise and
earthquakes, but there is a more frequent event which has caused chaos on the shores of Oregon in
the past. This is El Nino which during 1982-83 caused major storm damage along Alsea Spit on the
central coast. Not only did this exceptionally strong event raise sea level but it caused sand erosion
from the south end of beach segments. While Alsea Spit is recovering, Netarts Spit to the north is still
suffering from that disequilibrium [Komar, 1986; Komar, et.al., 1989]. The El Nino probably built
the beach out in front of the study area, because of the jetty, so had little impact there. An intact jetty
should keep Bandon's beach well-nourished, but a future El Nino's exceptionally low atmospheric
pressures and high storm winds could produce winter sea levels as much as 35 cm above their normal
level, as documented at Newport by Huyer, et.al. [1983] (see Figure 19). Although a breach as
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 32. Examples of gaps in the dune ridge produced by pedestrians.
(Upper) near the north end of the ridge.
(Lower) near the south end of the ridge.
(from P. Komar, 1991)
•
35
•
occurred in 1861 seems unlikely, ocean flooding property losses could be great following severe dune
undercutting. It is evident that Bandon Beach's mean sea level width of 25-30 meters, despite its
relatively high slope, can be easily covered by wave runup during typical (non-El Nino) storms at high
•
tides, placing the foredune in jeopardy.
The bluff:
•
Trending to the southwest of the lowland lies the bluff (marine terrace), with Coquille Point
being its most westerly extension overlooking the Pacific; it is composed of a jumble of sandstone,
•
volcanics, and metamorphic rocks such as greenstones. Palmer [1990] believes that, because of
ongoing normal erosion, landsliding, and unusual future events including earthquakes and global
warming, there are no sites existing without significant risks to development; he states that earthquakes
•
and global warming intensify the landslide risk.
The bluff is relatively steep, at a 40-60 degree angle. While vegetation covers all but solid
rock outcroppings, the high precipitation of the south Oregon coast (c. 150 cm/yr) ensures that a great
•
deal of water permeates the terrace sands which compose the upper 10-50 feet of the bluff. Erosion
is directed along structural weakness such as shear zones, faults, and zones of relatively soft bedrock.
•
Where the underlying bedrock has been subjected to intense weathering, a mantle of "flowing black
organic clayey goo" is formed [Palmer, 1990] surrounding large boulder-like masses of bedrock; this
is evident even in the dry season. The majority of the bluff area appears to be mantled by this type
•
of saturated surface, with the least steep areas (and most prone to development) probably having the
weakest bedrock. Numerous springs at the base of the bluff attest to groundwater infiltration. The
groundwater flows onto the beach undercutting the base of the bluff as it does so.
•
36
While indications are that the bluff is inherently unstable, those areas which are well-vegetated
(Figure 33 a&b) have exhibited little retreat; Beaulieu and Hughes [1975] mention no change in some
local areas over the last 100 years. There is also little evidence of direct wave attack at the base of
•
the bluff. Basically, instability is indicated by the absence of undisturbed rock material in exposures
between the resistant boulder masses, in addition to the distribution of springs. It is likely that removal
of the bluff vegetation, eg. attempts at development, would result in significant landsliding. This is
•
seen in places such as the Bandon Viewpoint area.
The beach is very wide, with a gentle slope at the foot of the bluff (see Figure 33 a&b), just
•
on the other side of Coquille Point from Bandon Beach. Survey figures offer a width of nearly 100
meters at mean sea level, with a slope of only 1.7 degrees (about 1:34). The base of the bluff shows
little, if any, sign of wave action; offshore shoals and sea stacks act as a breakwater in some locations
•
and parts of the base are heavily protected by woody debris (Figure 34). Yet, the face of the bluff
gives the impression of past wave-undercutting, with only minor mass movement since (Figure 35).
It is evident that Table Rock and other sea stacks, just offshore, were once part of this marine terrace.
•
At some distant time erosion separated these land masses. There apparently has been no significant
erosion over the past 110 years at the base of the bluff, at least since the Coquille Channel was
•
rerouted, and for a much longer period than Bandon's recorded history concerning the bluff face. This
implies that a land subsidence event initiated past erosional processes, with the land being subsequently
uplifted. Such a recurrence could effectively cause the disappearance of the low beach here; the beach
•
at high tide is about 60 meters wide, with an elevation of about 1.7 meters at the bluff base. A
subsidence event in excess of 1.7 meters would extinguish the beach at high tide; great wave and
surface current erosion would result. In addition, serious slumping of the bluff could result, further
•
•
incurring erosion.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 33. The well-vegetated Bandon bluff area exhibits
little erosion.
(Beaulieu and Hughes, 1975)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 34. Woody debris provides bluff base with protection
from wave action.
(from P. Komar, 1991)
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 35. The ocean beach and bluff eroded into the marine
terrace between Coquille Point and Grave Point
(see Fig. 2).
(from P. Komar, 1991)
•
37
•
CONCLUSION
•
It is evident from the low physical setting of the accreted land that it is subject to winter storm
waves. The narrow width of the dunes allows occasional wave 'overtopping' particularly toward the
southern reaches of the foredune; wave data combined with the shore profile indicates that the entire
•
dune could be washed over when storms are combined with higher tides. The southern end of the
dune seems to be more susceptible to changes -- away from the sand blockade provided by the south
•
jetty.
If the dunes are to remain stable, it is paramount that the jetty remains intact; otherwise an El
Nino-type situation may cause a breach of the land near the bluff such as occurred in 1861 (El Ninos
•
currently may only be partially predicted through satellite observance of Kelvin waves emanating from
the equatorial regions of southeast Asia). Part of the dune currently appears to be cut through in this
area; other parts exhibit wave-undercutting, which could lead to future dune loss and probable
•
flooding. The survey encompassing the beach, foredune, and backdune areas, demonstrates this dune
susceptibility to wave runup.
•
The perimeter of the parking lot, immediately abutting the jetty, is bounded by boulders.
These boulders have occasionally been moved 6-8 meters during a single storm. The high energy
winter waves are further attested to by the erosion of the inner portion of the south jetty; this is the
result of waves which have been funneled directly through the channel entrance. Should this inner
jetty area not be reconstructed, the land behind it, which is the lowest of the accreted lands (the marsh
area encompassing the pond), could experience flooding especially during spring tides.
•
•
•
38
•
While Bandon has remained free of flooding, the occurrence of a major subduction earthquake
could cause subsidence on the order of 1-2 meters. This would inundate the lowlands, including 'Old
Town', and, depending on resultant tsunami propagation, cause severe damage to the entire region.
•
The evidence for subduction earthquakes appears strong and the end of the interseismic cycle may be
near. It is not yet clear whether Bandon's relatively high uplift rate renders it more prone to a
cataclysmic earthquake than areas of slower tectonic rise.
•
An earthquake could cause serious slumping of the bluff, mass movement, and landslides. Due
to the inherent instability of the entire bluff area, with the exception of the bedrock outcroppings, it
•
is certain that tremendous erosion would subsequently occur, enhanced by the disappearance of the
low-sloping beach and wave action.
Studies done by Hicks and others have found a tectonic land-level rise relative to sea level
along the southern Oregon coast. The global warming issue is still not fully understood, and no
definite conclusions can be made concerning an increase in the rate of sea level rise over the next
century. For now, this is not a significant concern for the Bandon area.
•
The people of the Pacific Northwest, and particularly Oregon, have become increasingly aware
that cataclysmic events can happen in their own backyard. A concerned public attitude is the first step
to enacting coastal management decisions which, though possibly unpopular, may prove to be suitable
in the long run. Public awareness of the issues may be spread through the involvement of the local
media in topics such as jetty effects on the adjacent beaches and beach cleanup weekends where locals
•
may be taught and shown the tentative nature of dune existence. Groups such as the Bandon Storm
Watchers could be instrumental in educating the public. Perhaps the dune could be restored in those
areas of pedestrian traffic. Careful zoning practices will not only help to preserve the dune by limiting
•
•
future development, but will serve to protect life and property should a calamity occur.
•
39
•
Important considerations for the city of Bandon include cost benefit analyses for the
maintenance of the jetty (eg. jetty restoration vs. value of lowland property), so that present properties
on the accreted land may have the protection afforded by the jetty. Earthquake insurance, probably
•
quite low in cost, should be taken into consideration by property owners whether on the accreted land
or the bluff periphery. Until more information is available on the status of the Cascadia subduction
zone, it may be wise to establish a moratorium on accreted land building permits even for a short
•
period of time, eg. three years; certainly, no further development should be allowed on the face of the
bluff. Research on the zone is being carried out at a furious pace and the question of 'locked or
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
aseismic creep' could be resolved within a few years, as well as the strength of any seismic activity
which the area may expect.
•
40
•
REFERENCES
Adams, J., Active Deformation of the Pacific Northwest Continental Margin. Tectonics, Vol. 3, No.
4, 1984, pp. 449472.
Atwater, B.F., Evidence for Great Holocene Earthquakes Along the Outer Coast of Washington State.
Science, Vol. 236, May 1987, pp. 942-944.
Bandon City Planning Commission; Bandon, Oregon: A Plan for Development, 1963.
•
Barnett, T.P., The Estimation of "Global" Sea Level Change: A Problem of Uniqueness. Journal of
Geophysical Research, Vol. 89, No. C5, September 1984, pp. 7980-7988.
Bascom, W., Waves and Beaches, Anchor Press/Doubleday, New York, 1980.
•
•
•
Beaulieu, J.D. and Hughes, P.W., Environmental Geology of Western Coos and Douglas Counties,
Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Portland, 1975.
Beer, T., Environmental Oceanography: An Introduction to the Behavior of Coastal Waters, Pergamon
Press, New York, 1983.
Bennett, G., "A History of Bandon and the Coquille River," chapter 4 in The Oregon Historical
Quarterly, F.G. Young, ed., Koke-Chapman Co., Eugene, Vol. 28, 1927, pp. 311-357.
Bennett, G., "A History of Bandon and the Coquille River," chapter 5 in The Oregon Historical
Quarterly, F.G. Young, ed., Koke-Chapman Co., Eugene, Vol. 29, 1928, pp. 20-50.
Bird, E.C.F., Coastline Changes: A Global Review, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1985.
•
•
•
•
Brown, J., Colling, A., Park, D., Phillips, J., Rothery, D., and Wright, J., Waves, Tides and
Shallow-Water Processes, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1989.
Carter, R.W.G., Coastal Environments: An Introduction to the Physical, Ecological and Cultural
Systems of Coastlines, Academic Press, London, 1988.
Chappell, J., Geology of Coral Terraces, Huon Peninsula, New Guinea: A Study of Quaternary
Tectonic Movements and Sea-Level Changes. Geological Society of America Bulletin, Vol.
85, 1974, pp. 553-570.
Clemens, K.E., Along-Coast Variations of Oregon Beach-Sand Compositions Produced by the Mixing
of Sediments from Multiple Sources under a Transgressing Sea. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State
University, Corvallis, 1987, 75 pp.
•
41
•
"Coquille Indian Dig Project Under Way," Western World newspaper (Bandon, Oregon), September
1990.
Darienzo, M.E. and Peterson, C.D., Episodic Tectonic Subsidence of Late Holocene Salt Marshes,
Northern Oregon Central Cascadia Margin. Tectonics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1990, pp. 1-22.
•
Douthit, N., A Guide to Oregon South Coast History, River West Books, Coos Bay, 1986.
Dyer, K.R., Coastal and Estuarine Sediment Dynamics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1986.
Earle, M.D. and Bishop, J.M., A Practical Guide to Ocean Wave Measurement and Analysis, Endeco,
Inc., Marion, Mass., 1984.
Fox, W.T. and Davis, R.A., Jr., Seasonal Variation in Beach Erosion and Sedimentation on the
Oregon Coast. Geological Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 89, No. 10, 1978, pp. 1541-1549.
•
Goldfinger, C., Neotectonics and Strike-Slip Faulting in the Cascadia Subduction Zone, Workshop on
Oregon Earthquake Source Zones, Oregon State University, March 18, 1991.
Gornitz, V., Lebedoff, S., and Hansen, J., Global Sea Level Trend in the Past Century. Science, Vol.
215, March 1982, pp. 1611-1614.
•
Griffith, J., "Downtown Dig Sheds Light on Bandon's Past," Oregonian newspaper, September 4,
1990.
Guza, R.T. and Thornton, E.B., Wave Set-up on a Natural Beach. Journal of Geophysical Research,
Vol. 86, No. C5, 1981, pp. 4133-4137.
•
•
•
Halliday, J., The Quiet Coast. Pacific Northwest magazine, Vol. 25, No. 2, February 1991, pp. 3639.
Hansen, J., Johnson, D., Lacis, A., Lebedeff, S., Lee, P., Rind, D., and Russell, G., Climate Impact
of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Science, Vol. 213, August 1981, pp. 957-966.
Heaton, T.H. and Hartzell, S.H., Earthquake Hazards on the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Science, Vol.
236, April 1987, pp. 162-168.
Hicks, S.D., An Average Geopotential Sea Level Rise for the United States. Journal of Geophysical
Research, Vol. 83, No. C3, March 1978, pp. 1377-1379.
Hicks, S.D., Debaugh, H.A., and Hickman, L.E., Sea Level Variations for the United States, 18551980; U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, National Ocean Service, Rockville, Maryland, 1983.
•
•
Hoffman, J.S. , Keyes, D. and Titus, J.G., Projecting Future Sea Level Rise: Methodology, Estimates
to the Year 2100, and ResearchEnvironmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1983.
•
42
•
Huyer, A., Gilbert, W.E., and Pittock, H.L., Anomalous Sea Level at Newport, Oregon, During the
1982-83 El Nino. Coastal Oceanography and Climatology News, Vol. 5, 1983, pp. 37-39.
Johnson, J.W., Tidal Inlets on the California, Oregon, and Washington Coasts. Hydraulic Engineering
Laboratory (Univ. of California), Berkeley, 1972.
•
Kaufman, W. and Pilkey, 0., The Beaches are Moving: The Drowning of America's Shoreline,
Anchor Press/Doubleday, New York, 1979.
Kelsey, H.M., Late Quaternary Deformation of Marine Terraces on the Cascadia Subduction Zone
near Cape Blanco, Oregon. Tectonics, Vol. 9, No. 5, 1990, pp. 983-1014.
•
Kennett, J.P., Marine Geology, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1982.
Kerr, R.A., Ocean Drilling Details Steps to an Icy World {quoting J. Kennett}. Science, Vol. 236,
May 1987, pp. 912-913.
•
•
Klingeman, P.C., et.al., Coastal Processes -- Oregon Coastal Littoral Drift. Marine Geotechnique
Preliminary Study (Oregon State Univ.), Corvallis, 1969.
Kobayashi, N., Cox, D.T., and Wurjanto, A., Permeability Effects on Irregular Wave Runup and
Reflection. Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1991, pp. 127-136.
Komar, P.D., "Beach Processes and Erosion -- an Introduction;" chapter 1 in Handbook of Coastal
Processes and Erosion, ed. P. Komar, pp. 1-19, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 1983.
Komar, P.D., Beach Processes and Sedimentation, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1976.
•
•
Komar, P.D., "Coastal Erosion in Response to the Construction of Jetties and Breakwaters;" chapter
9 in Handbook of Coastal Processes and Erosion, ed. P. Komar, pp. 191-204, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, Fla., 1983.
Komar, P.D., The 1982-83 El Nino and Erosion on the Coast of Oregon. Shore and Beach, Vol. 54,
1986, pp. 3-12.
Komar, P.D., The Pacific Northwest Coast: Living with the Shores of Oregon and Washington,
unpublished (1991).
Komar, P.D., Wave Conditions on the Oregon Coast During the Winter of 1977-78 and the Resulting
Erosion of Nestucca Spit. Shore and Beach, Vol. 46, 1978, pp. 3-8.
Komar, P.D., [personal communication to Larry Ward (city of Bandon)--letter, August 2, 1990].
•
•
Komar, P.D. and Good, J.W., "The Oregon Coast in the Twenty-First Century: A Need for Wise
Management;" pp. 73-89 in Ocean Agenda 21: Passages to the Pacific Century, ed. C.L.
Smith, Oregon Sea Grant, Corvallis, 1989.
•
43
•
Komar, P.D. and Holman, R.A., Coastal Processes and the Development of Shoreline Erosion.
Annual Review of Earth Planetary Science, Vol. 14, 1986, pp. 237-265.
Komar, P.D., Good, J.W., and Shih, S., Erosion of Netarts Spit, Oregon: Continued Impacts of the
1982-83 El Nino. Shore and Beach, Vol. 57, 1989, pp. 11-19.
•
Komar, P.D., Lizarraga-Arciniega, J.R., and Terich, T.A., Oregon Coast Shoreline Changes Due to
Jetties. Journal of the Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.
102, No. WW1, Proc. Paper 11933, Feb. 1976, pp. 13-30.
LaJoie, K.R., "Coastal Tectonics," in Active Tectonics, R. Wallace, ed., pp. 95-124, National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1986.
Lizarraga-Arciniega, J.R. and Komar, P.D., Shoreline Changes Due to Jetty Construction on the
Oregon Coast, Oregon State Sea Grant, Corvallis, 1975.
•
Mclnelly, G.W. and Kelsey, H.M., Late Quaternary Tectonic Deformation in the Cape Arago-Bandon
Region of Coastal Oregon as Deduced from Wave-Cut Platforms. Journal of Geophysical
Research, Vol. 95, No. B5, May 1990, pp. 6699-6713.
Milliman, J.D., Sea Levels: Past, Present, and Future. Oceanus, Vol. 32, No.2, 1989, pp. 40-42.
•
•
•
Monastersky, R., Rattling the Northwest. Science News, Vol. 137, 1990, pp. 137-139.
Muhs, D.R., Kelsey, H.M., Miller, G.H., Kennedy, G.L., Whelan, J.F., and Mclnelly, G.W., Age
Estimates and Uplift Rates for Late Pleistocene Marine Terraces: Southern Oregon Portion of
the Cascadia Forearc. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 95, No. B5, May 1990, pp.
6685-6698.
National Research Council, Glaciers, Ice Sheets, and Sea Level: Effect of a CO2-Induced Climatic
Change, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1985.
Oregon State Marine Board, Boating in Oregon Coastal Waters (5th ed.), Oregon State University Sea
Grant, Salem, 1988.
Palmer, L., Geologic Evolution of Coquille Point (Bandon, Oregon), 43 pp., Geology, Portland,
October 1990.
•
Percy, K.L., Sutherlin, C., Bella, D.A., and Klingeman, P.C., Descriptions and Information Sources
for Oregon Estuaries, Oregon State University Sea Grant, Corvallis, 1974.
Peterson, C.D., Coastal Paleoseismicity, Workshop on Oregon Earthquake Source Zones, Oregon
State University, March 18, 1991.
•
•
Petty, R., The Irish Gorse of Bandon. Oregon Coast magazine, Florence, Oregon, June/July 1985,
pp. 56-60.
•
44
•
Pugh, D.T., Tides, Surges and Mean Sea-Level, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1987.
Reilinger, R. and Adams, J., Geodetic Evidence for Active Landward Tilting of the Oregon and
Washington Coastal Ranges. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1982, pp. 401-403.
•
Riddihough, R.P., A Model for Recent Plate Interactions off Canada's West Coast. Canadian Journal
of Earth Science, Vol. 14, 1977, pp. 384-396.
Ross, M.E. and Morgan, M., Coastal Geologic Hazards and Land-Use Planning in Northwestern
Oregon. Environmental Geology and Water Science, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1986, pp. 221-227.
•
Ryan, P.R., High Sea Levels and Temperatures Seen Next Century. Oceanus, Vol. 26, No. 4, Winter
1983/84, pp. 63-67.
Sanders, J.E., Principles of Physical Geology, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1981.
•
Schatz, C.E., Source and Characteristics of the Tsunami Observed along the Coast of the Pacific
Northwest on March 28, 1964. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 1965, 39 pp.
Schneider, S., The Greenhouse Effect: Science and Policy. Science, Vol. 243, 1989, pp. 771-781.
•
Solow, A.R. and Broadus, J.M., Climatic Catastrophe: On the Horizon or Not? Oceanus, Vol. 32,
No. 2, 1989, pp. 61-64.
Ternyik, W.E., Site Investigation Report (Bandon Property), 3 pp., Florence, Ore., Nov. 1990.
•
Thatcher, W., The Earthquake Deformation Cycle at the Nankai Trough, Southwest Japan. Journal
of Geophysical Research, Vol. 89, 1984, pp. 3087-3101.
Thompson, E.F., Howell, G.L., and Smith, J.M., Evaluation of Seismometer Wave Gage and
Comparative Analysis of Wave Data at Yaquina and Coquille Bays, Oregon; Misc. paper
CERC-85-12, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Miss., September 1985.
•
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon Coastal Harbors, Government Printing Office, Portland, 1986.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Dept. of Boating and Waterways, Coastal Data
Information Program - Errata (1983-85), Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Univ. of Calif.,
San Diego, April 1989.
•
•
Vincent, P., Geodetic Deformation of the Oregon Cascadia Margin. M.S. Dissertation, University of
Oregon, Eugene, 1989, 86 pp.
Weldon, R., Deformation of the Oregon Coast from Geodetic and Tidal Records, Workshop on
Oregon Earthquake Source Zones, Oregon State University, March 18, 1991.
45
0
West, D.O. and McCrumb, D.R., Coastline Uplift in Oregon and Washington and the Nature of
Cascadia Subduction-Zone Tectonics. Geology, Vol. 16, 1988, pp. 169-172.
Yelin, T., Overview of Oregon Seismicity, Workshop on Oregon Earthquake Source Zones, Oregon
State University, March 18, 1991.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
APPENDIX I
(including 1984 significant wave heights, wave energy
and wave periods as measured by the Coquille array)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
[Coastal Data Information Program (1989)-Corps of Engr]
•
A. Calculations
•
•
Hs (significant wave height) as measured by the array subsurface sensor, in 16 meters of
water; this is considered to be deep water so,
Longuet-Higgins method applied: Hrms = 0.7
Hs
Hrms = 0.7 x Hs
Breaking height (Hb) = 0.39 x g(exp .2) x [T x (Hrms) (Hrms)]exp .4
•
where g = 9.81 m/sec sec and T = wave period (in seconds)
Periods for max Hs conversion were compared to time of day max Hs occurred; error range
could be significant.
•
January 1984
•
February
2.49 Hs = 2.63 Hb
3.82 Hs = 3.73 Hb
ave. period = 12.4
ave. period = 12.6
4.6 max Hs = 4.6 max Hb
7.4 max Hs = 5.5 max Hb
•
March
•
•
•
•
April
3.32 Hs = 3.31 Hb
3.06 Hs = 2.98 Hb
ave. period = 12.45
ave. period = 11.2
5.9 max Hs = 4.9 max Hb
6.2 max Hs = 5.9 max Hb
May
June
2.22 Hs = 2.13 Hb
1.73 Hs = 1.62 Hb
ave. period = 9.2
ave. period = 7.6
4.8 max Hs = 4.5 max Hb
2.8 max Hs = 2.5 max
•
•
•
•
•
July
1.42 Hs = 1.33 Hb
1.31 Hs = 1.31 Hb
ave. period = 6.9
ave. period = 7.9
2.8 max Hs = 2.9 max Hb
4.0 max Hs = 4.0 max Hb
September
•
•
October
1.66 Hs = 1.72 Hb
2.78 Hs = 2.67 Hb
ave. period = 9.7
ave. period = 10.3
3.2 max Hs = 3.5 max Hb
6.1 max Hs = 5.8 max Hb
November
•
August
December
3.41 Hs = 3.23 Hb
3.24 Hs = 3.18 Hb
ave. period = 11.1
ave. period = 11.8
6.6 max Hs = 6.5 max Hb
7.1 max Hs = 6.6 max Hb
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COOUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY, ENERGY
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JAN 1984
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
0228
1316
2027
129. 4
100. 9
101.5
1046. 1
635. 9
644.4
1. 3
3. 9
3.4
0. 2
0. 8
0.6
0. 2
0. 9
0.6
0. 2
0. 5
0.8
34. 9
32. 9
44.5
27. 4
20. 7
15.9
13. 2
19. 7
11.9
0223
0825
1423
2027
113.5
141.8
149. 1
153.2
804.6
1256.2
1389. 2
1467.0
1.0
1.6
3. 1
1.8
0.5
0.3
0. 3
0.4
1.8
2.6
1. 3
1.8
0.9
1.6
14. 9
11.2
4.2
6.0
7. 1
26.4
17.6
21.6
21. 6
24.0
46.2
34.7
27. 2
15.0
19.9
18.7
15. 1
12.6
8.3
13.4
9. 8
7.3
3
3
3
3
0223
0827
1424
2022
213.
198.
177.
207.
1
4
0
7
2839.
2461.
1957.
2695.
4
0
4
5
1. 6
1.8
3. 0
0. 9
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
4
8
3
9
12. 6
1. 7
2. 5
3. 1
25.
22.
28.
19.
5
3
6
2
26.
38.
30.
35.
B
5
2
9
19.
20.
15.
14.
8.
8.
10.
14.
4
6
5
3
5.
6.
8.
10.
3
5
7
4
4
4
4
4
0223
0824
1426
2022
216.
270.
263.
322.
2
2
9
4
2920. 2
4561.6
4352. 8
6495. 2
1. 4
1.9
3. 7
6. 2
0. 4
0.4
0. 6
2. 8
2. 0
2.9
1. B
2. 3
3. 6
6.6
13. 4
16. 2
32. 5
39.7
23. 4
29. 0
28.
21.
29.
13.
6
1
0
2
16. 2
11.7
13. 9
13. 3
10. 4
8.9
8. 8
9. 9
5.
7.
5.
7.
4
1
9
6
5
5
5
5
0222
0822
1423
2024
451. 1 12715.4
446. 0 12434. 7
453. 8 12873. 7
373.3 8707.3
7. 3
3. 2
3. 3
2. 1
29.7
12. 9
7. 1
20. 4
17. 7
21.5
6. 8
12.8
24. 4
9.4
11. 5
9. 0
15. 1
21.6
7.6
7. 4
9. 9
I I. 3
15. 5
17. 6
12. 0
10.2
8. 5
9. 2
9. 9
14.0
6. 4
8. 0
5. 9
8.6
6
6
6
6
0222
0822
1423
2022
335. 1
359. 9
300. 1
297.1
7018. 7
8095. 8
5630. 6
5517.7
2. 4
1. 6
1. 5
1.2
0. 6
0. 4
0. 4
0.2
6. 0
2. 0
2. 7
3.4
42. 1
31. 0
23. 9
18.7
18.0
23. 0
35. 7
41.1
11. 9
21. 0
15. 9
11.5
6. 8
8. 7
6. 7
7.0
9. 7
9. 1
9. 4
11.7
2. 8
3. 7
4. 2
5.6
7
7
7
0822
1422
2022
219. 9
207.8
216. 5
3022. 2
2699. 3
2930. 7
0. 7
1.0
0. 8
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
2. 1
3. 1
0. B
7. 9
9.9
5. 6
31. 2
34. 1
17. 9
16. 9
27.8
24. 2
11. 0
11.2
26. 5
13. 9
8. 1
17. 4
16. 6
5. 1
7. 1
8
8
8
8
0222
0822
1422
2022
203.4
193. 2
203. 5
216.7
2585.9
2331. 7
2589. 0
2935.4
1.
1.
2.
3.
3
0
7
4
0. 1
0. 2
0. 6
10.0
0.4
0. 3
0. 3
0. 3
9.8
7. 5
2. 7
1. 0
12.2
7.8
13. 6
22. 2,.
23.7
24. 1
29. 8
17. 1
30.6
31. 8
24. 5
18.9
10.8
17. 1
15. 9
15.0
11.6
10. 8
10. 4
12. 6
9
9
9
0224
0822
2025
384. 7
339. 2
331.5
9249. 4
7193. 0
6867.6
2. 5
3. 1
4.4
56. 2
41. 4
5.3
1.3
14. 3
19.9
0. 3
1. 3
7.4
3. 6
3. 7
8.3
10. 9
5. 3
21.3
10. 1
15. 0
11.6
9. 4
10. 2
10.6
6. 2
6. 2
11.7
PST
DAY/TIME
1
1
1
3
2
5
0
.1 n
IL.=
1.7
2. 5- 20. 5
1. 1 19. 9
4.4
18.5
5
2
2
6
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JAN 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. )
(CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
10
10
10
10
0226
0824
1422
2025
338. 3 7154. 3
416. 6 10845. 5
411.0 10556.6
395. 0 9750. 0
5. B
3. 5
3.7
2. 0
11
11
11
0222
0827
2025
404.0 10201.1
421.9 11124.5
228.4 3261. 1
3.2
2.7
2.0
12
12
12
12
0226
0826
1427
2022
245. 3
186.2
179.8
167.9
3760. 1
2166. 5
2020.2
1762.8
13
13
13
13
0223
0822
1423
2022
171. 8
153.7
121. 9
98. 2
1845. 1
1476.9
928. 3
602. 8
14
14
14
14
0222
0825
1425
2021
103.
104.
117.
82.
15
15
15
15
0225
0823
1425
2022
88. 7
83. 5
114. 5
136.7
492. 2
436.2
819. 3
1167. 1
16
16
16
16
0225
0825
1422
2021
137.0
149. 1
149. 6
168. 1
13e8. 6
17
17
17
17
0222
0822
1423
2021
18
18
0222
0824
0
2
8
7
6. 5
5. 6
18.8
34. 9
10. 7
6. 9
7.4
8. 1
15. 3
10. 1
7.6
5. 7
16. 3
15. 6
15.6
15. 1
16. 7
10. 0
9.6
10. 5
12. 2
8. 7
7.7
10. 3
2.3
0.8
0.4
12.9
5. 1
1. 1
37.6
34.4
27.7
14.3
15.6
22.6
4.6
10.6
19.4
7.6
7.9
10.2
10.9
15.3
7.9
7.0
7.9
9.2
1. 4
I. 9
1.6
1.2
0. 3
O. 1
0.3
0.2
1. 0
1. 6
1.0
I.4
8. 0
13.8
9.7
5. 3
33. 8
25.9
27.3
17. 1
30. 6
23.7
19.0
14.8
9. 3
9. 2
10.8
15.9
8. 3
10.7
11.8
29.0
7. 8
13. 7
19. 1
15.6
1. 5
1.0
0. 9
I. 1
0. 1
O.3
0. 6
0.2
0. 9
1.2
2. 4
1.7
7.0
12.5
13. 4
9. 3
21. 5
31.2
12. 9
13. 6
32.9
19.3
19. 6
18. 7
10.6
6.7
10. 1
4. 8
14. 1
13.7
19. 3
21. 4
11. 9
14.6
21. 1
29. 6
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2. 3
0. 6
1.3
1. 4
11.8
10. 0
12. 1
18. 7
14. 4
15. 4
43.7
30. 5
16.9
5. 9
4. 8
7. 3
4.
3.
2.
3.
19.
32.
13.
20.
30. 1
31. 5
22. 3
16. 6
1.8
0. 5
0.6
0. 2
0.3
1.
1.
1.
1.
8
9
1
1
7. 8
22. 6
9.5
14.8
32. 7
40.8
52. 6
37.9
19. 2
12. 8
22. 3
29.7
2. 1
2. 9
3. 5
8.6
14. 0
6.4
3. 4
3. 1
21.
11.
5.
3.
1399. 2
1767. 1
1. 8
1. 3
2. 4
1.7
0. 5
1. 1
0. 9
0.3
0. 6
0.3
0. 8
1. 5
4. 5
1.8
2. 5
1. 6
37.4
20.0
12. 2
12. 3
34.6
54.9
26. 9
34. 1
12.9
9.0
14. 0
11.3
3. 5
3.7
17. 1
12. 2
4. 8
8.4
23. 6
25. 3
128. 6
142. 7
119. 3
110.8
1033. 6
1272. 8
890. 1
767.1
1. 4
1. 5
4. 1
4. 1
0. 4
0. 5
0.3
O. 9
5.
6.
5.
4.
9
8
1
9
5. 6
6. 8
8. 1
12.3
5. 1
3. 2
9. 6
13.1
34. 8
27. 1
12.4
6. 5
14.
15.
27.
22.
4
6
2
6
14. 6
23. 3
17. 9
17.3
18.
15.
15.
18.
97. 9
87.7
598. 6
481.2
2. 3
5.0
0. 8
O.2
13. 6
3. 1
18. 8
12.4
14. 7
41.6
6. 6
5.8
15. 2
9.6
13. 5
11.9
14. 9
10.8
4
9
0
6
668.
688.
856.
426.
8
3
1
9
1172. 8
7
5
4
3
0. 6
1. 4
2.2
7.
23.
6.
1.
8
9
1
1
1
2
1
3
9.
16.
23.
12.
6-4
7
7
1
7
3
7
6
8
6
0
7
1
3
8
7
9
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JAN 1984
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
8-6
22+
22-18
18-16
16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
•
•
•
•
0
•
•
6-4
18
18
1422
2022
101.7
105. 1
646.4
690..8
6.7
3. 5
0.3
0. 2
2.8
2. 6
40.0
12. 3
20.3
58. 6
9.4
'7. 6
4.3
3. 4
6.8
5. 9
9.9
6. 4
19
19
19
19
0222
0822
1422
2022
99. 7
113. 5
83. 6
121.7
621. 1
805.6
437. 2
926.4
4. 3
4. 2
7. 1
9.4
0. 2
0. 1
0. 8
I. 1
0.7
0.4
1. 5
0.6
16. 8
10.6
4. 3
3.6
48.2
46.7
20. 9
29.0
20. 1
25. 3
35. 2
25.9
3. 4
5. 9
22. 3
14.5
3. 1
2. 6
4. 6
4.7
3. 7
4. 5
3. 6
11.6
20
20
20
20
0222
0822
1422
2025
78. 1
74. 9
84.7
132. 0
380. 9
350.8
448. 1
1089. 6
1. 5
3. 8
5.9
0. 7
5. 4
5. 1
3. 1
0. 8
0. 5
6. 4
13. 1
6. 2
2.
3.
1.
5.
0
0
1
6
20. 1
14. 4
7.4
1. 3
34. 0
26. 8
7. 1
3. 5
23. 2
22. 5
15.8
12. 0
9. 9
13. 0
13.0
35. 4
3. 8
5. 4
34.0
35. 0
21
21
21
21
0225
0825
1425
2025
121.
166.
164.
152.
926.
1727.
1681.
1458.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
4
7
3
0. 2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 3
5. 0
2. 3
1. 8
1.7
5.
10.
7.
9.
0
7
8
3
n c..n
c..
1. 5
8. 0
7. 1
2.
1.
2.
1.
9
6
5
6
24. 1
14. 1
4. 9
15. 3
22.
45.
54.
39.
38.
24.
20.
25.
23
23
23
0933
1428
2025
252. 3
251. 5
279. 9
3979. 4
3954.8
4895. 0
1. 0
1.4
1. 3
0. 2
0.3
0. 2
1. 4
1. 1
1. 1
3. 6
4.4
5. 8
10. 6
16.0
17. 9
45. 7
24. 5
28. 1
16. 9
21.9
19. 6
8. 7
16.4
12. 0
12. 3
14.4
14. 4
24
24
24
24
0226
0822
1422
2025
244.9
231. 2
238.8
269. 0
3747.4
3339. 4
3564.2
4521. 1
1.8
2. 6
1.3
1. 4
O.3
0. 7
3.0
38. 2
0. 5
0. 2
0.4
0. 7
4. 4
1. 8
2. 1
1. 1
27. 7
15. 3
9. 5
5. 9
20. 4
35. 3
26. 1
15. 8
18. 9
23. 0
30.2
16. 5
16. 1
14. 6
17.8
14. 1
10. 4
7. 0
10. 1
6. 7
25
25
25
25
0222
0822
1423
2022
256.4
290. 3
286. 0
356. 3
4109.8
5268. 7
5113. 1
7934. 3
1.8
1. 5
2. 0
1. 9
21.8
6. 4
3. 1
6. 0
10.8
33. 9
26. 9
23. 3
1.0
0. 7
5. 2
13. 1
5.9
6. 7
5. 6
6. 6
19.3
11. 0
22. 6
19. 2
23.8
22. 5
13. 9
13. 2
9.0
7. 2
10. 4
10. 7
7.0
10. 5
10. 7
6. 4
26
26
26
26
0222
0825
1457
2022
458. 5 13137. 8
344. 8 7431. 7
331.9 6885.5
292. 9 5362. 7
2. 1
2. 1
1.9
1. 5
3. 3
1. 2
0.6
0. 2
12. 0
11. 7
4. 1
1. 6
27. 3
14. 4
17.9
19. 6
7
24. 9
21.6
29. 6
6. 9
12.8
21.1
21. 5
7. 8
10. 0
11.6
10. 3
13. 9
16. 3
14.4
10. 8
8. 3
6. 9
7.3
5. 4
27
27
27
27
0222
0821
1431
2024
256.8
219.8
225. 8
250.8
4122. 1
3018.7
3185. 9
3931. 1
O.
1.
1.
1.
9
4
2
5
O. 3
0. 2
0. 4
1.2
O. 9
1. 7
2. 9
2.9
12.0
3. 7
5. 9
12.0
21.4 , 36.6
17. 7 33.4
20. 5 30. 3
27. 5 26.9
13.8
25.2
20. 7
12.8
7. 4
10.4
10. 7
8.9
7. 2
6. 7
7. 7
6.7
28
0224
333. 8
6962. 4
1. 8
1. 2
1. 6
10. 1
40. 4
15. 9
14. 5
9. 1
5. 9
7
2
0
7
1
2
5
3
le.
0
4
5
8
8
3
2
1
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JAN 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
28
28
28
0823
1424
2023
321. 4
305. 5
280. 7
6457. 1
5831. 3
4923. 5
1. 7
1. 4
2. 7
0. 6
0. 9
0. 3
1. 7
2. 3
0. 6
19. 5
9. 7
4. 6
26. 5
28. 0
26. 9
24. 3
25. 5
34. 2
9. 2
8. 6
10. 3
10. 5
10. 8
10. 3
6. 3
13. 2
10. 5
29
29
29
29
0223
0824
1424
2024
222.8
226. 5
219. 3
221. 9
3102.
3206.
3005.
3078.
0
9
1
2
1. 1
1. 2
0.9
1. 0
0. 7
0. 4
0.4
0. 5
1.2
1. 3
2. 1
1. 9
3.
6.
2.
2.
26. 4
33. 8
14.2
13. 3
31. 4
14. 6
30.9
26. 1
17. 5
12. 8
14.0
15. 9
10.
15.
21.
25.
1
0
3
4
8.
15.
14.
13.
9
2
5
6
30
30
30
30
0223
0824
1424
2023
230. 7
195. 6
181.0
213. 9
3326.
2390.
2048.
2860.
2
3
1
6
1.
1.
2.
2.
1
3
4
3
0.
0.
O.
0.
3
4
5
5
1.
0.
1.
0.
5
9
0
7
5. 5
8. 2
13. 1
6. 2
19.
13.
26.
26.
19. 0
20. 3
18.4
23. 3
24.
26.
10.
17.
9
9
5
9
20. 6
21. 5
16.4
13. 9
8.
7.
11.
9.
0
7
7
8
31
31
31
31
0224
0824
1428
2028
190. 9
172. 4
185.4
232. 0
2276. 6
1857. 9
2148.7
3364. 6
2.
3.
4.
2.
4
4
0
5
6.
16.
9.
3.
8
2
2
9
1. 2
15. 8
32.8
27. 7
3. 0
5. 1
6. 1
32. 9
27. 4
21. 1
11.9
10. 4
22.
14.
12.
5.
12. 5
7. 8
8.7
5. 7
16. 7
10. 0
8.4
8. 0
1
1
1
8
6
2
5
0
6
0
5
3
6-4
7. 8
6. 9
6.
4. 1
COGUILLE RIVER, DR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
JAN
PERSISTENCE
• CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS —N— METERS OR LESS
DAYS
METERS
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3. 0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5. 0
5.5
6.0
1,
2,
3,
IL,
3,
2,
9,
2,
4,
4,
4,
21,
21,
2,
4,
16,
9,
9,
21,
9,
4,
10,
3,
10,
10,
2,
10,
3,
3,
1,
5,
CP
5,
3,
5,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR JAN 1984
DATE ( JAN)
SIG. HT (
M. )
I.
3
I.
9
8
DATE ( JAN)
2.3
5
3.8
SIG. HT ( M. )
15
DATE ( JAN)
SIG. HT (M.)
1.4
c.nn
DATE ( JAN)
SIG. HT (
M. )
DATE ( JAN)
SIG. HT
)
0.
0
29
2. 3
16
1.7
23
2.8
30
2. 3
10
4.2
17
1.4
24
2.7
31
2. 3
3.2
11
4.2
18
1.1
25
3.6
4.5
12
2.5
19
1.2
26
4.6
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
3.6
13
1.7
20
1.3
27
2.6
2.2
14
1.2
21
1.7
28
3.3
12
16 w *
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
•
•
•
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
FEB 1984
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
4245.
4089.
4487.
4363.
6
8
5
2
2. 3
1.0
2. 9
1. 5
9. 5
1. 9 10. 6 30. 3 27. 0
6.
5
26.9
30.
1
10.
4
0. 3
6. 8 20. 2 28. 1 15. 1
0. 8
6. 7 32. 8 18. 8
2. 7
0.3
0224 259. 4 4206.
0824 280. 0 4899.
2 1424 213. 8 2857.
2024 195. 0 2376.
5
6
0
4
1. 4
1. 1
1. 5
3. 0
0. 2
0. 3
0. 1
1. 8
I 0224 260. 6
1 0824 255. 8
1 1423 268. 0
1 2022 264. 2
•
•
•
6-4
7. 3
6. 3
5. 3
8.7 11. 4
5. 1
6. 9 12. 7
7. 1
8. 6 14. 5 14. 4
7. 6
3. 4 37. 6 23. 6 10. 5 14. 7
1. 5
9. 7
7.
0
21.
8
38.
1
10.8
10.
9
0. 8
0.7 10. 2 17. 7 25. 9 12. 5 15. 1 16. 7
nn&.n 20. 0
8. 9 20. 9 19. 5 ,mg..
3. 3
0. 8
5. 3
6.7
4. 0
5. 8
3
3
3
3
0223 207. 5 2692. 2
0825 357.5 7987.2
1523 322. 7 6509. 4
2024 260. 6 4244. 8
9. 0 14. 7 12. 8
8. 0
3. 0
2. 7
2. 0 43. 0
4.7
2.3 22.3
1.2
6.2
1.9 17.8 37.3
6.
4
11.
5
7.
8
1.
9
26.
4
26.
9
12.
6
2. 8
9. 0
6. 3
0. 5 15. 1 27. 2 17. 2 17. 4
1. 9
4
4
4
4
0224 249. 6
0824 183. 5
1424 152.8
2024 128. 0
3894. 0
2105. 6
1460.0
1024. 5
2. 0
n2
g..r1.6
0.8
0. 5
0. 7
0.2
0. 3
6. 0
5.8
6. 4
3. 2 39. 6 22. 9 13. 9
6. 3
7. 5
1. 3 20. 3 24. 0 22. 6 15. 5
5.6
6.3 39.3 21.6 14.9 10.5
0.5
5. 5 23. 2 29. 6 19. 4 10. 1 10. 8
0. 7
5
5
5
5
0224 119.6
0823 107.7
75. 8
1425
97.8
2026
894. 1
724. 4
359. 2
597. 4
1. 1
1. 1
2. 6
1. 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
3
6
6
3. 0 35.4 28.4 14. 5
0.6
4. 3 23. 5 28. 5 15. 3
1. 8
4. 2 28. 9 21. 5 17. 0
4. 4
2. 0 13. 5 21. 2 32. 2 13. 7
6.9 10.0
7. 6 17. 9
6. 4 14.8
5. 4 10. 2
1. 6
1. 4
7. 3
1. 4
I.4 44. 9
1. 6 22. 4
6. 1
0.4 16. 8 52. 1 15. 4
5. 4
3. 2 48. 3 28. 3
0. 6
8. 2
2. 0 17. 3 18. 1
1. 3
0. 9 13. 6 34. 4 11. 4
7. 1
4. 0
3. 2
5. 1
6. 1
6 0226 144. 0 1296. 5
6 0825 162. 9 1657. 6
6 1429 181. 8 2066. 7
•
6 2026 169. 9 1803.8
•
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
2. 7
2. 9
nn
m.g.
3. 0
3.2
2.4
7.2 31.0 13.5
7.3
7.7
5.6 17. 1 10.0
3. 8 13.3 11. 5 12.9 30. 0
7 0226 157.9 1558.3
7 0827 131.9 1087. 1
7 1457 146.3 1337.3
1.0
1.9 14.8 25.6
3.8
35.4
12.2
1.3
9. 2
I. 7 17.3
0. 9
8 1019 231.9 3360.7
8 1455 259. 5 4209. 8
0.9
1. 3
0.3
O.3
1. 5 19.9 25.0 18.6 11.0 12.5 10.9
4. 4 22. 7 34. 4 13. 7 10. 9 12. 2
O.5
9
9
9
9
1.0
4. 0
7
2.7
2. 1
0. 1
1. 1
1. 6
0. 5
5.4 36.6 23.6 11. 1 20.0
2. 4
0. 2
8. 3 16.8 15. 4
5. 8 25. 0 12. 6 11. 5
7. 4 15. 5 12. 5
6. 3 18. 9 19. 5 16. 2
9. 0 12. 9 14. 6
1. 3 22. 4 20. 7 17. 0
0225 365. 5 8348. 9
0824 534. 7 17870. 0
1426 453. 7 12864. 1
202B 449. 0 12602. 4
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
FEB 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SCI)
10
10
10
10
0228
0828
1427
2025
487.8 14871.8
493. 6 15227. 4
362.0 8188.9
313. 5 6141. 9
11
11
11
11
0228
0825
1425
2027
251. 7
264. 3
253.4
218. 1
3960. 7
4365.8
4013. 4
2971.6
12
12
0227
1427
294. 8
243. 6
13
13
13
13
0258
0827
1429
2024
280.
364.
585.
591.
14
14
14
14
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
6-4
0.3
O. 4
0.3
0. 1
1. 5
2. 8
0.7
0. 3
7. 1
19. 2
5.2
2. 0
40.7
28. 7
42.2
24. 3
13.7
15. 7
13.3
38. 2
11.7
7. 3
16.0
14. 5
15. 1
16. 1
11.6
9. 1
7.9
8. 4
9.6
10. 7
1.0
0. 6
1. 1
1.0
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0.9
0. 1
0.2
0.2
4. 1
1. 3
1.4
1.3
13. 2
6.4
5.9
9. 1
27. 2
15. 1
25. 6
36.7
16. 0
37. 3
24. 9
18.7
25. 7
21. 1
16.4
11.2
12. 1
18. 3
24. 9
22. 1
5430. 1
3707. 8
0. 6
0. 5
0. 3
0. 1
0. 2
0. 4
1.3
1. 6
2.7
23. 1
24.6
34. 0
27.6
17. 5
19.3
22. 9
0 4899. 5
6 9306. 7
1 21398. 7
9 21896. 7
2. 1
5. 3
4. 8
3. 6
20.
10.
4.
5.
5
7
8
4
25. 4
9. 9
16. 1
15. 6
19.
13.
13.
14.
6
2
5
9
17.8
8. 9
21. 3
14. 1
0224
0850
1427
2024
516.4 16667.0
472.9 13977.0
365. 3 8340. 5
280.9 4931. 5
4.0
15
15
15
15
0224
0824
1426
2024
16
16
16
16
0.
36.
16.
3.
2
7
8
3
2.2
1.
5.
10.
17.
3
9
0
2
4.
3.
5.
13.
4
1
5
6
9.
6.
7.
12.
1
8
7
7
22.2
3. 0
1.7
1.6
1. 1
0. 9
0.2
14. 1
8.2
5. 9
1.4
16.2
28.0
26. 1
14. 1
16.8
19.7
16. 0
10.7
13.2
12.7
1. 5. 1
19.4
9.6
9.5
8. 0
20.0
14.4
11.2
14. 7
21. 1
10.6
7.9
10. 7
11.8
366.1 8377.2
300. 3 5636. 3
331. 1 6851. 4
410.6 10536.3
1.3
1. 4
1. 4
3.2
O.2
0. 2
0. 5
0.6
1.0
1. 6
1. 7
11.6
4.9
24. 0
1. 6
24.6
24.8
33. 4
17. 5
10.2
30.3
18. 0
38. 5
9.1
16.4
10. 4
19. 0
14.0
11.3
6. 5
5. 5
12.7
10.2
5. 2
14.8
14.5
0225
0828
1423
2025
347.
418.
569.
472.
0 7525. 1
1 10923. 8
0 20236. 8
1 13927.8
1.5
1.6
3.6
2.3
0. 4
0.3
1.8
1. 0
1. 7
0.6
14.7
3. 8
18.3
2.7
21.3
35. 0
24.0
25.5
13.0
11.2
18.5
20.0
8.0
10.8
17.2
24.3
12. 1
10.7
9. 9
14.2
13.9
15.5
8. 8
11.2
12. 1
10. 1
17
17
17
17
0225
0823
1426
2022
442. 7 12246. 4
376. 6 8864.0
323.9 6555.0
281. 1 4937. 3
2.3
2.8
2.7
1.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.8
2. 1
1.5
0.6
13.3
12. 8
12.0
4.3
31.4
39.0
44.5
39.3
22.8
17.4
17.3
1,3. 1
9.9
8.7
10.2
21.7
12.7
11.5
7.5
11.0
6.8
5.6
4.6
8.5
18
18
18
0226
0827
1427
266.4
301.2
315.7
2. 5
2.9
2.5
0. 3
0.8
3. 4
4.2
1.9
0. 8
17.6
23.0
9. 4
39.2
35.3
40. 2
11.7
11.4
24. 0
12.2
5.7
7. 3
8.4
12.7
5. 9
4.2
6.8
6. 8
4434.0
5669.2
6229.2
2.2
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
FEB 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM.) (CM. SG)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
18
2023
294. 1
5406. 5
2. 3
15. 5
1. 6
21. 5
17. 5
9. 3
10. 4
13. 4
8. 8
19
19
19
19
0222
0822
1423
2023
301. 5
312.7
270. 7
224. 3
5681.8
6110.9
4578. 5
3145. 2
2.8
2.4
2. 3
1. 3
7.2
7.6
1.3
0. 3
16.4
18.4
23. 8
3. 9
7.6
12.2
10. 7
33. 4
21.4
14.8
17. 6
23. 2
16.9
11.9
16. 1
12. 1
9.4
11.6
14. 4
8.2
10.0
11.0
7. 0
9. 9
8.7
10.6
7. 2
8. 2
20
20
20
20
0222
0852
1422
2027
247. 1 3817. 1
276.8 4789. 1
371. 3 8615. 0
465.7 13554.3
3. 0
1. 5
3. 2
3.5
0. 3
1. 7
16. 1
2.6
7. 3
0.7
8. 6
20.6
10. 9
a 6
6. 3
12.8
20. 7
21. 5
23. 6
14.0
19. 6
21. 3
18. 2
5.3
17. 3
16. 5
6. 6
16.5
12. 4
14.7
10. 6
11.8
8. 9
14. 0
7. 2
13.2
21
21
21
21
0226
0822
1426
2025
379.3 8993.2
427.2 11404.8
402. 2 10110. 8
345.4 7457. 6
A.. c.
2. 5
2.4
3. 2
1.8
0. 5
0.7
27.1
13.6
6. 1
1. 1
13.5
15. 3
17. 9
31. 9
14.7
23. 1
29. 7
17. 3
9.8
13. 1
11.7
17.2
12.4
7. 5
9. 2
11.0
11.5
15.0
10.8
12.2
6.8
9.0
11.2
7. 3
22
22
22
454.
324.
302.
271.
4 12907. 5
8 6592. 6
9 5732.7
3 4599. 4
2. 3
2. 5
1.9
1. 7
0. 4
0. 3
3.0
7. 7
3.
2.
0.
0.
9
1
5
4
32. 3
14. 5
11.2
22
0227
0826
1423
2023
3. 1
13. 2
27. 5
40.7
26. 6
18. 7
20. 5
14.6
26. 9
8. 1
12. 4
11.9
18.0
14. 6
14. 2
10.6
10. 9
7. 1
6. 5
6. 1
5. 3
23
23
23
0226
0824
1423
285. 0
366. 8
344.5
5075. 3
8409. 8
7415.8
2. 3
2. 9
2.7
15. 1
1. 0
30. 1
7.9
3. 2
4. 1
16.0
15. 6
12. 4
13.0
20.
8. 5
3.2
9
15. 4
22.6
17. 5
12. 7
11.9
16. 6
8. 2
12.1
8. 3
6. 1
11. 1
24
24
24
0826
1438
2023
738.3 34064.4
724. 2 32781. 5
722. 0 32579. 9
4. 4
5. 1
3. 6
14.3
8. 0
4. 2
11.2
17. 1
14. 3
7. 0
8. 7
18. 2
9. 4
5. 9
6. 1
7. 1
5. 5
6. 9
12.1
16. 0
13. 1
12.7
14. 3
16. 4
22. 3
19. 9
17. 7
25
25
25
25
0224
0823
1423
2022
628. 6 24699. 9
511.8 16370.9
387. 5 9385. 5
301.0 5662.8
3. 2
2.6
1.4
1.5
1.
9
0.4
0. 2
0.2
5. 9
4.2
2. 1
0.7
23. 5
14.9
19. 9
10.0
16. 5
19.6
27.2
25.9
9. 1
19.4
11.7
17.8
8. 9
15.1
12. 5
21.5
17. 1
12.1
15. 7
15.9
14. 3
12.2
9.7
7.0
26
26
26
26
0223
0823
1422
2022
277. 2
159. 9
159.0
207. 8
4801.0
1598. 2
1579. 5
2699. 8
1. 0
1.4
0. 6
1. 3
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
2
3
4
1.0
0. 6
0. 7
0. 5
5. 8
12. 1
14. 4
14. 1
31.
19.
15.
14.
24.
1
20. 3
. 9. 2
19. 1
19.4
18. 5
12. 0
24. 9
11.0
14. 5
26. 1
17. 9
6.2
13. 4
21. 5
8. 0
27
27
0223
0823
259. 8 4217. 8
480. 0 14397. 3
2. 6
3. 7
14. 1
16. 6
25. 8
27. 3
2. 8
9. 2
9. 5
2. 1
24. 9
22. 7
9. 5
5. 3
8. 1
10. 4
1.4
9
6
7
3
3. 1
3. 1
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
FEB 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
27
27
1429
2023
452. 4 12789. 1
329. 7 6794. 6
3. 9
3. B
2. 6
3. 2
28. 0
6. 7
28
28
28
28
0223
0824
1423
2026
363.3
282. 5
274. 5
294. 2
8248.
4986.
4710.
5409.
3.
2.
1.
1.
0
8
4
9
1. 4
0. 8
0.6
0. 3
6. 1
4. 8
2. 1
2. 8
29
29
29
29
0226
0826
1427
2024
225. 8
183.9
247.8
198. 0
3187. 6
2112.9
3836. 8
2450. 2
1.2
1.5
2. 1
1. 4
0. 2
0.2
0. 4
0. 2
0. 3
0.3
0. 4
0. 2
2
5
0
9
8. 3
6
15. 8
28. 3
24.
18.
24.
9.
3.
27.
15.
31.
23.
0
4
9
0
5. 6
2.2
1. 7
0. 4
9
2
6
9
27. 8
17.3
4. 1
7. 0
6-4
9. 0
7. 3
15.
7. 1
9. 3
13. 7
3
4
6
9
8. 0
17. 1
15. 3
23. 0
10.
9.
9.
8.
7
5
4
8
9. 1
8.5
12. 5
9. 7
20. 3
36.9
34. 1
18.9
22. 0
17.5
18. 4
38. 9
13. 3
14.8
16. 2
21.8
9. 8
9.8
23. 0
11. 7
7. 8
5. 8
16.
17.
17.
26.
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
FEB
PERSISTENCE
•CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
•
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1. 0
I. 5
2. 0
2. 5
3. 0
5
4. 0
4. 5
5. 0
5.5
6.0
•
3,
4,
2,
2,
a
•
I,
5,
5,
8,
MO
2,
3,
8,
8,
12,
23,
GP
4,
2,
2,
2,
1,
1,
7,
A.,
1,
1,
1,
1,
1,
1,
4,
3,
7,
4,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
•
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( FEB)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( FEB)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( FEB)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( FEB)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
9
8
2. 6
15
4. 1
=..
22
4. 5
29
2. 5
3. 6
2. 8
2. 7
5. 3
16
5. 7
23
3. 7
30
O. 0
10
4. 9
17
4. 4
24
7. 4
31
0. 0
2. 5
11
2. 6
18
3. 2
25
6. 3 .
1. 2
12
2. 9
19
3. 1
26
7
6
5
2. 8
2,
1,
1984
FEB
4
3
2
1
( FEB)
1,
2,
1,
1. 8
13
5. 9
20
4. 7
27
4. 8
1. 6
14
5. 2
21
4. 3
28
3. 6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
4. 9
6. 2
24.5
26. 5
29. 8
32. 7
37.7
32.3
41. 2
39. 8
17.7
17. 1
14. 1
10. 8
10.4
7.7
8. 5
8. 1
4.8
7.8
4
3
4
6
18.6
34. 5
38. 0
26. 3
37. 0
16.8
14. 7
20. 8
15. 1
8. 3
9. 4
17. 0
11.8
11.0
10. 7
11. 8
7.
6.
4.
5.
0. 3
0. 7
1. 4
0.3
9. 2
8. 8
3. 6
3.4
32. 3
20. 7
23. 6
17.7
31. 5
46.8
30. 4
40.0
9. 2
10. 1
14. 8
11.5
7. 9
6. 1
7. 7
6.9
7. 6
5. 7
15. 0
14.3
4. 4
0.4
6.2
2. 7
2.8
3. 5
7.6
16. 0
2. 1
2. 5
2.8
12. 0
17. 7
5.9
5.8
8.4
37. 8
46.9
19.3
11. 1
12. 5
12.9
15.8
21. 4
9. 2
15.4
19. 5
9. 9
12. 5
11.8
21.3
16. 4
3. 1
3.8
2.2
1.4
14. 1
25. 8
8.8
2.0
11.0
13. 4
54.7
26. 1
26.8
25. 9
11.8
27. 3
7.7
10. 8
11.5
22.8
3.7
2. 4
2.2
11.7
13. 0
5. 7
5.9
3. 9
7. 3
3. 3
1.9
3.2
13.7
9. 5
1.4
2. 1
1633. 7
2029. 7
2227.7
1609.0
2. 0
1. 0
1. 5
1.4
2. 8
6. 0
1.1
1.0
27. 6
6. 9
13. 1
8.7
20. 0
31. 0
32. 5
35.7
8. 4
9. 8
6.2
8.0
23. 5
25. 7
15.6
19.6
7. 8
10. 3
13.2
17.2
4. 0
6. 2
7. 1
4.0
4. 4
3. 6
10. 1
4.8
167. 3
167.8
165. 2
156. 7
1749. 9
1759.0
1705. 6
1534. 5
1.8
1.9
1. 3
1. 2
1.
1.
0.
0.
0
3
9
6
9. 3
6.4
6. 7
6. 0
28.
33.
32.
20.
13.8
16. 5
13. 1
14. 0
15. 0
11.8
12.8
15. 3
7. 6
6. 0
8.0
5. 8
3.
2.
5.
3.
8
8
0227
0827
1427
2027
170.8
147. 4
129. 6
181. 5
1823.4
1358. 5
1049. 8
2057. 9
2.3
0. 9
2. 4
7. 8
0.2
0. 4
0.6
16. 6
2.3
1. 7
2. 1
2. 2
11.9
15. 5
17. 4
3. 1
35.4 '22.2
34. 1 24. 6
32. 2 19. 3
19. 9 22. 7
16.6
9. 6
10. 6
9. 7
6.7
6. 2
5. 7
6. 3
3.0
7. 4
10. 2
12. 0
9
0227
460. 5 13255. 3
3. 7
39. 3
16. 5
1. 4
18. 0
8. 7
7. 0
1
1
1
1
0226
0823
1425
2027
164. 8
243. 5
281.7
281.9
1696.4
3706. 6
4959.4
4967.5
1. 3
1.0
1.6
1.8
0. 3
0. 8
1.0
4.2
0. 2
0. 4
1.2
1.3
2
2
2
0230
0828
1532
2027
291. 8 5321. 9
344.2 7405.8
419. 1 10977. 4
319. 9 6396. 5
2. 2
1.9
2. 1
1.9
0.4
0.6
0. 4
0. 3
3. 8
4.9
2. 2
1. 7
3
3
3
3
0228
0827
1426
2028
340.8
277. 0
229. 5
235.6
7259. 1
4794. 6
3290. 7
3469.2
2. 2
1. 3
2. 3
1.1
0. 2
0. 3
1. 8
5.4
4
4
4
4
0228
0827
1426
2027
186. 3
155.1
114.6
93. 0
2168. 7
1503.0
820.8
540. 2
1.5
1.0
2.1
2. 6
5
5
5
5
0228
0828
1505
2031
100.9
96. 7
136.8
152.8
636.4
584. 0
1168.9
1459.6
6
6
6
6
0228
0828
1429
2025
161. 7
180. 2
188.8
160.4
7
7
7
7
0225
0825
1428
2030
8
2
0. 2
0. 7
1.6
1.8
4.
16.
18.
15.
1
5
3
4
20.
20.
20.
33.
7
1
3
3
2. 1
3. 6
2
0
6
1
1
9
0
8
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
9
9
9
0827
1428
2028
401. 6 10078. 2
385. 5 9290. 2
328.7 6750.7
2. 9
3. 3
2.7
14. 4
2. 3
0.6
33. 9
22. 4
7.2
8. 8
13. 2
35.1
3. 9
15. 3
18.7
3. 1
10. 9
11.8
19. 0
15. 5
7.9
6. 0
10. 8
11.8
8.3
6. 7
4.7
10
10
10
10
0228
0830
1427
2027
271.
259.
203.
254.
4
5
0
1
1. 3
2. 5
2. 0
2. 1
0.
0.
2.
4.
3.
1.
0.
2.
0
7
7
4
19.1
19. 4
6. 6
7. 3
42.
27.
23.
29.
10.
15.
33.
24.
7
9
3
3
7. 2
14. 8
16. 9
14.0
8.
8.
B.
10.
8
2
6
3
7. 3
9. 8
7. 1
5. 9
11
11
11
11
0227
0827
1428
2028
312.7
358. 2
349. 9
275. 3
6111.1
8020. 3
7653.0
4735.6
2.8
2. 6
2.2
2.6
2.2
1. 5
0.4
0.7
16.2
13. 1
8.0
2.8
13.5
33. 5
25.8
16.6
17.9
15. 4
17.0
19. 8
20.3
10.0
9. 8
16.4
12.9
9. 1
6. 5
20. 2
9.0
9. 6
13.7
11.9
5.5
5. 6
16.9
9.4
12
12
12
12
0227
0828
1432
2029
288. 4 5199. 6
394. 5 9728. 1
436.5 11908.1
374.1 8748.8
1. 1
2. 3
1.9
2.0
0. 3
0. 5
0.4
0.2
2. 6
0.5
3.3
4.0
12. 3
9. 6
11.0
14.6
13. 9
29. 4
25.4
35.7
14. 3
25. 0
11.8
16.1
19. 4
12. 8
11.0
8. 2
13. 5
10. 3
12.8
11.9
23. 1
10. 0
22.8
7.7
13
13
13
13
0228
0828
1430
2027
354.
251.
167.
202.
8
8
8
4
7869.
3961.
1759.
2561.
5
9
2
2
1. 3
1. 5
0.8
I. 0
0. 3
0. 1
0.2
0. 2
0.8
0. 4
0.2
0. 3
13.
7.
4.
0.
3
5
3
4
28.
29.
10.
9.
9
7
8
7
24.
26.
41.
19.
8
9
6
8
13.
17.
17.
19.
2
1
7
8
12.
10.
8.
20.
1
0
4
5
5.
7.
16.
28.
14
14
14
14
0228
0828
1433
2031
257.
273.
306.
266.
5
8
0
1
4145.
4686.
5850.
4424.
0
1
9
6
1. 8
2. 6
1. 7
2. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
5.
1.
0.
0.
2
0
B
5
10. 1
22. 8
5. 5
1. 8
22.
31.
35.
36.
2
4
8
0
24. 9
18. 6
27. 1
22. 1
13.
10.
8.
10.
4
2
9
6
10.
8.
9.
14.
3
2
6
4
12. 1
5. 0
10. 7
12. 7
15
15
0231
0832
252.2
218. 5
3974.5
2985. 1
1.7
3. 5
0.2
0. 3
0.3
0. 2
1.9
1. 0
9.4
6. 5
21.4
14.7
23.3
30. 5
23.8
23. 0
18.5
20. 8
16
16
16
0908
1440
2024
307. 4
319. 5
363.1
5906. 0
6380. 8
8241.0
3. 2
9. 6
2.9
32. 6
39. 4
16.5
1. 1
3. 8
17.4
0. 5
0. 7
0.5
18. 1
2. 3
4.5
14. 1
10. 7
9.3
8.6
16. 9
22.5
12. 4
7. 8
15.3
9. 8
9. 3
11.5
17
17
17
17
0225
0825
1425
2025
436. 1
453.5
527.4
478.5
11889. 1
12852.8
17381.5
14308. 0
2. 5
3.5
3.3
3. 0
9.7
3.0
2.2
0. 6
25. 8
10.4
19.8
10. 7
4. 0
14.0
18.7
25. 2
3.6 " 20.4
6.6 16.3
8.3
11.7
14.8
9. 5
18.0
22.5
15.5
10. 4
10. 1
13.3
12.1
14. 0
6. 5
10.9
8.8
12. 2
18
0225
363.9
8276.9
3.3
1.4
12.9
22.3
22.2
10.3
10.9
6.3
5
2
8
3
4608.
4200.
2597.
4041.
6
4
0
2
5
6
3
2
5
8
2
9
10.7
6
2
5
8
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM.) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
18
18
18
0825
1425
2025
332. 0
316.6
355. 1
6890.2
6265.2
7880.3
2. 3
3.6
25. 0
0. 5
0.3
5. 7
3. 4
2.3
1. 6
22. 3
28.6
8. 7
21. 6
18.0
15. 0
10. 0
19.0
14. 8
9. 5
11.3
13. 7
17. 0
9.7
8. 3
13. 8
7.6
7. 6
19
19
19
19
0225
0829
1431
2025
555. 6
590. 4
452.0
453. 4
19293. 3
21787. 9
12770.9
12848. 5
5.
4.
4.
3.
2
5
3
6
45. 7
10. 2
5.3
1. 9
4. 3
18. 1
15. 1
23. 5
4. 3
6. 7
24.0
8. 4
4. 6
7. 5
10.6
17. 3
10. 0
3. 6
9.6
7. 1
10.
17.
9.
14.
5
0
5
0
9. 8
13. 0
14.0
13. 8
6.
19.
8.
10.
20
20
20
20
0225
0828
1423
2025
448. 9 12596. 2
312. 2 6092. 1
308. 7 5957. 3
308.5 5946.7
2. 5
1. 9
1. 5
1.5
0. 9
0.8
0. 3
0.4
9. 7
6. 3
0. 7
1.2
38. 2
23. 4
33. 4
11.5
14. 7
15. 9
24. 2
27.9
11. 1
23. 6
14. 0
9.3
5.4
8. 8
8. 9
14.0
13. 2
9. 6
8. 5
17.4
4. 8
10. 1
8. 9
17.3
21
21
21
21
0225
0829
1425
2025
294. 7 5426. 2
330. 4 6821.3
408.5 10427.7
311.2 6053.3
1. 1
1. 6
1.1
1.3
0. 2
0. 2
0.2
0.2
0. 3
0. 2
0.5
0.2
6. 4
0. 7
2.2
2.0
19. 7
9. 4
20.8
22.5
14. 8
33. 9
38.0
24.4
25. 6
28. 7
15.8
25.0
15. 2
13. 2
10.6
14.5
17. 1
12. 6
11.3
10.3
22
22
22
==.
22
0225
0825
1427
2024
312.
273.
222.
178.
4
6
9
3
1.6
1. 2
0. 9
1. 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
4
7
1. 0
1.0
0. 9
1.2
14.
10.
6.
10.
43.
49.
37.
32.
18.
21.
26.
32.
12.
9.
15.
12.
1
1
1
0
8. 9
7. 6
13. 1
9. 8
23
23
23
23
0223
0828
1426
2025
185.7
279. 1
267. 1
287.9
2155.0
4869.6
4459. 6
5180.0
1.2
1. 7
1. 1
1.6
0.3
0. 3
0. 4
0.6
0.6
0. 6
0. 6
0.9
1.3
2. 9
1.6
2.8
18.4
22. 9
33. 8
21.5
25.9
38. 9
31. 9
45.3
32.5
12. 4
13. 4
13.4
12.2
10. 2
10. 7
8.3
7.9
10. 6
7. 1
6.0
24
24
24
24
0225
0825
1425
2025
229.6
250. 0
272. 5
263. 5
3294.1
3906. 2
4640.0
4340.7
1.13
2. 1
1.5
2.9
1.9
1. 5
0.8
0.4
1.5
7. 3
9.6
4. 2
5.0
4. 4
8. 1
34.4
19.7
24. 4
12. 5
18.0
36.7
28. 4
35.6
15. 1
16. 5
15. 9
15.2
7.9
10.0
8. 8
11.4
11. 6
7.3
7. 7
5. 6
5.9
25
25
25
25
0225
0825
1455
2025
338.5
287.6
317.3
283. 5
7161.9
5168.0
6293.6
5022. 6
2. 4
1. 9
2.7
2. 9
0. 5
0. 5
8.9
5. 5
7. 1
0. 6
0.7
0. 6
34. 3
25.9
8.0
6. 5
20. 6 12. 2
21.5 , 19.9
21.8 11.8
24. 8 19. 5
7. 0
14.4
9.0
14. 3
11. 6
10.6
14.0
13. 1
4.7
5. 2
23.5
13. 3
26
26
26
0228
0825
1427
277. 8
348. 1
320.2
4822.1
7574. 6
6407.8
2. 0
1. 8
1. 7
6. 2
12. 7
9. 8
0. 5
1. 2
1. 4
2. 8
0. 8
2. 1
21. 5
22.8
25.7
19. 1
19. 3
23.8
12. 8
17. 4
16. 1
18.9
15. 4
11. 7
0
7
2
1
6084.
4683.
3084.
1983.
3
2
1
2
3
5
3
0
16. 6
9. 0
8. 1
7
0
2
3
4
6
3
7
2
9
1
7
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAR 1984
PST
SIG. HT TOT. EN
DAY/TIME (CM.) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8 8-6 6-4
26 2025 315. 2 6208. 9
1. 6
4. 4 20. 5
27
27
27
27
0225 323. 5
0825 268.6
1428 279. 0
2025 258.0
6541. 7
4507.7
4865. 6
4160.4
2. 4
1.8
1. 5
1.9
5. 1 22. 1
4. 4
8.7 16.0
9.6
0. 9 30. 2 10. 6
3. 5 17.8 14. 5
28
28
28
28
0225 226. 1 3195.0
0830 195.6 2390.4
1429 283.0 5004. 5
2025 349. 8 7646. 2
1.6
2.5
2. 1
1. 8
1.4 14. 5 23. 1 18.2 10.0 15.3 11.8
4.6
1.0 12.9 26.9 18. 1 13.8 11.2
8.2
5.7
0. 8 13. 2 32. 3 19. 9
4. 6
8. 2 11. 5
7. 9
0. 4
4. 3 21. 2 18. 2 15. 6 13. 3 14. 3 11. 4
29
29
29
29
0225
0825
1426
2025
383.0 9169.3
353.4 7806. 5
281.2 4941.4
255.0 4062. 5
1.4
1.7
1.2
2. 1
0.7
0. 2
0.3
0. 3
1. 1
0. 8
0.2
0.2
30
30
30
30
0225
0828
1424
2025
217. 9 2968. 1
202. 6 2564. 2
170.0 1806. 3
181. B 2065.2
1.
1.
2.
3.
0.
0.
0.
6.
0. B
2. 9 22. 4 38. 5 16. 0 10. 1
2. 2
3. 2 15. 3 31. 1 25. 3 14. 0
1. 1 11. 5 15. 2 24. 7 26.2 11.6
2. 3 11. 6 28. 9 23. 8 12. 8
7. 2
31
31
31
31
0225 311.9 6080.5
0825 338.8 7172. 6
1426 390. 4 9525. 6
2025 385. 1 9269. 8
2
3
3
0
4
4
7
5
4. 0
2. 5 22. 4 20. 3 16. 9
2. 8
7.1
9. 5
17.9
9.7 27.6
4. 6 30. 3
6.3 21.0
4.7 11. 1
20. 8
19.9
14. 7
12.6
22. 3 12. 8
19.5 11.9
16. 7
9. 4
16.8
9. 5
7. 9
7. 8
6.0
7. 1
6. 1
20.6 14.9 11.4 13.0
35. 0 11. 1
9. 4
7. 3
30.8 19.7 12.8
8.2
35. 1 18. 1 11.6 17.2
a2
7. 6
7. 1
4. 4
4.2 12.0 13.9 11.4 16.6 19.5
9.3
9.4
4.2
3. 1
2. 3 13. 0
6. 6 17. 9 16. 8 19. 7 14. 0
7. 1
3. 1
0. 7
2. 5 19. 3 27. 1 17. 8 13. 0 12. 1
5. 0
2. 6
0. 2
3. 1
9. 6 17. 2 25. 2 15.8 16. 6 10. 2
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
MAR
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
•
•
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4. 0
4.5
5.0
5. 5
6. 0
5,
5,
1,
1,
1.
8,
16,
18,
31,
I,
5,
6,
6.
7.
1,
12,
1,
1,
2,
1,
12,
I,
2,
4,
12,
1.
.1
11.0
7,
1,
1,
10,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR MAR 1984
•
SIG. HT (M. )
•
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE ( MAR)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE ( MAR)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE ( MAR)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
9
8
DATE ( MAR)
3. 4
4. 2
2. 8
1. 8
15
2. 5
22
3. 1
29
3. 8
4. 6
16
3. 6
23
2. 9
30
2. 2
10
2. 7
17
5. 3
24
2. 7
31
3. 9
1. 9
11
3. 6
18
3. 6
25
3. 4
1. 5
12
4. 4
19
5. 9
26
3. 5
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
DATE ( MAR )
1. 9
13
3. 5
20
4. 5
27
3. 2
1. 7
14
3. 1
21
4. 1
28
3. 5
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
COOUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
APR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. SO)
(CM. )
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS).
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
0.
0.
0.
1.
5
4
5
2
1. 6
1. 2
1. 0
1. 6
8.
2.
5.
4.
5
5
4
2
23.
23.
25.
31.
8
2
0
3
25.
23.
20.
23.
0
2
5
7
17.
22.
20.
16.
3
3
1
3
12.
15.
17.
10.
8
5
6
9
9.
10.
8.
8.
4
7
2
0
9.
36.
39.
22.
1
5
7
9
1. 0
1.4
12. 6
19. 8
6.
4.
3.
2.
2
3
8
0
31.
13.
6.
6.
1
15.
12.
8.
8.
8
9
0
3
15.
12.
13.
21.
9
3
4
4
10.
9.
6.
9.
9
8
8
3
5.
6.
5.
7.
0
3.7
2. 8
3.4
11.9
7. 0
3.0
28. 1
24. 4
37. 3
37. 6
19. 5
7. 1
11. 3
5. 9
11. 3
14.2
3. 3
5.4
11. 5
7. 9
8.7
7.9
7. 2
5.7
4.8
4. 4
6. 1
5128.3
3503.6
4242. 5
2. 1
1.9
1. 1
0.3
0.4
0. 1
4.5
1. 3
0. 9
30.9
28.2
3. 6
16.2
19.7
46. 7
12.9
19.6
17.8
14.6
9. 1
11.4
14.2
11.8
11. 6
4.8
8. 5
7. 2
219.6
222. 0
212. 0
211.2
3012.9
3081. 3
2809. 1
2787.0
1. 2
1. 0
1.6
1.2
0.4
0. 5
0. 5
1.2
1. 0
1.7
3. 9
4.2
19.4
5. 9
12. 8
5.4
19.3
47. 2
15. 0
27.5
23.3
19. 1
30. 9
23.8
16.8
9. 7
18. 9
21.4
10.4
9. 2
7. 7
10.0
8.6
6.2
9. 2
5.8
0223
0827
1426
2025
223.8
239.2
254. 4
291.5
3129. 1
3576. 1
4045. 4
5311.5
1.8
1.6
5. 6
4.7
0. 3
0.2
4. 2
29.9
7. 5
4.9
2. 5
0.7
13.4
8.8
12. 0
4.2
37.8
9. 1
20. 4
17.7
14.7
31.0
20. 9
21.8
13.9
13.7
13. 5
8.2
6.2
19.6
13. 9
8.8
4.9
11. 7
7. 5
4.6
7
0227
356.5
7942.1
2. 5
57.3
6.3
1.3
1.6
4.2
15.1
6.9
5.3
9
0833
4567. 7
7227. 5
1. 7
1. 2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 7
0. 4
3. 9
2. 5
27. 3
12. 9
26. 4
44. 0
18. 8
15. 8
13. 2
8. 9
8. 1
14. 7
10.8
14. 1
25.6
10. 3
16. 8
9. 8
1
1
I
1
0225
0825
1425
2028
365.
338.
296.
294.
3
3
2
0
8341.
7154.
5482.
5403.
5
4
3
0
1. 5
1.6
2. 1
3. 3
n
c.
n
c.
n
c.
n
r..
0225
0825
1424
2024
280.
355.
355.
335.
8
7
7
3
4929.
7909.
7905.
7027.
3
8
5
7
5.
3.
4.
2.
3
3
3
0225
0828
1425
252. 5
293. 1
296.2
3983. 5
5368.6
5484.7
4
4
4
0834
1434
2034
286.4
236.8
260. 5
5
5
5
5
0234
0857
1424
2025
6
6
6
6
5
3
3
9
5
3
2
9
2034
270. 3
340. 1
10
10
10
10
0300
0833
1438
2038
375. 1 8794.9
442. 4 12231. 9
601. 3 22601. 3
596.2 22217.8
1.8
5. 1
5. 4
4. 5
0.
0.
9.
8.
3
7
9
7
0.3
1. 7
16. 5
20.5
5.2
7. 9
9. 7
8. 3
17.3
36. 4
8. 3
12.2
24.2
16. 5
4. 7
12.6
14.9
7. 6
18. 0
12.8
11
0238
0842
1428
612.7 23461. 2
616.1 23721.9
473.3 14002.9
7. 1
3.9
3.0
12. 9
3.9
2.0
13. 8
21.6
14.9
8. 5
14.0
9.2
6. 8
9.8
19.0
8. 6
10.5
15.2
15.8
12.7
11.5
11
11
11. 1
11.2
13. 4
10. 8
15.4
3
4
7
13. 4
13.2
10. 2
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
APR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
11
2027
397.8
9892.2
3.5
3. 1
11.4
16.0
11.4
10.4
11.8
18.2
14.6
12
12
12
12
0226
0826
1426
2025
405.8 10292.7
404.0 10202.3
479.0 14342.8
393. 1 9659. 3
2.6
1.8
1.6
1. 6
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
6.2
2.7
0.4
0. 4
16.3
15.8
2.9
7. 5
16.5
20.1
22.4
23. 3
10.4
27.0
39.2
33. 0
13.7
12.1
I I. 6
11. 2
14.0
11.8
10.2
15. 1
20.4
8.8
11.7
8. 1
13
13
13
13
0225
0827
1427
2025
316.
269.
252.
168.
5
5
4
2
1.6
1. 3
1. 4
2. 1
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
0. 1
0.6
0. 3
0. 2
0. 2
3.
2.
2.
1.
9
6
4
5
22.3
16. 5
16. 1
11.9
37.9
36. 0
40. 8
35. 2
24.
17.3
3
21.6
25. 8
8.6
10. 9
10. 6
13. 8
8.2
8. 3
7. 0
9. 9
14
14
14
14
0225
0825
1423
2025
133.1
122. 6
125. 4
149. 1
1106.4
940. 0
982. 5
1390. 3
3.3
2. 6
2. 4
2. 9
0.3
0. 1
0. 3
0. 1
0.4
0. 4
0. 7
0. 2
1.4
1.9
0. 9
0. 8
10.9
7.
10. 8
5. 9
27.5
nn c..
22. 7
16. 9
26.8
25. 3
34. 1
40. 7
15.6
25. 6
15. 0
17. 9
14.3
15. 3
13. 5
15. 0
15
15
15
15
0225
0825
1425
2025
145. 2
182. 0
153.2
164. 1
1316. 8
2069. 6
1466.6
1683. 2
2. 5
1. 5
1.9
1. 8
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0.1
0. 4
1. 3
0. 7
0.8
0. 6
6. 0
1. 3
1.8
1. 2
15. 4
10. 1
11.3
6.6
35. 9
30. 1
33.8
39. 4
12. 2
34. 4
31.7
36. 2
26. 7
22. 1
18.9
14. 1
16
16
16
16
0227
0825
1430
2025
186.
189.
163.
181.
2178.
2235.
1679.
2064.
5
1
9
6
2. 1
1. 8
1. 7
1. 6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
6.
29.
27.
33.
40.
28.
32.
29.
29.
21.
18.
22.
9
3
7
1
7. 2
9. 8
10. 0
8.5
17
17
17
0225
0825
2025
157. 1
157.4
169. 6
1542.8
1549.2
1798. 0
2.9
1.4
0. 6
0.2
0. 2
1. 6
0. 2
0. 1
0.,3
1.4
0.3
0. 7
18
18
18
18
0225
0828
1430
2027
235. 7
282. 2
237.4
366. 8
3472. 0
4978.8
3522.2
8409. 0
1. 0
1.3
1. 1
2. 1
1. 1
1. 0
0. 5
0. 6
6. 5
3. 8
4.8
2. 5
0. 5
0. 7
19
19
19
19
0226
0826
1428
2026
352.0 7745.8
447. 8 12535. 2
439.0 12045.8
415. 8 10805. 6
2.6
2. 6
2.7
2. 0
0.8
0. 7
0.9
1. 1
9.6
7. 4
12.1
12. 8
20
0226
426. 1 11345. 5
3. 2
0. 4
2. 3
6
8
2
2
7
1
9
8
6263.
4549.
3974.
1768.
2
1
4
2
3
3
3
3
4
7
7
4
12.
8.
9.
4.
6
5
1
3
3
7
5
2
5
3
3
7
6-4
32.8
30.3
9. 5
31.0
31.8
20. 1
17. 5
20.0
36. 4
9.2
9.3
30. 8
6
0
5
0
6. 1
34. 0
44.6
29. 0
32. 7
31. 4
22.3
12. 9
29. 8
9. 3
8.4
12. 1
22. 2
10. 1
11.4
11. 2
15.3
33. 9
13.5
23. 5
24.3
18. 7
19.1
13. 7
14.3
4. 2
11.5
15. 4
15.1
6. 8
12.2
9. 3
11.4
16. 2
17.7
13.7
6.9
9. 9
10.9
9.0
23.4
23.6
17. 1
9. 1
15.2
6. 0
4.9
7. 0
5. 3
7. 1
0. 5
0.
9.
2.
23.
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
APR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SG)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
6.8
11.4
1. 3
26. 6
37.8
27. 6
20. 0 18. 0
14.4. 14.6
31. 3 20. 7
15. 0
11.1
10. 4
9. 6
8.5
5. 7
8
1
1
1
2. 8
n n
2.2
3.3
0. 9
6. 2
11.4
5.0
5. 0
30. 8
28.4
24.9
33. 8
29. 3
22.0
32.2
29. 1
19. 6
20.6
21.4
10. 6
9. 5
11.8
11.5
10. 2
19.
5.
1.
0.
3
3
3
4
12. 1
18. 7
18.
1. 8
24.
7
21. 0
34.8
37. 9
14.
22.
12.
20.
2
3
5
6
7. 1
13. 8
12.3
21.8
10. 6
10. 3
12.8
10. 5
5.
5.
5.
5.
4
9
5
7
1.
0.
1.
0.
3
6
1
4
1. 4
2. 4
n
c....c.n
0. 9
14.
14.
19.
10.
39.
22.
25.
29.
4
5
6
6
16. 1
18. 5
15. 2
17. 0
12. 0
22.2
13. 4
22. 2
12.
17.
21.
19.
0
5
8
4
0. 2
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0. 5
0. 5
0. 5
0.4
1. 3
1. 2
1. 0
1.9
13. 7
33. 0
13.7
14.8
25. 6
27. 3
47. 5
31.4
20. 7
15. 5
8. 4
19.3
20. 9
12. 8
14.0
18.8
16. 8
8. 8
14. 5
12.7
1.0
0. 8
0. 6
0. 7
0.2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0.8
0. 8
0. 9
0. 3
7.6
4. 7
7. 8
6. 9
31.
37.
31.
20.
5
0
0
8
25.0
28. 6
27. 8
31. 6
22.4
18. 2
20. 0
22. 9
11.8
10. 0
12. 1
16. 9
2893. 0
2295.2
2192. 5
1985. 3
0. 6
0.7
0. 5
0. 9
0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 3
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 2
0.4
0. 3
0. 3
2. 0
1.0
0. 8
1. 7
22. 6
17.6
13. 8
9. 3
37. 5
31.9
32. 4
34. 5
22. 6
33.2
35. 6
26. 1
14.
15.
16.
27.
7
5
8
2
5
5
2
9
1902. 1
2364. 2
2006. 9
1933. 2
0.
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.
6
4
4
2
1. 5
5.8
3. 3
1. 2
0. 3
1. 5
19. 1
10. 0
1.
0.
0.
5.
5
6
6
1
9. 9
5. 7
4. 2
... 1. 3
34. 7
44. 3
31. 0
16. 5
32.
26.
21.
36.
18.
14.
19.
29.
1
7
7
0
1725
2324
125. 4
130. 8
982. 1
1069. 8
0. 9
0. 8
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
1. 1
0. 9
20. 3
8. 6
20.8
15. 4
3. 5
6. 8
28. 4
45. 2
25. 2
22. 4
0524
133. 6
1115. 2
0. 5
0. 1
0.2
0.4
5.8
26. 5
19.3
27.7
19. 8
20
20
20
0823
1425
2025
386. 3
333.5
270. 4
9328. 8
6950.0
4570. 7
1.7
1.5
1. 8
0. 4
0.3
0. 2
2. 2
0.9
1. 5
21
21
21
21
0226
0826
1426
2026
225. 7
157. 3
170.4
212. 9
3182. 7
1546.0
1814.2
2831. 9
1. 3
1. 5
0.9
1. 7
0. 2
0. 3
0.2
7. 0
0.
2.
1.
2.
22
==
22
==
nn..
22
229
a..a..
0225
0826
1425
2026
399. 3
374. 9
338.2
275. 2
9965. 2
8784. 8
7148.9
4733. 8
4. 8
2. 4
2. 1
1. 6
2.
0.
0.
0.
2
6
3
2
23
23
23
23
0226
0827
1429
2029
222.
213.
290.
327.
3
5
4
5
3087.
2849.
5272.
6702.
4
0
1
6
1.
1.
1.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0
7
2
2
24
24
24
24
0229
0829
1430
2028
283. 5
315. 2
329.7
287.0
5023.
6208.
6792.
5149.
6
4
6
1
0. 8
1. 1
0. 7
0.9
25
25
25
25
0229
0829
1427
2027
286.0
284. 1
248. 2
221. 9
5113.
5043.
3849.
3077.
5
1
6
3
26
26
26
26
0229
0830
1432
2027
215. 1
191.6
187. 3
178. 2
27
27
27
27
0229
0828
1431
2026
174.
194.
179.
175.
28
28
29
6
4
2
7
9
8
7
0
5
7
8
1
0
6
5
2
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
APR 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. )
(CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
29
29
29
1125
1724
2325
120.7
84. 7
94. 6
910.5
448. 8
558. 9
0.6
1. 2
0.6
0.4
0. 5
0.4
0.3
1. 1
0.9
0.4
1. 4
1. 1
2. 5
5. 6
3.8
25.8
24. 6
10. 2
31.6
19. 3
13. 9
21.2
21. 2
14. 2
17.7
25. 4
55. 4
30
30
30
30
0525
0824
1426
2025
97. 4
99.1
98. 1
138.0
593. 2
613.7
601. 4
1190. 5
0. 3
3.8
1.5
1. 5
0. 6
0.8
0. 5
0. 5
0.
1.
1.
0.
0. 9
1.3
2. 0
0.7
2. 8
2.9
2. 0
1. 5
14. 5
11.8
11. 5
6.6
26. 2
11.4
24. 0
11.6
12. 2
22.8
18. 9
31. 6
42. 2
44.4
38. 4
46. 1
8
1
6
3
6-4
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
APR
1984
PERSISTENCE
•CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
•
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1. 0
1. 5
2. 0
2.5
3.0
3. 5
4. 0
4. 5
5.0
5.5
6. 0
3,
1,
4,
I,
4,
4,
4,
1,
4,
1,
4,
1,
5,
1,
1,
1,
I,
6,
18,
19,
19,
19,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
1,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR APR 1984
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
DATE
15
I. 8
( APR)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
0. 0
( APR)
SIG. HT (M. )
nn
c.m.
4. 0
29
( APR)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
( APR)
I.
3. 0
3. 6
3. 7
3
3. 4
16
1. 9
23
3. 3
30
1. 4
10
6. 0
17
1. 7
24
3. 3
31
0. 0
2. 9
2. 9
11
6. 2
18
3. 7
25
2. 9
12
4. 8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
( APR)
13
3. 2
20
4. 3
27
1. 9
3. 6
14
1. 5
21
2. 3
28
1. 3
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY. ENERGY
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAY 1984
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
PST.SIG. HT TOT. EN 22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8 8-6 6-4
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
7. 8
7. 4
7. 9 37. 5
11.4 52.7
41. 9
24. 6
19.4
35. 7
28. 4
14. 8
14.0 39.4 22.6
20. 0 25. 5 30. 6
25. 9 27. 4 22. 0
X 8.3 33.0 24.8
9.4
8. 7
10. 7
17.9
10.0
10. 9
11. 5
14. 5
33. 8
36. 6
27. 7
30.5
27.8
33. 1
33. 8
31.1
15. 5
14. 9
18. 5
17.6
14. 6
10. 5
16. 5
17.4
1.6
1.5
1. 6
1. 5
27.4
18.6
27.9
17. 6
37.2
44.9
28.1
18.8
21.1
19. 2
24. 2
26. 5
10.3
14.8
6
34. 2
0.7
0. 3
1. 1
0. 3
1.3
0. 4
0. 9
0. 5
6.2
4. 2
8. 5
12. 2
19.4
39.4
40.3
54. 8
33.5
36.8
30. 1
21. 0
38.2
18. 6
18. 3
10. 7
0. 2
0.2
0. 3
0. 2
0.7
0.4
0. 3
0. 3
0. 9
1.2
0. 6
1. 4
14. 1
18.9
4. 4
17.5
38. 1
43.7
36. 4
29.0
30. 9
23.7
22. 8
24.5
14. 6
11.4
34. 7
26. 9
0.
0.
5.
3.
4
6
9
4
1.
1.
1.
6.
1
4
6
1
1.
2.
4.
6.
0
2
5
9
15. 3
19.0
5. 6
4. 5
36.
27.2
28. 2
27. 3
18. 1
24.9
18. 7
26. 0
26.
21.
22.
15.
0. 4
1. 4
1. 9
1. 5
2.
3.
2.
12.
3
4
0
4
0.
2.
30.
22.
5
3
9
1
0. 6
3. 4
V. 4
32. 3
4.
8.
14.
13.
24.
3
27.2
10. 2
7. 1
63. 2
37. 4
9. I
7. 8
28. 0
30.4
15. 4
18. 1
9. 9
7. 6
9. 4 11. 7
7. 5
7. 0
1. Et
0. 6
0. 6
2. 9
0. 5
0. 8
0. 4
0. 2
0. 3
1. 2
0. 4
0. 2
1. 4
0. 3
0. 3
351.9 7737.7
330. 4 6821. 5
256.6 4207. 9
256. 6 4115. 9
1.8
1. 2
1. 2
1. 3
0.2
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
0.3
0. 5
0. 3
0. 2
2.8
2. 7
1. 2
0.4
3
3
3
3
0231 186.6 2176. 5
0828 178. 4 1990. 2
1429 173. 3 1877.3
2028 140.9 1241.6
1. 8
0. 9
1. 0
0.9
0. 1
0. 1
0. 3
0.3
0. 3
0. 3
0. 3
0.4
1. 7
0. 3
1. 1
0.7
4. 8
3. 9
1. 3
1.5
4
4
4
4
0230
0825
1425
2025
136.8 1169.2
140.3 1229.7
788. 1
112. 3
790. 5
112. 5
1.4
0.4
0.4
0. 5
0.4
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.3
0.4
0.7
0. 6
0.8
0.5
0.7
0. 7
5 0228 134.0 1121.8
5 0827 179. 3 2009. 7
5 1427 152. 5 1453. 8
5 2027 17B. 7 1995. 6
0.6
0. 4
0. 7
0. 6
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0.5
0. 3
0. 4
0. 1
6
6
6
6
0. 7
0.7
0. 9
0. 6
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0. 1
956. 0
1 0226 123. 7
1 1427 219. 4 3009. 8
1 2026 240. 0 3600. 8
0225
0826
14 27
2028
20
0225 152. 2 1447. 0
0825 151.9 1441.2
1425 150. 0 1406.8
2024 133.9 1120.6
680. 1
301.5
149. 0
79. 6
1.
3.
13.
10.
3
4
0
6
0.
0.
0.
0.
356. 9
7.5. 6
8 0225
216.8
58.9
8 0825
8 1426 157. 2 1544. 7
8 20244 272. 0 4624. 1
4.
6.
1.
2.
7
9
8
8
0. 3
9. 7
2. 9
1. 1
0225 377. 3 8895. 9
9 0828
409.99 10502.00
9 082
2. 7
2. 6
7 0225 104. 3
69.5
7 0827
48. 8
7 1424
35. 7
7 2024
2
2
4
6
0. 7 10. 2
3. 5
0. 6
18. 4
17. 1
2
7
2
4
2
5
7
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAY 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
9
9
1427
2026
372.8 8687.4
405. 2 10262. 1
2.2
2. 8
0.5
1. 0
4.2
2. 4
14.6
22.13
27.6
36. 0
14.7
12. 0
10
10
10
10
0225
0829
1426
2024
347.
280.
275.
197.
0
2
7
7
3. 0
1.8
1. 4
1. 2
0.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
2.
12.
3.
1.
0.
32.
21.
32.
9.
20.
33.
33.
28.
11
11
11
11
0225
0829
1431
2025
187. 8
149.2
150.5
184.6
2205. 2
1391. 1
1416.1
2129.7
0. 8
0.9
0.5
0.7
0. 6
0. 5
0.3
0.3
12
12
0225
0852
141. 1
128. 4
1245.0
1030. 1
0.8
0. 7
14
14
14
0825
1529
2128
155. 9
162. 5
159. 2
1518.13
1649. 8
1585. 0
15
15
15
15
0327
0822
1426
2027
/46. 5
145.9
142. 6
117. 6
16
16
16
16
0226
0825
1424
2028
17
17
17
17
1
1
5
2
7529.
4903.
4744.
2429.
6
3
3
3
2
8
2
3
4
4
7
5
7
9
8
2
0
6
1
3
9.5
5. 3
13.
17.
10.
19.
5
1
5
7
6-4
15.4
12. 6
11.8
5. 6
10.
13.
10.
26.
6.
7.
9.
12.
3
3
6
5
8
2
0
4
2.4
0. 4
1.0
1.0
1.7
3. 7
2.0
1.0
0.3
19. 9
42. 3
6.7
8.4
25. 4
25.2
44.0
59.2
23. 9
16.7
29.7
17.2
23. 6
9.6
13.6
10.8
0.4
0. 1
3.8
n
0.8
3. 0
0.9
1. 5
4. 5
1. 1
43.6
36. 1
31. 1
37. 0
14.6
18. 7
2. 4
0. 9
1. 0
0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
1. 8
1. 0
0. 5
1. 3
0. 7
1. 3
2. 1
1. 2
2. 5
23. 9
21. 4
29. 0
46. 5
56. 8
44.1
22. 1
18. 0
21. 8
1341. 0
1329.9
1271. 8
863.8
3. 1
1.9
1.4
1. 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
2
3
3
0. 9
0.6
1.0
0. 3
0. 9
1.2
1.0
1. 3
2. 7
3.6
2. 1
4.3
33. 7
38.4
42. 9
39. 1
34. 3
30.6
31. 6
2B.2
24. 5
23. 9 .
20. 1
25.3
118.8
110. 6
94.7
95.6
881.9
764. 7
560.9
571.3
2.8
2. 0
1. 4
1.9
0.2
0. 6
0. 4
0.6
0.2
0. 6
0. 9
1.8
0.8
0. 9
2. 1
1.0
1.6
1. 5
5.2
1.8
2. 0
1. 6
1.4
19.0
10. 5
19.0
20. 5
55.0
53. 3
53.7
49. 5
19.0
28.9
19. 0
18. 5
0225
0826
1425
2025
88. 7
89. 7
184. 2
191.8
492. 1
502. 7
2120. 3
2298.4
3. 8
2. 3
1. 5
2.6
O. 3
0. 6
0. 1
0.3
11. 4
14. 9
0. 9
0.6
1. 6
15. 6
9. 8
18.0
8. 9
13. 0
6. 6
15.6
7. 9
20. 6
47. 2
23.7
18. 2
10. 4
24. 7
12.5
30. 4
14. 7
5. 0
8.4
18. 1
8. 4
4. 7
18.7
18
18
18
18
0225
0825
1425
2026
176. 8
186. 9
166.7
169. 3
1954. 3
2182. 6
1736.5
1792. 0
1. 9
0. 8
1.4
1. 9
0. 2
0. 3
0.4
8. 5
0. 3
0. 3
0.3
0. 6
6. 6
4. 4
1.7
1. 3
31. 2
20. 6
20.6
16. 7
7. 9
22. 7
?7.2
31. 7
30. 1
34. 6
24.7
23. 5
14. 5
10. 9
17.5
10. 8
7. 7
5. 8
6.7
5. 3
19
19
0225
0824
232.8
301.8
3386.9
5692.7
4. 1
31.5
7. 9
19.8
24.3
1.2
17.3
5.5
11.0
5. 9
17.8
15. 0
7.7
11. 3
3.7
12. 4
1
1
1
1
2. 2
r...a.
3.7
1.8
n n
=6=
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAY 1984
PST .SIG. HT TOT. EN
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
•
•
6-4
19
19
1423
2025
299. 6
372. 3
5611. 3
8661. 1
2. 9
2. 5
0.8
0. 5
26.7
14. 0
12. 1
29. 0
13.8
13. 4
5.8
8.4
14. 6
6. 7
9.8
15. 0
14.0
11.0
20
20
20
20
0225
0825
1424
2025
286. 2
322.6
262.8
232. 9
5119.9
6504. 1
4317.0
3390. 7
2. 3
1.8
1.5
1. 4
0. 3
0.2
0.2
0. 1
1. 4
1.3
0.5
0. 2
18. 5
11.3
12.2
2. 7
34.9
29.8
18.4
28. 0
20.0
22.7
25.7
30. 7
9. 5
15.0
17.6
21. 6
7. 8
9.6
13.2
9. 8
5. 7
8.8
11.0
5. 9
21
21
21
21
0225
0824
1425
2025
247.
229.
256.
260.
1
0
8
1
3817.
3278.
4120.
4229.
5
8
9
1
1. 5
1.3
1. 1
1. 4
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
1
1
2
0. 3
0. 2
O.2
0. 2
0. 8
0.8
O.7
1. 2
20.
30.
19.
15.
9
6
7
3
37.
20.
47.
39.
18.
27.
15.
19.
0
0
9
3
14.7
12. 4
9. 3
15. 2
7.
7.
6.
8.
0
5
2
5
22
22
cc
nn
22
.....
22
0225
0825
1425
2025
183.
145.
178.
136.
0
3
6
0
2093.
1318.
1994.
1156.
7
9
0
4
1.
1.
0.
0.
4
9
5
5
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
1.9
0. 5
0. 3
0. 1
2. 3
0. 7
0. 7
0. 3
0.9
26.
5.
2.
2.
5
2
3
7
27. 9
48. 4
16. 2
28.4
24. 4
17. 0
22. 6
30.4
12. 2
9. 9
33. 5
22.8
6.
16.
24.
10.
7
9
8
4
23
23
23
23
0224
0825
1426
2029
478. 1 14288. 3
426.4 11365.9
318.0 6318. 8
335. 1 7019. 5
2. 7
1.9
2. 1
1. 7
0. 4
0.2
0. 3
0. 1
3. 8
0.5
0. 6
0. 3
19. 7
31.7
7. 6
1. 3
34. 9
17.2
27. 5
26. 8
8. 1
14.5
23. 4
39. 2
7. 2
8.9
18. 9
14. 3
15. 4
15.5
12. 1
10. 4
8. 3
10.0
8. 0
6. 4
24
24
24
24
0228
0828
1426
2024
313. 1
227. 4
247. 0
193. 8
6125.
3231.
3813.
2347.
8
0
5
1
1. 2
0.9
0. 8
0. 8
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 1
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
0.7
0. 4
0. 2
0. 3
13. 1
10. 9
0. 8
1. 2
45.
51.
32.
31.
0
6
0
8
17. 4
17. 9
47.8
29. 8
10. 1
11.3
12. 4
22. 1
12.
7.
6.
14.
25
25
0225
2024
125. 3
181. 3
980. 6
2054. 3
0. 6
0. 6
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 4
0. 3
1. 0
0. 2
25. 2
3. 0
34. 9
39. 9
20. 6
43. 9
17. 3
12. 3
26
26
26
0225
0825
2025
264. 6
281. 0
274. 2
4376. 5
4935. 4
4699. 5
0. 6
1. 0
0. 9
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
0. 6
2. 9
1. 5
15. 9
29. 5
31. 1
47. 7
33. 3
37. 0
20. 4
18. 9
14. 2
14. 8
14. 3
15. 3
27
27
27
27
0225
0824
1425
2025
190. 1
153. 2
164.2
160. 5
2258. 9
1466. 3
1685.8
1610. 0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0.2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0.2
2. 0
0. 5
0.4
0.3
24.
30.
4.
13.
2
1
6
7
28. 2
26. 1
37. 1
22. 7
26. 7
22. 9
24.2
41. 7
18. 3
19. 7
31.4
20. 9
28
28
0224
0825
121.2
112. 4
918. 5
790. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0.2
0.2
0. 5
0. 3
0.2
0. 3
4.3
0.8
21.6
31. 3
40.4
36.2
31.2
29. 1
cc
•
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
7
7
5
7
1.8
2. 1
2
6
2
3
8
3
2
1
•
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
MAY 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
28
28
1424
2024
103.9
88. 9
675. 1
493. 4
1. 1
1. 4
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 5
0. 5
0. 8
0. 2
0. 7
2. 4
1. 0
18. 7
10. 3
36. 9
21. 8
40. 2
63. 9
29
29
29
0225
1425
2023
96. 6
118. 7
101. 9
582. 7
880.6
648. 7
2. 8
0. 8
2. 4
0. 1
0.2
0. 4
0. 4
0. 5
0. 7
0. 6
0. 3
0. 4
0. 6
0. 3
0. 5
0. 4
0. 4
0. 6
21. 0
4. 8
6. 6
21. 5
16.2
30. 5
53. 1
77.0
58. 5
30
30
30
30
0225
0826
1427
2023
135.
131.
139.
130.
5
6
1
8
1147.
1081.
1209.
1069.
9
9
0
8
3.
1.
0.
1.
9
7
9
8
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
3
5
4
0.
0.
1.
1.
5
9
4
1
1.2
0. 3
0. 2
0. 2
0.
1.
1.
4.
8
9
6
7
3.0
2. 3
6.8
18. 1
57.
56.
61.
50.
9
8
6
4
32.
36.
27.
23.
4
1
5
5
31
31
31
31
0225
0826
1425
2025
109.
141.
160.
193.
8
7
5
7
753.
1254.
1610.
2344.
9
1
3
5
3. 4
1.7
0. 6
0. 9
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
2
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
3
2
1
1. 4
1. 1
0.9
0. 7
0. 7
0.2
0. 2
0. 4
2. 2
1.0
1. 4
1. 3
26. 9
30.4
26. 7
29. 1
40. 1
50.8
31. 8
37. 3
25.
14.
38.
30.
3
9
6
4
6-4
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
MAY
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS —N— METERS OR LESS
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1.0
1. 5
2. 0
2. 5
3. 0
3. 5
4.0
4. 5
5. 0
5. 5
6. 0
1,
1,
5,
1,
1,
1,
5,
6,
6,
3,
9,
18,
18,
18,
e.
12,
12,
12,
12,
1,
5,
2,
in.,
3,
9,
8,
3,
1,
1,
1,
5,
5,
5,
8,
CP
3,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
DATE
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( MAY)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( MAY)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( MAY)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
( MAY)
1. 9
3. 5
2. 4
2. 7
15
1. 5
22
1. 8
29
I. 2
4. 1
16
1. 2
23
4. 8
30
1. 4
10
3. 5
17
I. 9
24
3. 1
31
1. 9
1. 4
11
1. 9
18
1. 9
25
I. 8
5,
1984
MAY
1. 8
12
1. 4
19
3. 7
26
2. 8
7
6
5
4
( MAY).
SIG. HT (M. )
5,
1,
7,
8,
1. 5
13
0. 0
20
3. 2
27
1. 9
1. 0
14
1. 6
21
2. 6
28
1. 2
WAVE ENERGY SPECTRA JUN 1984
31
•-
•
t 21 –
co
Cr)
--.11111111•111111C
Ot • •
"111Z
•• • .■■■,,,
•
• .0
1111116
20
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
4
ZOGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUN 1984
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL
ENERGY
INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
•
BAND
PERIOD
LIMITS (SECS)
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
8-6
22-18
18-16
16-14
14-12
12-10 10-B
22+
AY/TIME . (CM. ) (CM. SO)
•
•
•
•
7
0
4
1
47. 1
29. 5
13. 3
29. 5
30. 1
45. 9
42. 3
44. 9
17.
20.
41.
23.
0. 3
0. 6
0. 7
2.4
0. 8
0. 4
0. 5
1.9
35. 9
15. 7
21.8
14. 1
42. 6
48.8
44. 6
51.0
19. 0
33. 9
31. 0
27.7
1. 5
1. 5
1. 2
1.0
2. 5
2. 9
1.9
2. 6
6. 0
11.8
20. 4
10. 9
10. 1
25. 1
35. 8
44.1
47. 0
34.9
20. 4
28. 4
32.
23.
19.
12.
0. 3
0.2
0.2
0. 1
1. 0
0. 4
0.4
0. 3
1. 9
1. 0
1. 1
0. 4
2. 1
14. 7
25.0
3. 4
10.8
40.4
44.1
51. 3
37. 9
28. 3
17.5
30. 0
45. 6
14. 7
11.2
14. 5
1
1
1
1
O. 1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 3
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
6
4
8
22. 7
16. 1
1. 4
6. 0
38. 7
59. 0
52. 3
44. 1
23. 1
13. 7
25. 9
29. 0
14. 1
9. 6
19. 1
19. 1
1. 3
O.8
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0.2
2. 2
1. 2
22. 7
19.8
27. 8
38.7
29. 3
28.3
16. 7
11. 3
5
1
9
9
0.
1.
0.
0.
7
3
8
9
0. 1
0.2
0. 1
0. 2
0.
0.
0.
0.
1. 0
1.4
0. 3
0. 2
6. 5
13.0
3. 0
0. 7
21. 2
31.3
20. El
19. 0
35. 9
26.0
34. 4
46. 3
18. B
14. 1
25. 5
24. 7
16. 0
13. 1
15. 3
8. 3
3
8
4
6
0.
2.
0.
0.
9
8
7
7
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
1
3
0. 2
0. 4
0. 9
1. 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
1
4
5
7
18. 9
16. 1
7. 1
19. 5
42.
2
39. 5
47. 8
35. 9
20.
28.
29.
29.
16.
12.
13.
13.
0. 1
0. 3
0. 1
5. 5
^ 1
1. 5
1.4
1. 4
0. 5
0.8
0. 4
0. 4
3.8
7. 8
5. 7
36.7
22. 6
25. 7
29.9
37. 0
34. 0
1
5
9
5
1.9
1. 2
O. 3
0. 6
0. 1
0. 1
O. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0. 4
O. 3
0. 2
0.
0.
O.
0.
200. 7
172. 6
132.5
121.8
2516. 9
1861. 3
1097.9
927.4
I. 0
0. 3
0. 6
0.6
0. 1
0. 1
0. 3
0.2
0. 2
0. 3
0. 3
0.3
0. 6
0. 5
0. 6
2.4
0225
0825
1423
2025
102.
123.
126.
112.
659.
958.
1002.
791.
0
9
1
6
0. 5
0. 2
1. 1
0.7
0. 3
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 5
0.4
0. 3
0. 5
4
4
4
4
0254
0828
1430
2024
119.2
231. 8
202.9
241. 4
888. 5
3359. 6
2574.1
3641. 9
0. 7
0. 6
1.0
0. 4
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
0225
0829
1427
2025
204.
185.
225.
158.
2619.
2142.
3170.
1566.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
6
0829
2024
194. 0
284.2
2352. 3
5047. 3
7
7
7
7
0227
0827
1428
2028
276. 5
253.0
232. 3
237. 1
4779.
4001.
3373.
3513.
8
8
8
8
0227
0831
1424
2025
176. 5
158. 5
149. 0
128.2
1946.
1570.
1388.
1026.
9
9
9
0225
0826
1425
109.7
118. 0
144. 5
751. 5
870. 1
1304. 9
0225
0828
1424
2022
180.
162.
173.
205.
0225
0824
1425
2025
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
9
7
1
1
7
9
6
5
7
2
2
3
2046.
1654.
1871.
2629.
6-4
2
7
5
1
7
0
B
9
0.4
0. 6
0. 4
2
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
3
6
5
5
2
4
3
2
3
2
5
2.
2.
1.
1.
2
3
3
3
7
2
2
3
9
8
8
3
2
4
2
1
0
6
9
1
21.9
28.
32. 2
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUN 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
9
2025
173.8
1887.7
0. 5
0. 1
0. 3
2. 1
0. 3
1.7
37.0
40.4
18. 1
10
10
10
10
0225
0825
1425
2025
165. 4
141. 1
108. 2
107. 1
1710.
1245.
732.
716.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
5
3
4
1. 3
1.7
3. 4
4. 6
0.
0.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
1.
33.
32.
19.
26.
6
5
3
6
40. 2
37. 9
46. 4
37. 1
22.
25.
28.
28.
11
1I
11
11
0225
0827
1429
2024
65.3
53.8
65.3
483. 5
266.6
180.7
266. 5
2. 1
4.4
3.9
3.6
0. 1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.8
0. 5
0.2
4.6
2.4
4.5
4.9
3. 3
4.2
5.4
3.6
1.3
0.9
1.4
0.7
24.3
17.6
15.4
10.9
34.6
32.4
37.8
13.3
29.9
37.8
30.9
62.7
12
12
12
12
0225
0825
1425
2025
91. 0
105. 7
110. 3
135.0
517. 5
698. 0
760.7
1138.9
5. 5
4. 2
0. 5
1.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
2. 5
1. 5
1. 7
0.8
0. 4
0. 3
0. 5
0.7
3. 1
2. 4
3.6
5.4
16. 2
32. 8
43.9
43.3
70.
58.
49.
48.
13
13
13
13
0225
0828
1430
2028
147. 2
169. 5
137.8
149. 7
1354. 3
1795. 4
1186.6
1401. 3
2. 4
1.2
0.7
1. 1
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
14
14
14
14
0228
0828
1428
2028
163. 5
168. 3
136.7
135. 9
1671.
1770.
1167.
1154.
2.
1.
0.
0.
15
15
15
15
0228
0828
1427
2025
141.8
115.2
108. 5
153.9
1257. 3
829.2
735. 4
1479. 5
16
16
16
0225
0825
1425
159. 3
146. 1
156. 6
17
17
17
17
0225
0825
1424
2028
190.
186.
186.
167.
18
0225
168. 5
BB. 0
2
0
6
2
3
2
3
6
7
8
5
9
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
4
3
2
2
7
9
0
4
0
7
2
4
5
4
1
3
0. 1
0. 3
0.2
0. 1
0. 6
0. 3
0. 5
0. 4
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
6
5
4
0. 8
0. 5
0.7
0. 5
12. 9
11. 1
20. 5
20. 1
54. 8
58.4
53.2
52. 6
28. 2
27.9
23.9
25. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0.4
0. 2
0. 7
0. 3
0. 5
0. 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
3
5
5
1. 1
1. 6
1.2
0. 7
28. 3
33. 5
20.9
14. 0
43.
36.
34.
39.
8
4
1
8
23. 4
27. 0
41.9
43.8
2. 3
1.2
0.3
0. 9
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
2
2
0.2
0.3
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
0.2
0. 4
0. 2
0.9
0.7
0. 9
0. 5
1.0
1.8
2.8
1.3
10.0
4.6
4. 0
5. 9
58. 5
48.0
47. 0
59. 7
27. 3
43.6
44. 6
31. 5
1586. 8
1334.2
1532. 7
0. 9
0. 3
0. 4
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0. 4
0. 4
0. 4
0. 4
3. 5
5. 6
1. 0
2.9
20. 9
14. 0
11. 6
9. 2
64. 0
54.7
31. 0
19. 4
26.7
32. 7
2260.
2162.
2175.
1748.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
2
0. 2
0. 3
0. 1
0. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
2.
0.
0.
0
4
7
6
18. 7
20. 2
18. 1
12. 8
26.
33.
23.
24.
26.
22.
25.
30.
9
6
0
7
25. 7
20. 6
31.7
30. 7
0. 1
0. 2
0. 5
0. 2
7. 8
37. 5
16. 7
4
4
3
0
2
4
1
0
1773. 5
4
2
9
9
8
3
5
4
0. 4
0. 1
5
5
9
5
4
5
1
9
3
5
3
2
7
4
9
7
37. 0
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUN 1984
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8 8-6
6-4
18
18
18
0838
1428
2026
155. 5
124. 9
99. 5
1511. 9
974. 7
618. 3
0. 3
0. 7
0. 3
0. 2
0. 3
0. 8
0. 4
0. 2
0. 3
0. 6
0. 6
1. 2
0. 2
0. 4
0. 5
1. 5
0. 8
1. 6
28. 7 41. 5 27. 1
22. 3 31. 6 43. 3
26. 9 25. 6 43. 3
19
19
19
19
0226
0826
1427
2028
96. 3
71.7
60. 0
53. 2
579. I
321. 5
225.1
176. 6
0. 3
1.2
4. 5
1. 2
1. 1
1.9
1. 3
0.8
2. 0
6. 6
1. 0
1. 5
0. 9
2.5
3. 3
2. 4
0. 6
0.6
1. 4
1. 9
20. 5 33.
15.7 37.
22. 8 32.
9. 8 47.
20
20
20
0226
0825
1431
65. 0
73. 6
101. 9
264. 3
338. 5
649. 0
0. 9
2. 6
1. 5
nn
r...c.
1. 2
0. 4
4. 4
3. 6
2. 5
nn
a...6
1. 1
1. 3
3. 2
2. 4
1. 2
1. 6
1. 1
1. 2
5. 1 24. 6 56. 2
5. 5 18. 0 64. 9
7. 9 25. 1 59. 4
21
2025
157.3
1545.7
0.7
3.2
1.0
1.0
0.4
1.9
29.6 51.2 11.5
1291.8
923. 9
845.0
0.7
O. 8
0.7
10.8
11.9
10.4
0.6
1. 2
1.2
0. 5
0. 4
1.4
nn
143.8
121. 6
116.3
0.9
c.c.
0225
0825
1427
31. 1 34.9 19. 5
29.4 39.7 15. 3
11.3 42.4 31.2
25
25
25
0826
1428
2028
98. 5
101. 2
86. 8
606. 9
639. 5
470. 6
0. 5
0. 5
1. 4
0. 9
2. 1
1.3
6. 3
3. 0
7. 6
1. 0
1. 8
0.8
8. 0
7. 3
6. 0
42. 9 26. 4 11.7
40. B 35. 7 8. 3
44. 2 22. 3 14. 1
26
26
26
26
0228
0827
1426
2028
81.
88.
82.
98.
0
1. 8
0. 7
2. 4
0. 9
0. 6
22
22
c.c.
5
2
9
3
415.
485.
429.
604.
7
1
3
3. 4
0.9
1.5
2. 4
1. 6
0. 7
0.9
1. 3
2. 3
3. 1
1. 1
1.9
19. 0 10. 2
8. 8 20. 7
7. 3 11.8
5. 1 28. 1
3. 1
0. 6
3. 2
552. 2
94. 0
27 0225
nc.n
c.
0.
8
2.
7
871.2
27 0827 11B. 1
4.0
1. 1
1. 1
781.1
27 1425 III. 8
1.4
0. 5
1.4
27 2029 130.7 1067.8
•
0.8
2. 6
3. 1
2.3
4. 5
0. 6
0. 5
2. 3
1. 6
0.7
3. 1
3
1
6
4
41.
39.
29.
26.
4
3
1
4
8. 3
25. 3 31. 8
4. 9 21. 6 36. 7
4. 3 29.7 42. 3
3.6 35.8 17. 3
9. 6 21. 9 13. 5 15. 4 20. 7 12. 7
7. 7 20.7 14.9 14. 3
16. 7 20.5
8.2
6.2 27.8 21.8
3.7 26.5
5.2 22. 1 11.7 21.2 23.2 13.7
28
28
28
28
0227
0827
1426
2025
131.0
165. 8
189. 6
231. 7
1072.9
1718. 2
2246. 3
3355. 7
2.9
1.6
1. 2
1.8
0. 5
0.7
0. 4
0. 3
1.3
1. 0
0. 3
0. 4
6.2 13.7 14. 1 25.8
2. 4 27. 3 19. 6 20. 7
8. 0 29. 0 31. 1
2. 0
4. 8 42. 4 26. 6
0. 8
29
29
29
29
0225
0825
1425
2023
209. 8
221.0
229.9
223. 7
2751. 8
3051.4
3303.8
3128. 3
1. 9
1.0
1.3
1. 2
0. 4
0. 1
0.2
0. 2
0. 4
0.4
0.3
0. 5
1. 8
9. 5
26.6
17. 0 10. 1
6. 3
22. 0
9. 2
14. 2
9. 8 12. 0
4. 2 36. 6 39. 5
1.6 39.3 31.5 14.3 11.2
6.7 43.3 24.0 12.3 10.5
1.9
7. 1
1.8 21. 7 33. 9 23. 2 10.8
1.0
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUN 1984
PST
SIG. HT TOT. EN
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
30
30
30
30
1.9
1. 2
0. 9
1. 0
0225 241. 1 3634.4
0825 232. 8 3388. 0
1424 219. 5 3012. 0
2025 220. 2 3029. 9
0.2
O. 1
0. 2
0. 4
0. 3
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
6-4
1.4 20. 5 41. 1 21.4
7.7
6. 1
0. 7 13. 5 31. 7 25. 1 15. 1 12. 8
0. 4
2. 1 36. 0 26. 4 15. 9 18. 4
0. 4
0. 9 33. 7 27. 4 17. 2 19. 3
•
•
•
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
JUN
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS —N— METERS OR LESS
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1. 0
1. 5
2. 0
2.5
3. 0
3. 5
4. 0
4.5
5.0
5. 5
6. 0
1,
2,
15,
15,
6,
6,
6,
6,
6,
6,
6,
1,
1,
1,
5,
22,
22,
22,
22,
22,
22,
22,
1,
2,
3,
6,
3,
1,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR JUN 1984
a
•
SIG. HT (M. )
SIG. HT (M. )
40
DATE
( JUN)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE ( JUN)
SIG. HT (M. )
40
DATE ( JUN)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
DATE ( JUN)
1. 3
2. 0
2. 1
1. 8
15
1. 5
22
1.4
29
2.3
1. 7
16
1. 6
23
0.0
30
2. 4
10
1. 7
17
1. 9
24
0.0
31
0. 0
2. 4
11
0. 9
18
1. 7
25
1.0
2. 3
12
1. 3
19
1. 0
26
1.0
7
6
5
4
3
2
.L.
1
DATE ( JUN)
2. El
13
1. 7
20
1. 0
27
1.3
2.13
14
1. 7
21
1. 6
28
2.3
WAVE ENERGY SPECTRA JUL 1984
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUL 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
1
1
1
0225
0825
2025
207.0
162.9
200. 6
2679.0
1658.7
2514. 6
1.4
0. 5
1. 1
0.2
1. 2
0. 6
0.9
7. 3
2. 9
0.2
I. 5
15. 0
0.7
n n
c..c.
1. 1
19.2
15.6
7. 4
32.3
35.8
32. 0
27.7
18. 2
17. 8
17.9
18. 3
22. 5
c2.
2
c.
2n
0225
0825
1426
219. 3
280.6
246.6
3006. 5
4919.5
3801.9
1. 9
1.5
1.2
0. 3
0.3
0.2
0. 9
0.3
0.3
18. 3
18.0
8.4
6. 5
23.5
21.8
12. 3
15.9
32.2
29. 0
17.9
12. 5
17. 5
12.6
9.3
13. 8
10.5
14. 5
3
3
3
3
0224
0830
1426
2025
201.
196.
174.
160.
2540.
2415.
1901.
1610.
6
4
3
6
1. 1
0. 7
0. 9
1. 0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
3
7
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
3
7
4
16. 8
14. 5
13. 1
5. 4
24.
19.
28.
37.
6
6
0.
1
20.
22.
17.
15.
8
6
5
9
19. 5
19. 1
9. 5
14. 6
16.
23.
30.
25.
7
3
2
0
4
4
4
4
0227
0825
1425
2024
150. 0
152. 8
137.8
126. 1
1406. 7
1458.8
1187. 0
993. 2
1. 0
1.4
n 2
2.
nm.ir-n
1.4
0. 7
0. 3
0.4
0. 2
2. 1
1. 5
I.
1.
3.
2.
2
9
6
9
1. 7
0. 7
0.8
0. 8
21.
28.
29.
25.
0
2
5
8
19.
24.
23.
29.
0
8
5
1
25. 1
14. 7
11.8
10. 3
28.
26.
26.
28.
6
2
6
4
5
5
5
5
0225
0824
1425
2025
121.7
101. 4
108.0
152. 4
926.0
643. 0
728. 9
1452. 5
1.3
3. 9
2. 4
1. 0
0. 1
0. 6
0. 3
0. 2
1.6
2. 7
2. 0
1. 2
5.3
7. 8
6. 8
2. 0
0.7
2. 9
1. 6
2. 3
8.7
12. 3
3. 4
2. 2
40.4
29. 0
15. 0
20. 4
21.0
24. 5
29. 1
43. 2
21.2
16. 7
40. 0
27. 9
6
6
6
6
0225
0827
1425
2025
189. 9
151. 1
158. 9
145.8
2252.
1427.
1578.
1328.
7
2
0
8
0. 8
2.0
0.8
1. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0. 3
0.3
0. 2
0. 5
0. 8
1.8
1.1
1. 3
0. 4
1.2
0. 6
0. 8
0. 3
0.6
0. 3
0. 3
18.9
15.7
8. 5
7. 6
57. 7
56.7
50.8
57. 9
21. 0
22.0
38. 0
30. 8
7
7
7
7
0252
0825
1425
2025
171.9
150. 6
143. 6
137. 1
1847. 5
1417. 9
1288. 0
1175.2
0.7
0. 5
0. 8
0.6
0. 1
0. 2
0. 4
0.6
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
4
6
3
1.2
1. 1
0. 7
0. 9
1.
1.
2.
1.
3
7
0
7
0. 3
0. 2
0. 4
0.4
8.9
7. 9
3. 5
3. 5
61.0
56. 4
53. 1
60. 1
26.
32.
38.
32.
8
0224
143. 7
1291. 0
0. 2
0. 5
0. 4
0. 7
0. 9
0. 3
5. 3
60. 7
31. 5
9
9
9
0828
1430
2026
98. 1
76. 1
79. 9
601. 0
362. 3
398. 6
I. 0
0. 3.
0. 7
0. 8
0. 7
0. 6
6. 8
9. 0
4. 0
2. 4
2. 4
15. 5
1. 0
2. 4
3. 9
1. 0
1. 3
**1. 6
3. 5
3. 7
2. 2
42. 3
31. 5
30. 2
41. 6
49. 2
41. 7
10
10
0226
0826
95. 8
97. 1
573. 9
589. 0
1. 1
2. 7
0. 3
0. 6
3. 8
2. 9
4. 9
5. 9
1.5
2. 3
1. 0
1. 0
4. 1
3. 5
27. 8
18. 7
55.8
62. 9
6
6
4
5
n
a.. m.
°
2
2
4
3
2
1
1
1
5
0
9
5
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUL 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. )
(CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
1427
2024
79. 4
71.8
394. 0
321.9
0. 8
2.0
3. 3
2. 1
0.8
3.0
13. 5
9.8
3. 6
5.7
0. 9
1. 3
4. 4
8.9
18. 4
22.9
54. 9
44.8
11
11
11
11
0226
0825
1428
2028
76.0
70.7
66. 4
64.2
361.4
312. 5
276. 0
257.5
5.0
5.4
2. 6
2.5
4.0
0.6
1. 1
0.9
2.3
6.2
8. 5
4.7
5.3
5.8
6. 3
8.7
4.7
4.0
6. 9
4.6
1.2
2.7
1. 5
3.4
3. 1
4.7
3. 7
3.1
21.6
20.7
30. B
36.2
53.3
50.2
39. 2
36.4
12
12
12
12
0227
0828
1428
2023
74. 9
B0.3
82. 7
90. 9
350.
403.
427.
516.
7.
7.
1.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
8
4
7
9
12. 5
4. 9
2. 3
5. 4
1. 7
3. 1
4. 4
3.
3.
2.
0.
8
6
4
8
6. 2
4. 4
4. 1
1. 5
4. 6
8. 9
22. 1
9. 9
31.
22.
18.
14.
28.
47.
46.
63.
13
13
13
0225
0825
1430
128. 7
125. 3
149. 0
1035. 5
982. 0
1386. 9
3. 1
2. 3
0. 4
0. 2
0. 3
0. 3
0. 5
0. 2
0. 2
0. 4
1. 1
0. 4
0. 7
0. 6
0. 4
0. 4
0. 4
0. 2
B.7
7. 6
2. 1
22. 1
28. 5
26. 1
64. 4
59. 5
70. 4
14
14
14
14
0225
0825
1426
2024
142.
149.
145.
120.
0
9
7
0
1260.
1404.
1326.
900.
4
1
8
3
1.
0.
0.
0.
6
7
4
8
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
3
2
5
5. 0
7. 2
2. 3
50.
62.
48.
55.
7
0
7
0
41.
29.
47.
40.
15
15
15
15
0225
0825
1426
2026
112.0
120. 8
109.9
122. 3
784.
911.
754.
934.
5
3
5
9
1. 4
0. 6
0.3
0.7
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 5
0. 4
0.2
0. 2
1.9
1. 4
1.7
1. 4
0. 5
0. 3
0.7
0. 7
0. 4
0. 3
0.7
0. 8
5.0
5. 8
6.8
5. 9
48.
59.
55.
59.
6
3
1
5
42.0
32. 3
34.8
31. 2
16
16
16
16
0228
0829
1429
2026
126.
124.
120.
176.
2
0
9
4
994.
960.
913.
1944.
9
3
8
9
0.
0.
0.
0.
8
2
3
4
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
0.
1.
1.
0.
8
0
6
2
0.
1.
2.
1.
7
0
7
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
8
8
7
5.
7.
12.
20.
6
9
7
0
61.
54.
56.
56.
9
4
6
4
29.
34.
25.
21.
7
7
4
5
17
17
17
17
0253
0902
1429
2026
198.
166.
179.
195.
8
6
5
5
2470.
1735.
2014.
2387.
3
6
4
8
0.
0.
0.
0.
7
5
7
6
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
3
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
4
5
9
1.
2.
2.
15.
6
4
7
7
34.
33.
40.
37.
7
5
0
9
39.
40.
36.
22.
6
9
7
1
22.
22.
19.
22.
9
4
3
7
18
1430
163. 2
18
2052
195. 6
1663. 7
2391. 5
1. 1
0. 6
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0. 6
0. 2
1. 7
1. 0
7. 3
13.9
39. 4
49. 7
26.7
17. 1
23. 2
15. 6
19
19
0253
0825
171. 3
170. 7
1833. 7
11320.7
0. 7
0. 6
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0. 3
0. 4
12. 4
4. 4
38. 2
37. 9
28. 5
28. 6
19. B
28. 0
10
10
9
5
4
5
6
0
0
8
n
mr.
6
3
3
5
1
1
1
1
5
3
3
7
3
3
4
3
3
7
2
5
0
6
5
0
9
3
3
2
8
0
•
•
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUL 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 1B-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
19
19
1433
2025
176. 9
177. 3
1956. 2
1965. 7
0. 6
0. 5
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0. 3
0. 6
0. 7
0. 3
0. 7
1. 4
0. 6
29. 2
23. 3
33. 7
39. 2
34. 4
34. 9
20
20
20
20
0225
0825
1422
2050
149.
128.
144.
130.
6
2
9
7
1399.
1027.
1313.
1067.
5
5
0
9
0. 5
0. 5
1. 0
1. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
2
1
2. 1
2. 4
1. 3
0. 5
1.
6.
3.
4.
4
8
4
2
0. 8
2. 2
4. 1
1. 6
26. 8
10. 3
20. 1
24. 6
40.
42.
40.
30.
6
2
2
8
28.
35.
30.
37.
1
8
2
4
21
21
21
21
0225
0825
1425
2051
133.2
135. 3
149. 1
155. 7
1108.
1144.
1390.
1515.
6
2
0
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
5
5
7
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
2
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
4
2
2
3.
4.
2.
1.
4
8
0
2
2.0
2.2
2. 5
0. 9
15.
19.
9.
12.
8
6
7
2
46.6
37.8
30. 2
59. 4
31.
35.
55.
25.
3
0
0
7
22
172.
153.
151.
139.
6
8
5
9
1862.
1478.
1434.
1222.
3
9
5
7
0.
0.
1.
1.
4
5
2
2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.
0.
O.
0.
1
2
2
4
0.
0.
O.
0.
2
2
2
5
1.
0.
1.
0.
6
4
0
6
2.2
22
==
22
0225
0824
1425
2024
2. 8
1. 7
1.7
30.
30.
28.
42.
0
3
1
7
41. 6
46. 9
51.4
34. 8
24.
19.
16.
18.
3
1
5
3
23
23
23
23
0225
0825
1425
2025
121.
107.
107.
103.
8
3
1
7
927. 2
719. 9
716. 8
671.8
0. 4
0. 5
1.0
0. 8
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
5
3
4.
0.
0.
0.
1.
4
5
8
6
0.
0.
0.
2.
4
4
7
7
2. 8
1.8
3. 8
4. 3
43.
24.
27.
22.
8
4
5
2
36.
47.
45.
45.
15.
24.
21.
22.
9
6
4
6
24
24
24
24
0225
0831
1430
2025
91. 1
107.6
102.8
98. 6
519.
723.
660.
607.
2
9
1
5
O.4
0.9
O.6
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0. 3
0. 4
0. 3
O.3
0. 5
2. 0
1. 1
1.7
3. 2
2. 6
1. 0
1.6
2. 4
12. 5
17.9
18. 9
19. 9
14. 0
11. 1
15.0
13. 2
47. 9
51. 1
44.7
21. 6
20. 3
16.9
17.3
38. 9
25
25
25
25
0225
0828
1422
2024
91. 6
78. 8
80. 7
85.0
524. 1
387. 8
407. 0
451.3
3. 2
1. 3
0. 7
0.5
0. 2
0. 4
0. 3
0.5
0. 5
1. 0
0. 9
1.2
1. 0
2. 3
3. 0
1. 5
4. 8
5. 7
3.5
18. 8
15. 1
8. 2
4.7
18. 8
30. 2
23. 5
28.9
22. 4
18. 5
25. 6
35.3
34. 1
26. 9
32. 4
21.8
26
26
26
26
0225
0830
1431
2025
85. 6
78. 2
71.1
71. 8
458. 4
382. 3
316.2
322. 4
2. 6
3. 3
1.4
2. 4
1. 1
0. 3
0.3
0. 4
1. 2
0. 7
1.2
1. 1
5. 7
4. 4
5. 7
3. 6
9. 9
8.0
4. 6
4. 1
41. 0
26. 8
31.6
34. 0
21. 4
32. 7
39.4
33. 7
20. 4
19. 4
9.7
14. 5
27
27
27
27
0225
0827
1429
2028
74. 3
67.7
65. 2
79. 7
344. 7
286.8
265. 4
396. 8
7. 5
7.5
0. 4
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
1. 1
1.2
1. 4
1. 8
6. 7
7.4
4. 9
1. 7
2. 6
4.7
9. 3
2. 4
3. 4
4.0
3. 2
1. 3
9
27.7
29. 9
22. 6
26. 5
29.0
29. 1
21. 4
9. 2
18.8
20. 3
46. 0
22
2.2
3. 1
4.2
3. 3
2. 9
4.4
4.4
42.
2
7
0
8
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
JUL 1984
•
•
S
•
•
•
•
•
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
28
28
28
28
0225
0825
1424
2023
83.
84.
64.
84.
2
5
9
0
432. 5
446.2
262. 9
440. 5
4.
6.
3.
3.
29
29
29
29
0225
0825
1424
2025
101.2
91.8
100. 5
82. 1
639.7
526.3
631. 0
421. 5
30
30
30
30
0225
0828
1425
2028
91. 1
90.7
73. 8
94. 6
31
31
31
0225
1426
2024
105. 5
123. 0
129. 1
4
3
1
9
0.
0.
0.
0.
6-4
2
2
3
2
0. 9
0. 7
0.7
1. 2
3. 2
2. 3
3. 3
2. 1
3. 4
4. 8
2. 8
1. 4
1. 3
1.4
1. 7
9. 3
11.0
9. 2
2. 1
23. 8
19. 3
25.7
19. 2
55.
56.
51.
67.
4.8
3.6
0. 7
3. 9
0.2
0.2
0. 2
0. 3
0.9
0.3
0. 2
0. 3
1.0
1.6
1. 6
0. 8
3.8
1.6
1. 6
1. 5
0.9
0.7
0. 4
1. 0
1.2
1.0
0.5
0. 7
26.2
23.5
12. 7
15. 0
61.4
68.0
82. 6
77. 0
518. 1
514.3
340. 2
558.9
4. 0
1.0
0. 3
1. 1
0. 3
0.2
0. 7
0. 6
0. 3
0.6
0. 5
0. 3
1.
0.
1.
1.
2
5
4
0
1. 6
1.7
1. 2
1. 3
1.0
2. 4
4. 6
2. 6
5. 1
8. 5
11.8
13. 3
40.9
17. 2
21.8
76. 0
49.4
68. 2
57. 1
695. 1
945. 4
1041. 6
1. 0
0. 8
0. 4
0. 9
0. 3
0. 2
0. 3
0. 5
0. 6
0. 6
0. 5
0. 5
2. 1
1. 0
0. 5
21. 9
15. 6
11.7
20. 7
38. 2
36. 2
20. 6
22. 1
32. 4
32. 4
21. 5
17. 9
1
1
9
3
COGUILLE RIVERS OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
JUL
PERSISTENCE
-CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
I.
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1.0
5
2. 0
2.5
3.0
3. 5
4.0
4.5
5. 0
5. 5
6.0
4,
8,
28,
1,
31,
31,
31,
31,
31,
31,
31,
I,
11
9,
29,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR JUL 1984
SIG. HT (M. )
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE ( JUL)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE ( JUL)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE ( JUL)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
DATE ( JUL)
2. 0
2. 8
2. 1
I. 4
15
1. 2
nn
c.c.
1.7
29
1. 0
1. 0
16
I. 8
23
1.2
30
0. 9
10
1. 0
17
2. 0
1. 5
11
0. 8
18
2. 0
1. 5
12
0. 9
19
1. 8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
DATE ( JULY
I. 7
I. 9
14
13
I. 5
1. 5
21
20
1. 6
I. 5
.,.
24
1.1
31
1. 3
25
0.9
26
0.9
27
0.8
28
0.8
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
COQUILLE RI VER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
AUG 1984
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
DAY/TLME (CM. ) (CM. SG)
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
S
•
•
0225
133.9
1120.6
1 0832 107.6 723.0
438. 3
83. 7
1 1433
562. 1
94. 8
1 2027
6-4
0. 5
0.2
0. 5
1. 8
0.3
0.4
0. 5
0. 4
0.8
1. 1
1. 4
0. 5
0.3
0. 8
1. 4
0. 7
0.8
0.9
1. 2
1. 2
8. 3
1.7
3. 2
1. 2
42.4
32.5
27. 9
22. 3
24.9
31.7
30. 9
45. 0
22.2
31.0
33. 5
27. 3
1.
0.
2.
2.
1
7
1
2
1.4
0. 3
0. 5
0. 6
3.4
1. 9
2. 7
5. 7
2. 5
n n
c...A.
1. 8
3. 0
1.4
1. 9
0. 7
n nal.
c...
0.7
1. 2
0. 7
1.2
le. 0
26. 3
15. 4
9.1
34. 1
40. 7
44. 9
52. 8
37.8
25. 2
31. 7
23. 7
0.3
1.2
1. 9
6. 1
2.9
12. 5
4. 7
7. 4
5.5
4. 1
13. 9
15. 1
2.4
2.2
2. 1
3. 7
1. 1
2.0
2. 1
2. 0
3. 1
4.8
2. 0
3. 3
46.2
35.2
42. 8
28. 5
34.7
34.0
25. 1
26. 0
6.
16.
9.
17.
14.
16.
7.
6.
3.
3.
2.
2.
2
6
8
4
I.2
2. 0
1. 1
0. 9
3. 1
3. 5
1. 7
2. 5
23. 1
14. 6
19. 2
38. 9
28. 1
19. 2
37. 1
23. 7
1. 7
3.5
2.7
19.3
1. 0
0.7
1.3
0.7
3. 1
7.3
12. 0
3.9
40. 7
17.1
25. 5
21.2
17. 7
11.8
10.2
11.7
13.2
4
23. 4
56. 1
1. 5
4. 5
2.0
9. 1
2.4
18.
18.
22.
15.
17. 1
19. 6
11. 1
9. 7
17. 9
4. 9
15.9
34. 4
1. 5
2. 0
8.7
4. 1
12. 0
10. 4
30.9
20. 2
3
8. 9
21.3
29. 1
0225
0825
1432
2 2031
416.
81.6
308.
70. 2
402.
80. 3
79. 5 394.
3
3
3
3
0225
0829
1429
2024
71.7
57.6
59. 0
53. 5
321.0
207.6
217. 8
178.8
4.3
4.4
5. 9
8. 4
4
4
4
4
0225
0826
1425
2025
53.
57.
73.
86.
180.
203.
340.
470.
6.
3.
3.
2.
5
5
5
5
590. 5
97. 2
0226
0823 96.6 582.7
766.2
1425 118.7
911.9
2025 120.8
0. 9
1.7
n nIL
...
1.3
2. 0
21.9
0.9
0.5
10. 1
12.6
36.2
15.0
23. 3
23.8
9.4
26.9
6
6
6
6
0223 131.2 1075. 5
746. 2
0825 109. 3
1423 123.6 955. 5
954. 3
2025 123. 6
0.7
1. 2
0.6
0. 9
0.2
0. 3
0.2
0. 2
20.3
1.9
0.7
1. 1
26.6
28. 2
39. 2
7. 3
7
7
7
7
0225
0825
1425
2025
633. 0
100. 6
702. 8
106. 0
131.3 1078.. 1
968. 7
124. 5
0.8
0. 7
0.6
1. 6
0. 4
0. 3
0.4
0. 5
1. 2
1. 2
0.6
0. 8
5. 5
3. 5
1.4
0. 9
48. 8
68. 7
20.6
8. 8
8
8
8
8
0228 130. 3 1061. 7
0824 141. 5 1251. 2
919. 4
1426 121. 3
887.3
2025 119.2
0. 7
1. 3
0. 7
1.3
0. 2
0. 3
0. 4
0.2
0. 4
0. 4
0. 9
0.9
0. 6
1. 5
1. 9
1.6
6. 3
1. 3
1. 8
1.6
14.
14.
21.
12.
8
1
1
4
13. 8
25. 1
35. 8
42.2
23. 3
33. 1
16. 9
24.7
40. 1
23. 4
20. 1
15.5
9 0225 127. 6 1017. 2
2. 6
0. 3
0. 6
1. 0
0. 6
13. 0
37. 8
32. 1
12. 3
8
0
B
7
1
3
6
8
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8
3
6
1
6
5
9
5
14.
21.
17.
4.
7
7
6
B
0
5
9
9
5
0
3
9
24.
2. 1
1.2
0. 9
5
3
1
1
12.
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
AUG 1984
PST
SIG. HT TOT. EN
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
9 0833 119.0
885. 7
9 1433 151. 2 1429.3
9 2027 108.0
729. 3
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
6-4
2. 5
1.7
1. 5
1. 1
0.6
2. 2
0. 7
0.4
0. 3
0. 5
1.0
1. 6
0. 6
O.9
1. 0
6. 9
7.8
5. 4
36.9
46.7
21. 5
22. 0
21. 8
35.4
29. 2
19.7
31. 6
10
10
10
10
0225 118.9
0834 113. 1
1428 114.5
2026 102. 9
883.6
799. 3
818.8
662. 3
3.9
2. 3
1.7
1. 5
1.2
0. 6
1.7
1. 6
0.7
1. 0
0.6
0. 9
1.0
0. 8
1.8
3. 1
1. 3
1.7
1.2
1. 7
2.4
3. 4
1.8
3. 1
23.2
20. 5
30.6
29. 4
42.2
47.6
37.7
38. 9
24. 5
22. 6
23.4
20. 3
11
11
11
11
0225 111.2
0825
96. 5
1426
82.3
2028
84.2
773.2
581.8
423.6
442.9
2.8
3. 5
2. 0
2. 4
0.
0.
1.
1.
5
5
3
4
1.0
3.2
2. 9
1. 6
1. 1
0.9
2. 7
5. 6
I. 1
1.4
n c..n
....
2. 1
1.4
1. 1
1. 3
0. 9
28.0
29. 3
19.5
14.9
41.9
39. 5
41.6
46.9
22.6
20.9
27. 1
24. 7
12
12
12
12
0226
0825
1428
2028
69.5
67. 4
70. 0
54.3
301. 7
284. 1
306. 0
184.3
6. 8
5. 9
2. 0
5.2
3. 8
nn
......
1. 7
1. 9
3. 5
1. 9
2. 5
2.4
..) .12
2.
3. 2
4. 1
6.8
2. 0
n ...n
A..
2. 7
2.9
1. 5
0. 9
1. 3
1.7
9. 6
4. 6
3. 7
3.3
49. 4
41. 9
52. 4
43.3
21. 7
37. 6
30. 1
33.0
13
13
13
13
0228
0827
1426
2025
53.7
59. 5
58.2
59. 6
180.4
221. 4
211.5
nnn n
a.a..
r..
7.2
2. 0
2.7
im. r.,
nn
3. 3
1. 2
1.4
0. 7
4. 1
2. 4
2.5
4. 4
7.7
2.5
5. 1
2. 8
3. 1
2. 0
1.6
1. 6
n n
g..
c.
0. 9
1. 1
1. 3
4.2
2. 1
1.5
1. 5
28.6
42. 4
46.6
25. 2
40. 1
44. 8
38.0
60. 8
14 0226
14 0838
14 2025
51.9
57. 0
63. 6
168.4
203. 3
252. 9
5.8
2.5
0. 8
0.9
3. 8
5. 8
3.6
3. 5
1.2
4.9
3. 2
2. 6
3.7
2. 3
2. 0
1.6
3. 0
3. 1
1. 5
1. 7
4. 1
24.0
18. 0
43. 3
54.4
62. 5
37. 6
15 0225
15 0825
15 2024
70. 0
72. 2
69. 1
305. 9
325. 4
298. 3
1. 0
0. 8
0. 5
3. 4
2. 8
2. 1
0. 8
1. 2
8. 1
5. 0
4. 9
1. 6
1. 7
1. 9
2. 3
1. 5
I.7
I. 1
19. 4
9.7
16. 0
49. 7
53. 9
40. 9
18. 0
23. 6
27. 8
16
16
16
16
0225
71. 1
0825
60. 5
1427
75.6
2025 107. 2
316. 3
229. 1
357.3
718. 5
0. 4
0. 5
0.3
0. 5
1.2
5. 2
0.8
0. 4
20. 0
6. 2
11.3
5. 3
6. 3
3. 7
3.3
1. 9
1. 9
3. 3
1.7
1. 6
1. 9
3. 3
1.4
1. 7
8. 3
6. 4
5.9
18. 2
44. 9
26. 0
29.7
50. 6
15. 4
45. 8
46. 1
20.2
17
17
17
17
0225 119. 3
0828
98. 7
1425
83. 1
2025
75. 6
889. 4
609. 3
431. 6
357. 6
0.
0.
1.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
3
2
3
7
4
6
8
3. 3
2.
7.
5.
6.
6
7
4
0
6. 1
9. 4
10. 9
14.4
0.
0.
1.
6.
9
9
9
8
1,.. 1
0. 5
1. 6
2.2
30.7
12. 7
15. 2
12. 3
41. 5
35. 2
44.6
34. 1
16.2
33. 2
19. 0
21. 6
3. 0
15. 3
6. 3
1. 4
6. 0
32. 5
31. 6
•
•
•
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, DR ARRAY, ENERGY
AUG 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
•
•
SECS)
8-6
6-4
0.7
1.6
2. 6
0. 5
0.2
0. 3
9.8
3. 1
2. 3
11.7
15.7
5. 1
4.4
5.0
6. 3
1.3
1. 5
0. 7
6.3
6.2
2. 3
43.7
47.7
23. 2
22.0
19.4
57. 7
413.6
592. 3
1466. 5
1691. 4
O.
0.
0.
1.
7
3
4
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
3
1
1
4. 6
2.9
0. 4
0. 4
7. 3
2. 5
2. 1
1.8
2. 9
2.8
0. 8
1. 1
O. 7
0.9
0. 4
0. 3
1. 1
2. 9
6.7
8. 0
19.2
11.2
41. 6
61. 4
63.
76.
47.
26.
147. 2
123.7
114.8
101. 5
1354. 3
956.6
824.1
644.4
0. 7
0.5
0.7
1.4
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 4
0.4
0.5
0.3
1. 5
2. 1
2.9
2. 1
1. 9
3.0
1.8
3. 5
0. 7
1.7
n ng..
c...
2.6
10.0
n n6.
c...
5. 9
62. 2
55. 1
54.0
44.8
27. 0
27. 5
36.2
43.8
0225
0831
1430
2027
79. 9
77.3
62. 8
51. 2
399. 0
373.0
246. 7
163. 6
1. 1
0.4
2.8
4. 6
0. 2
0.2
0. 1
0. 3
0. 9
0.5
0. 8
0. 9
2. 4
2.0
1.8
3. 7
3. 2
6. 5
2.9
4. 4
8. 1
8. 4
12. 1
33. 1
18.8
19. 0
27. 8
51. 1
71.4
57. 2
34. 8
51. 5
75. 8
104.4
107. 8
165.7
358.8
681.8
726. 0
O. 8
0. 7
0.6
1. 3
0. 5
0. 2
0.2
0. 7
0. 6
0. 5
0.5
0. 1
4. 0
2. 1
1.2
0. 8
7. 2
5. 4
nn
nn
..c..
0225
0823
1424
2026
6. 7
13. 6
B.9
15. 9
1B. 5
28. 2
19.0
37. 4
22.0
24. 9
43.7
29. 1
40. 1
25. 0
24.0
13. 2
23
23
23
23
0228
0828
1430
2028
98. 2
107.3
122. 6
98. 8
602. 8
719.0
938. 8
609. 8
0. 4
0.9
0. 4
0. 5
1. 5
0. 2
0.4
0. 7
2. 9
0. 7
0.6
0. 3
0.8
1. 3
1.7
0. 5
1. 3
7. 5
1.4
33. 4
43.8
28. 1
32. 3
39. 2
31.5
45. 3
27. 0
16. 3
19.0
19. 6
31. 0
24
24
24
24
0225
0827
1424
2023
85. 4
B0.9
70. 7
92. 1
455.
409.
312.
530.
3
0
4
0
1.9
3. 7
2. 3
4. 3
0. 7
1. 5
3. 1
1. 5
2. 1
1. 7
1. 9
11. 6
1. 5
5
2
3
4
2. 3
nn
c.....
5.
7.
4.
7.
5. 7
17. 6
12. 1
36.4
38. 7
36. 0
38. 9
35.
31.
29.
29.
1
9
4
6
25
25
25
25
0225
0825
1426
2027
134.4
123. 6
149. 9
173. 1
1128.3
954. 9
1403. 6
1872. 4
1.9
1.6
1. 5
1. 1
0. 5
1. 5
2. 4
1. 0
1. 2
0.5
0. 5
0. 3
0. 2
1.8
2. 3
0. 8
0.8
0. 7
0. 6
0. 6
1.3
0. 8
1. 0
1.2
27.
17.6
0
19. 5
22. 9
56.0
39. 1
42. 0
57. 4
19.
26.
32.
15.
2
5
6
4
26
26
26
0828
1428
2027
141. 1
150.33
109. 2
1245.0
1411.22
745.8
2. 1
1.33
3. 5
0. 4
0.66
0. 3
0. 5
O. 4
2. 5
2.0
2. 9
7. 4
0.9
0. 9
2. 0
1.4
1. 3
1. 2
27.2
17. 9
17. 1
44.6
60.7
45. 0
21. 3
14. 5
21. 4
18
18
18
0828
1422
2025
55. 8
67. 1
79. 6
194.8
281.0
395. 9
19
19
19
19
0225
0825
1425
2025
81.3
97. 4
153. 2
164. 5
20
20
20
20
0225
0825
1426
2025
21
21
21
21
22
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
18-16
22+ 22-18
22
e....
c.c.
1.5
4. 8
3. 2
5. 3
5. 3
3. 0
nn
c.c.
5. 9
8.3
nn
m.c.
1. 9
1.0
0. 8
4. 3
3. 9
1.8
2.0
2. 0
n nc...
A..
7
7
9
1
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
AUG 1984
PST
SIG. HT TOT. EN
DAY/TIME (CM.) (CM. SG)
27 0228 109. 0
742.0
27 0827 174. 2 1895.9
.27 1427 274. 5 4708. 5
27 2025 271. 1 4593. 0
•
•
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 204B-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
4. 5
1. 9
2. 4
6-4
1.8
0. 5
0. 5
0. 6
11.0
6. 5
1. 3
1. 4
15. 1
15. 3
5. 7
8.7
4.6
41. 1
41. 1
48. 2
2. 0
10. 3
21. 2
17. 1
15. 1
8. 5
17. 8
12. 4
31. 3
10. 0
6. 7
15.0
6. 0
2. 9
3. 0
B. 1
28
28
28
28
0225 242.2 3667.8
0825 329. 1 6769.6
1427 391. 8 9591. 8
2023 403. 3 10168. 0
2.7
2. 3
3. 0
0.4
0.8
0. 5
0. 4
6.3
4.7
5. 4
1. 1
4.5
23.7
30. 8
30. 5
31.0
24. 1
32. 3
27. 8
32.9
16.8
6. 5
12. 6
11.3
10.3
5. 5
6. 8
7.3
11. 5
10. 5
9. 7
4. 1
6.3
6. 0
9. 4
29
29
29
29
0225 292.9 5360.2
0826 263. 6 4342. 2
1425 250.4 3917.3
2025 184. 4 2126. 1
2. 0
1. 2
1.3
0. 8
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
0. 1
0.6
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
5.5
4. 3
0.6
0. 6
44. 2
29. 7
26.8
9. 1
18.6
37. 6
32.7
3B. B
11.8
10. 4
17.2
26. 3
10.6
8. 1
11.9
11.9
7.0
8. 8
9.6
12. 6
30
30
30
30
0225 144. 5 1305.2
0827 133.2 1109. 1
1429 103. 5
669. 7
2025
99.3
616.8
0.9
0.8
0. 8
0.7
0. 1
0.2
0. 3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0. 3
0.4
0.8
1.0
2. 9
0.5
3. 1
2.3
3. 4
6.0
41.0
20. 1
22. 9
11.5
26.9
47.4
41. 3
41.6
16.0
17.0
18. 6
26.2
11.4
11. 5
9. 9
13.3
31
31
31
31
0225
0827
1431
2025
1.
0.
0.
1.
0. 5
0. 4
0. 5
0. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0. 9
1.2
0. 6
0.3
2. 8 10. 6 37. 6 32. 7 13. 7
6. 0 45. 8 28. 2 10. 6
7. 5
3. 1
9. 1 20. 3 27. 0 38. 6
3. 3 11.8 14.6 31. 9 36. 8
80.
BB.
83.
93.
9
1
1
2
408.
485.
432.
543.
8
4
1
5
1
3
5
4
5
5
7
2
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
AUG
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS DR LESS
•
•
•
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
I. 0
I. 5
2. 0
2. 5
3. 0
3. 5
4. 0
4. 5
5.0
5. 5
6. 0
4,
9,
2,
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
8,
26,
26,
27,
27,
27,
31,
31,
31,
31,
1,
5,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
•
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( AUG)
SIG. HT CM.)
•
DATE
( AUG)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE
( AUG)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
9
8
C AUG)
0. 7
O. 8
1. 3
1. 4
15
0. 7
==
22
1. 1
29
2. 9
3
2
1
( AUG)
1. 5
16
1. I
23
1. 2
30
1. 4
10
1. 2
17
1. 2
24
0. 9
31
0. 9
I,
I,
1,
2,
11
1. 1
18
o.e
25
1. 7
1. 2
12
0. 7
19
1. 6
26
1. 5
7
6
5
4
0. 9
1984
AUG
1. 3
1. 3
14
13
0. 6
0. 6
21
20
1. 5
27
2. 7
...
0. 8
28
4. 0
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
•
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
SEP 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
4
0
6
4
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
4
5
3
0. 6
0. 3
0. 6
0.2
4.
3.
1.
1.
4
7
1
0
8.
7.
6.
9.
3
5
0
1
24. 3
33. 7
33. 5
27.0
32.
38.
34.
30.
8
8
7
2
27. 9
14.13
nn
22. g.,2
31. 2
0225 152. 2 1448. 4
0828 143.8 1291.7
2 1425 130. 5 1064. 0
2025 140. 0 1224. 2
I. 1
1.0
1. 7
2. 0
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 3
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
0. 3
0.7
0. 8
0. 4
0.
1.
8.
1.
8
5
9
9
17. 4
15.2
15. 6
36. 5
35. 1
35.0
35. 7
25. 6
20. 7
31.4
16. 6
18. 9
24. 6
15. 5
20.8
14. 9
3
3
3
3
0225 134. 7 1134.7
496. 6
89. 1
0825
286. 9
67. 8
1425
2026 67.7 286.3
1.
0.
1.
3.
4
6
9
5
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0. 3
0. 5
0. 6
0.6
0. 6
1.8
4. 2
3. 1
I. 4
0. 9
2. 6
23.9
20. 1
13. 4
4. 9
24.4
36. 3
43. 0
37. 1
18.4
20. 1
24. 2
21.13
15.2
20. 1
15. 9
27.0
11.2
4
4
4
4
0225
0837
1433
2030
0.8
O. 6
0.9
1.5
0.2
O. 3
0.2
0. 2
0.4
O. 5
0.4
0. 4
0.9
1. 2
1.2
2. 6
1.3
1. 3
1. 4
3. 7
38.8
6. 4
2.2
3.1
13.8
58. 2
41. 5
39. 1
28.9
16. 8
41.4
35. 5
15. 3
15. 2
11.2
14. 4
5
5
5
5
0225 66.
0826 76.
1424 149.
2026 118.
7 278. 2
363. 9
3
5 1396. 2
874.0
3
1. 4
0. 3
0. 2
0.6
0. 3
0. 1
0. I
0.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
4
I
1
nn
E.
1,-.
1. 8
0. 6
0. 5
6. 4
6. 0
2. 3
3.7
3. 7
3. 6
3. 2
16.9
36.
17.
6.
14.
29.
45.
37.
38.
20.
25.
49.
25.
6
6
6
6
801.3
0226 113.2
0823 140. 7 1237. 9
1427 143.2 1281.8
863. 9
2030 117.6
O.8
0. 9
0.7
1. 4
0. 1
0. 1
0.2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0. 4
0.8
0. 3
1.0
0. 4
1.7
1. 3
2.8
1. 6
20.. 0
9. 9
22.5
21. 4
26.2
25. 9
30.3
29.8
27.6
37. 5
29.8
29. 5
23.0
24. 4
12.9
15. 7
7 0228 129. 2 1043. 1
1. 7
0. 2
0. 2
0. 2
1. 3
4. 5
34. 0
25. 7
32. 7
10 0831 148.8 1384.7
10 1436 163. 8 1677.0
10 2033 150. 5 1415.5
1.8
1. 5
nn
ar.
L..
O.9
0. 3
O. 3
4.7
2. 4
O. 9
3.7
24.8
11.3
10.0
4. 7
17. 9
27.7
29.8
22.2
20.6
16.9
16.5
16.4
9. 6
10.9
14.6
10. 7
18. 4
11
11
11
11
2587.2
2136.4
1976.9
2585.8
1.3
1. 5
1.8
1.0
0. 1
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.3
14.2
9. 5
1.9
1.0
45.4
27.0
21.6
26.4
1, 0.
5
12.2
20.2
30.0
8.3
13.2
24.7
20. 4
11.8
20. 5
20.5
12.8
8. 3
15.7
9.4
8.2
12 0232 213. 6 2850. 8
1.2
0. 3
0. 2
O.6
13. 0
41. 0
20. 5
14. 8
8. 9
1
1
1
1
608. 5
98. 7
0225
644. 6
0826 101. 6
700. 7
1422 105. 9
2025 133. 2 1109. 5
0234
0831
1432
2035
779.7
111.7
649. 1
101. 9
629. 1
100. 3
79. 8 397. 8
203. 5
184.9
177.8
203.4
1.
1.
1.
1.
5
3
9
3
6
4
B
1
1
4
3
9
•
COQUILLE RIVER, DR ARRAY, ENERGY
SEP 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
12
12
12
0833
1433
2032
190. 1
153. 6
157. 3
2259.8
1475. 5
1546. 9
1.2
1. 5
1. 0
0. 3
0. 3
0. 2
0.3
0. 4
0. 4
0.2
0. 4
0. 6
13
13
13
13
0232
0834
1435
2027
130.
122.
128.
125.
5
0
3
5
1065.
929.
1028.
983.
2
8
7
8
1. 6
0. 8
0. 9
0. 4
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
2
2
2
1.
0.
0.
1.
5
9
6
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
5
5
4
6
1.
1.
0.
0.
14
14
14
14
0229
0842
1436
2032
96.
71.
52.
61.
1
8
4
7
577.
322.
171.
237.
6
4
5
6
0. 6
1.0
3. 3
0. 5
0. 2
0. 3
1. 5
3. 1
1.
1.
6.
26.
4
1
8
6
1.
3.
1.
15.
7
2
9
4
0.
1.
3.
3.
15
15
15
15
0232
0834
1428
2029
99. 1
145.9
166. 1
176. 4
614. 0
1331.1
1723. 5
1944. 6
1. 3
2.8
1. 9
1. 5
0.9
O.4
0. 2
O. 2
8. 3
1.8
0. 3
O. 3
41. 8
18.4
5. 0
3. B
16
16
16
16
0229
0831
1432
2029
133.7
160.8
139. 0
114.1
1117.2
1616.5
1207. 4
813.9
1. 5
3. 5
1. 1
1.6
O.2
O.2
0. 2
0.2
0.2
O.7
0. 2
0.5
17
17
17
17
0229
0844
1444
2029
107. 6
724.
636.
813.
661.
0
5
8
5
0.
0.
0.
1.
6
4
7
3
0.
0.
1.
1.
4
4
0
5
0.
0.
0.
0.
18
18
18
18
0229
0828
1427
2028
142.
140.
151.
174.
1259. 9
1229. 7
1441.7
1905. 0
1.
0.
1.
1.
0
9
1
3
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
6
4
4
19
19
19
19
0226
0853
1430
2026
193. 7
192. 5
172.4
168. 8
2344.
2315.
1857.
1780.
0.
0.
0.
1.
6
8
7
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
1
2
3
20
0226
184. 2
2120. 1
20
20
0833
1441
100. 9
114. 1
102. 9
0
3
9
6
167. 4
172.6
0
8
7
7
1751. 7
1862. 0
O. 7
0. 6
0. 7
O.2
0. 1
0.2
6-4
43.9
26. 1
15. 3
24.9
32. 3
35. 8
11.9
18. 9
20. 4
9.6
9. 9
24.6
3
7
8
5
19.
20.
10.
5.
6
9
2
4
30.
27.
36.
25.
9
7
1
8
19.
29.
23.
23.
1
4
1
1
25.
18.
28.
43.
9
9
4
6
4.
3.
.4.
1.
3
1
4
9
20. 2
17. 1
13. 7
5. 6
33.
28.
26.
12.
1
8
4
2
3B. 1
44. 1
39. 1
31. 5
27. 6
45.2
45. 2
16. 6
0.7
13.5
37. 1
54. 0
1. 9
1.7
6. 1
13. 8
5. 2
4.7
2. 0
6. 7
12.7
11.9
2. 5
3. 7
O.9
1.0
0. 9
0.8
15. 9
2.3
1. 9
1.4
36. 1
30.9
36. 4
32.1
23.6
32.7
34. 6
29.1
16.4
13.9
18. 9
21.2
5.7
15.4
6. 3
13.5
3
4
3
4
1. 2
0. 7
1.7
1. 7
0.
3.
1.
4.
8
3
5
2
16. 3
6. 3
8. 1
8. 1
40. 5
41. 6
37.9
39. 0
26. 1
26. 6
27.2
22. 3
14.
20.
22.
22.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
3
3
3
0. 4
1.4
1. 4
0. 6
4. 8
8.0
6. 2
6. 3
23. 8
35. 9
40. 3
24. 6
43.
27.
19.
20.
8
7
8
2
13. 2
15. 4
8.6
25. 7
13. 0
10. 3
22. 4
21. 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
3
8
9
0. 9
1. 0
1. 1
2. 1
5.
7.
6.
8.
2
3
2
3
20. 2
28. 3
18. 9
1.
/!$. 2
17.
28.
33.
18.
2
6
5
2
39.
21.
26.
28.
16.
12.
12.
16.
O.6
0. 9
0.4
O.6
0. 8
1.0
11.9
2 5
29. 7
14. 2
18. 2
25. 1
39.9
8.2
10. 7
2. 1
1.8
11.0
1
3
3
7
24. 5
34. 3
31.2
8
4
2
3
3
6
1
0
4
7
8
7
14. 1
21. 9
14.2
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
SEP 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN RAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
SAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
20
2028
177. 3
1964. 9
0. 7
0. 1
0. 3
1.2
0. 9
10. 2
52. 6
24. 0
10. 4
21
21
21
21
0229
0835
1429
2026
236.
174.
203.
186.
3486. 1
1894. 3
2598.6
2168. 2
0. 7
0. 9
0.7
1. 2
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
2
0. 1
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
7
5
3
0. 7
1. 6
1. 6
1.7
26.
16.
13.
13.
43.
37.
53.
52.
18. 6
26. 4
19.7
20. 4
10. 5
16. 3
11.0
10. 8
c=
22
22
22
22
0226
0826
1425
2026
157. 4
159. 3
229.6
219. 9
1549.
1586.
3294.
3022.
2
9
5
5
0. 6
0. 9
0.3
1. 0
0. 7
12. 7
6.9
2. 0
0. 2
0. 5
34.9
23. 3
0. 4
0. 4
0.4
1. 8
1. 0
1. 2
0.7
0. 8
6. 6
1.3
0.9
8. 1
44.
56. 3
1
24.4
38. 7
21.
26.
20.
17.
6
4
5
5
13. 2
13. 1
11.4
7. 2
23
23
23
0226
0826
1426
286.9
318.3
315. 0
5145.8
6333. 5
6200. 8
1.4
1.4
1. 6
1.6
0. 5
0. 3
9.2
17.0
4. 0
11.1
24. 5
33. 5
1.6
4.8
18.3
20.0
18.3
B. 3
31.2
16. 3
18. 4
14.8
10.6
9. 2
9.6
7. 1
6. 8
24
24
24
24
0226
0839
1426
2023
246. 8
216. 1
183. 0
181.3
3805. 7
2918. 9
2092. 6
2054.3
1. 5
1. 9
1.7
1.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
7
6
3
1
14. 9
7. 5
0. 9
0.9
24. 2
25. 6
30. 7
14.9
16. 4
27. 1
22. 3
42. 5
18. 2
20. 1
24. 6
19.0
13.
12.
12.
14.
8
5
0
1
10. 5
5. 0
7. 9
7.0
25
25
25
0226
0837
2026
142. 3
I28. 2
80. 2
1265. 5
1027. 3
401. 9
3. 3
4. 5
5.
0. 1
0. 2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
0. 7
0. 6
0. 2
28. 8
3. 8
1. 3
20. 2
32. 6
21. 9
20. 4
17. 2
34. 8
17. 4
21. 7
19. 4
9. 5
19. 7
16. 8
26
26
26
26
0226
0833
1435
2026
86. 3
101. 7
101. 9
181.4
466. 0
646. 3
648. 4
2056.6
5. 9
3. 6
4. 0
1.6
0. 7
2. 1
4. 9
0.9
0. 3
0. 2
7. 2
31.6
0. 6
0. 5
0. 9
33.4
1. 8
0. 9
0. 6
0.3
27. 1
8. 7
6. 9
1.1
28. 8
31. 7
23. 7
10.0
28. 1
36. 5
37. 1
11.5
7. 2
16. 2
15. 2
10.0
27
27
27
27
0227
0834
1434
2026
141.4
138. 6
148. 3
156.9
1249.0
1200. 7
1374. 2
1539.4
4.0
2. 3
3. 2
1. 2
0.8
0. 5
0. 4
0. 2
27.4
3. 9
1. 8
0. 6
27.6
50. 7
18. 4
27. 8
2.5
6. 3
39. 7
32. 1
1.4
0. 8
0. 6
3. 0
10. .5
5. 2
2. 5
1. 5
11.4
14. 6
12. 7
11.9
14.9
16. 2
22. 1
22. 1
28
28
28
28
0226
0826
1426
2025
133.8
129. 9
111.4
101.0
1118.9
1055. 0
776.2
637.4
1.2
0. 9
1.4
O. 6
0.4
0. 4
0.5
O. 3
0.4
0. 3
0.8
O. 7
24. 5
7. 4
4.5
1. 4
26.1
32. 3
21.2
17.9
17.8
19. 3
33.0
J7. 7
1.7
3. 6
IO. 4
19.8
9.6
14. 4
10.6
8. 8
29
29
0228
0826
88.8
113.4
492.6
803.4
1.2
0. 5
0.4
0.2
3.7
1.4
0.9
0.7
22. 1
9.7
26.6
19. 5
27. 5
18.4
6.7
4.4
2
1
9
3
2
2
2
1
2
3
1
7
2
9
5
1
18.8
22 .0
18.2
13. 2
11.4
45.8
7
COOUILLE RIVER,
SEP 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
OR ARRAY, ENERGY
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. )
(CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
29
29
1425
2026
93. 8
85.7
549. 4
459. 5
0. 9
1.9
0. 1
0. 3
2. 0
2.6
3. 4
5. 4
5. 2
11. 5
30. 4
36.0
20. 2
20.2
3. 7
4.6
34. 3
18.0
30
0226
30
30
30
0827
103. 2
107.2
146. 5
173. 3
665. 7
718.2
1342. 0
1876. 7
2. 6
0.7
1. 0
1.0
0. 5
0.3
0. 1
0. 1
2. 8
0.2
O.3
O.2
6.
1.
1.
0.
22. 3
21.3
8. 9
4. 9
37. 7
18.2
16. 7
12. 5
13. 1
16.0
52. 3
59. 5
4. 3
18.9
12. 2
16. 6
10. 5
23.7
7. 7
5. 2
1430
2027
6
1
2
5
COW I LLE RIVERSOR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
SEP
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS —N — METERS OR LESS
•
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1. 0
1. 5
2. 0
2. 5
3.0
3. 5
4. 0
4. 5
5. 0
5. 5
6. 0
1,
1,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
5,
1,
13,
13,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
LP
1,
BP
6,
1,
7,
7,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
DATE
SI G. HT ( M. )
DATE
( SEP)
SI G. HT ( M. )
DATE
( SEP)
SI G. HT ( M. )
DATE
( SEP)
SIG. HT ( M. )
1. 3
9
B
0. 0
15
1. 8
nn
c.c.
2. 3
29
1. 1
0. 0
16
1. 6
23
3. 2
30
1.7
10
1. 6
17
I.1
24
2. 5
31
0. 0
1. 1
11
2. 0
18
1. 7
25
1. 4
1. 5
12
2. 1
19
1. 9
26
1. 8
7
6
5
4
3
c
1. 5
1. 3
( SEP)
SI G. HT ( M. )
DATE
1
( SEP)
1984
SEP
1. 4
1. 3
14
13
1. 3
20
1. 8
27
1. 6
1.
0
21
2. 4
28
I.3
• 1.6
12
PERIOD SEC.
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
V
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
OCT 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
(CM. )
HT TOT. EN
(CM. SO)
1
1
0227
0827
1426
2026
155. 5
158. 3
1511. 3
1567. 0
1305. 2
1441. 1
0.8
0.6
0. 7
1.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 1
0. 1
0. 2
0. 5
0.4
0.8
0. 7
0.7
2. 3
1.4
1. 5
0.7
18. 5
14.9
15. 3
5. 1
34.0
41. 1
25. 3
21.3
25. 1
24. 3
30. 0
31.2
19.
17.
26.
39.
2
2
2
2
0230
0829
1429
2027
117.0
100. 0
101.7
131.7
855.2
625. 6
646.7
1084.5
1. 3
0. 7
0.9
1.8
0. 1
1. 6
1.0
0.7
0.2
0. 3
21.4
3.0
0. 5
1. 2
9.2
31.7
0.6
0. 9
1.0
8.6
5.4
5. 1
3.0
1.7
22. 5
28. 9
19.9
14.3
42.3
29. 1
15.7
16.8
27.6
32. 7
28.4
21.8
3
3
3
0226
1429
2030
191. 4
158. 7
162. 2
2289. 5
1573. 8
1643. 9
0. 7
1. 9
1. 6
0. 4
0. 3
0. 4
0. 7
0. 8
1.3
19. 9
3. 6
3. 3
45. 0
38. 2
34. 8
5. 3
20. 7
30. 2
4. 3
12. 9
12. 5
10. 0
9. 5
6. 6
14. 1
12. 7
9. 7
4
4
4
4
0226
0826
1426
2026
150.
193.
343.
403.
6
6
7
6
0. 7
1. 2
2. 1
1. 4
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
4.
5.
9.
4.
2
4
3
1
12. 3
24. 6
25. 1
38. 7
30. 3
35. B
32.8
28. 3
22.
10.
15.
10.
13.
13.
9.
9.
16.
8.
5.
6.
5
5
5
5
0226
0826
1426
2026
306. 9
263.6
160. 1
127.7
5887. 7
4344.4
1601. 2
1019.2
0.9
1.0
0. 9
0.7
0. 2
0. 1
0. 3
0.2
0. 4
0.3
0. 8
0.9
n n
c...=
29. 8
36.7
6
6
6
'6
0226
0826
1427
2026
121.
290.
363.
333.
3
3
5
9
920. 2
5265. 5
8259.8
6968. 7
1. 1
2. 4
1. 1
7. 2
2.2
4.7
2. 0
0. 7
1. 3
2. 0
20.0
24. 0
7
7
7
7
0226
0826
1426
2028
272. 1
267. 5
269. 7
265.7
4627. 7
4472. 9
4545. 2
4413.1
2. 5
3. 0
2. 1
1.5
0.8
0. 6
0. 4
0.3
8
8
8
8
0226
0826
1429
2026
348.6
333. 1
396. 5
335.8
7594.
6935.
9826.
7045.
2.
2.
2.
2.
7
2
7
5
9
9
0228
0827
285. 2
314. 9
5085. 1
6196. 7
2. 0
1.6
PST
DAY/TI.ME
1
1
SIG.
144. 5
151.8
7 1419.
6 2343.
8 7387.
8 10190.
1
4
4
7
3
3
5
2
7
4
6
6
3
I
0
B
2
0
3
5
6-4
1
1
6
7
6
5
7
9
52.2
23. 0
26.6
12. 2
11.0
4. 1
2.4
17.3
26. 7
37.0
11. 8
10.1
24.8.
20.0
6. 3
7.3
18. 7
11.4
1. 8
0. 6
3.2
18.8
2.7
5. 8
7.8
20. 8
16. 6
25. 3
15.7
9. 9
32. 8
27. 7
11.2
9. 0
26.
16.
9.
10.
4
4
5
5
16. 7
13. 0
26. 1
4. 8
5. 1
8. 2
2. 4
0.8
19. 4
13. 3
7. 8
2.9
19.4
25. 8
20. 7
17.0
13. 3
18. 1
22. 7
35.8
16. 3
14. 1
15. 8
16.8
12. 1
11. 3
9. 8
11.9
11.6
6. 2
le. 6
13.3
0. 3
0. 3
1. 0
1.2
4.
2.
3.
8.
3
B
7
9
13.
28.
19.
21.
9
5
1
7
27. 2
24. 9
32.8
30.2
20. 8
20. 6
11. 3
11.7
11.4
7. 0
13. 4
9. 6
11.0
8. 6
11. 1
8. 2
8.
5.
5.
6.
0. 9
0. 7
3. 9
4. 5
24.
26. 7
4
25. 7
27. 7
17. 8
13. 9
8. 3
8. 7
8. 9
9. 7
1.2
I. 1
1. 1
8
4
4
5
6. 3
9. 3
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
OCT 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
<CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
1. 6
1. 5
O. 5
0. 5
1. 5
1. 1
32. 8
7. 1
16. 1
25. 5
9747. 0
6303. 5
16. 4
25. 1
9
9
1428
2026
394. 9
317. 6
10
10
10
10
0226
0826
1426
2026
421.
468.
401.
408.
1
7
4
4
11084.
13730.
10068.
10426.
7
0
0
9
3. 4
2.4
2.2
2. 0
0. 9
0.5
1.0
0. 4
20. 6
1.3
3.3
3. 8
20. 9
32.6
31.0
24. 7
14. 6 12. 6
9.5
28.7
21.4. 11.9
7. 9
37. 9
11
11
11
11
0226
0826
1424
2026
394.
380.
360.
340.
5
1
8
7
9724.
9027.
8136.
7254.
8
6
4
3
2.3
2. 5
2.8
1.6
1.4
1. 0
0.2
0.4
10.3
2. 0
1.6
1.7
26.9
30. 0
17.8
15.0
21.5
15. 1
34.5
30.4
12
12
12
12
0226
0829
1424
2026
286.
303.
185.
210.
2
0
1
0
5119.
5736.
2141.
2756.
8
2
5
9
2. 0
1. 1
1.5
1.4
0. 2
0. 2
0.3
1.7
1. 3
0. 6
0.9
3.9
2. 1
1. 1
13
13
13
13
0226
0826
1426
2026
611. 0 23334. 6
550. 0 18906. 9
528. 6 17462. 7
492.
15179. 1
4. 1
2.2
2. 0
1. 8
1.7
1. 1
0. 5
0. 4
14
14
14
14
0226
0826
1426
2025
342. 5
309. 5
363. 7
315.8
7330.
5988.
8269.
6234.
4
0
1
3
1.2
1.7
1.5
1.0
15
15
15
15
0226
0826
1427
2026
277.
309.
212.
198.
0
7
4
7
4797.
5995.
2819.
2468.
1
9
0
4
16
16
16
16
0226
0829
1426
2026
164.
129.
95.
218.
7
3
6
2
1694.
1045.
571.
2975.
17
17
17
17
0226
0826
1429
2029
190. 1
195.6
226.8
184.7
7. 6
15.3
10. 7
12.8
6-4
13. 2
11. 5
0
2
3
7
13.
13.
14.
10.
7
7
3
4
7.
5.
7.
6.
10.7
16. 7
19.3
21.9
11.3
8. 9
6. 3
11. 0
10.
13.
12.
11.
4
2
4
2
5. 7
11. 0
5. 7
7. 1
1.7
24. 2
6. 7
11.3
9.5
17.7
23. 6
14.3
32.0
10.
23.
27.
28.
7
4
8
3
18.
20.
12.
12.
2
5
9
6
24. 0
23. 1
27. 2
9. 5
3.0
7.7
3. 1
0. 7
20.5
42. 5
34.6
2. 6
14.6
7.0
25.8
36.6
15.2
4.4
11. 1
13. 0
10.
6.
5.
13.
8
9
5
3
16.
15.
12.
18.
9
7
5
2
13.7
12.9
5.5
13.9
0.5
0. 5
0.2
0.2
1.9
0.7
1.0
2.6
16.4
4. 1
3.3
12.5
36.1
28.7
15.9
21.8
18.3
34.9
40.4
21.3
8.
13.
17.
17.
4
4
2
0
11.
9.
10.
13.
1
1
9
1
6.5
7. 5
9. 9
10.9
1.7
1.3
1. 1
0.9
0.3
0.2
0. 3
0.2
0.5
0.3
0. 1
0.3
3.7
2. 1
4. 2
1.8
10.3
18.8
12. 9
15.2
31.0
33. 1
25. 9
40.9
29.
19.
32.
21.
5
5
0
0
13. 5
12. 4
16. 1
12. 3
10.0
12.8
7. 8
7.9
4
5
2
8
1.2
0. 7
0. 8
0. 8
0.2
0. 4
0. 2
0. 2
0.3
0. 6
2. 0
0. 4
0.8
0. 9
0. 7
0. 3
3.8
11.6
8. 4
0. 5
27. 1
32. 7
25. 0
5. 2
32.
28.
28.
27.
7
0
1
2
23. 9
17. 7
23. 2
41. 1
10.
7.
12.
24.
2258. 7
2392.0
3213. 9
2132. 7
0.8
0. 5
0. 7
1.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.3
0. 6
0. 2
0.4
0.4
0. 4
0. 5
1.8
1.2
0. 6
0. 6
0.7
b. 8
9. 1
8. 5
10.6
28.
36.
52.
50.
2
7
5
6
42.
33.
23.
25.
18. 1
1
1
1
1
4.2
6.
6.
8.
6.
4
0
8
9
9
7
0
5
6
8
0
9
19. 4
13. 5
9.4
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
OCT 1984
•
•
•
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
ENERGY
INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
(TDTAL
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
18
18
18
18
0229
0846
1432
2058
135.6
108. 6
135.8
214. 7
1149.4
737. 3
1153.2
2882. 1
1.3
0. 8
0. 6
2. 4
0.2
0. 2
0. 1
0. 1
0.6
0. 7
0. 3
0. 2
1.2
3. 3
1. 2
0. 7
0.9
2. 0
1.0
0. 6
11.4
12. 9
3. 5
13. 0
29.4
23.8
15.8
43. 0
27.0
34. 8
38.2
17. 9
28.4
22. 0
39.7
22. 5
19
19
19
19
0229
0826
1426
2026
154.0
198. 7
254. 2
254.0
1482.5
2468. 2
4038. 6
4033. 8
1.0
0. 6
0. 8
1. 3
0.2
0. 2
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
0. 3
0.7
0. 6
0. 5
0. 8
1.6
1. 0
2. 4
11. 2
41.6
10. 2
24.8
30. 1
33.2
59. 8
32. 2
27. 3
11.4
19. 9
24. 7
16. 2
10.5
7. 9
14. 7
13. 1
20
20
20
20
0228
0827
1425
2026
324.
373.
253.
185.
3
6
4
4
6574.
8725.
4011.
2147.
5
4
7
4
1. 1
1. 5
1. 0
0. 8
0. 4
0.4
0. 8
2. 0
0. 1
0. 5
0. 4
1. 5
0. 3
2. 1
0. 4
1. 5
n 2
19. 0
15. 9
0. 6
42. 5
38. 7
35.9
6. 9
30.
12.
24.
42.
10.
13.
13.
27.
12.
12.
7.
17.
21
21
21
21
0226
0826
1426
2026
171. 2
120.6
112.6
107. 1
1832.
5
909.8
792.4
717.0
0. 5
0.9
1.7
0.9
0.8
1.8
0.9
0.8
2. 4
4.7
2.8
4.6
1. 1
5.5
9.3
12.9
0. 9
2.2
17.5
31.0
2. 0
4.5
11.3
3.4
36. 9
31.0
17.5
6.6
36. 9
37.9
28.7
24.7
18. 9
12.0
10.8
15.5
22
c.=
22
==
g.r..
22
22
0226
0826
1429
2028
101. 0
131. 4
100. 7
95.7
637. 5
1079.7
634. 2
571. 9
0.8
3. 3
2. 5
3. 2
0. 6
1. 3
0.8
1.0
2. 4
1. 1
1. 4
1. 8
5.
3.
2.
3.
45.
5.
20.
16.
2
4
8
0
15. 0
55.0
25. 2
19. 6
10.
17.
12.
12.
12.
10.
24.
13.
1
2
4
1
8. 5
3. 9
10. 5
30. 1
23
23
23
0226
0826
1428
88. 4
87. 2
94.2
488. 4
475. 6
554.7
3. 2
11. 1
5.7
0. 4
1. 1
0.2
2. 0
1.8
1.4
2. 1
4.0
n n2
2.
7. 9
3.4
25. 7
16. 2
19.7
23. 3
22. 7
32.0
16. 4
22. 4
21.7
21. 8
15. 2
12.2
24
24
24
24
0226
0826
1426
2027
87.
84.
99.
103.
480. 8
445. 3
614. 7
669. 3 ,
6.
5.
9.
4.
3
7
7
9
0. 2
0. 1
0. 2
0. 3
0.
1.
0.
0.
9
0
6
9
1. 4
2. 1
2. 3
1. 3
2.
2.
2.
1.
40.
20.
23.
13.
28.
26.
25.
32.
12.
34.
33.
39.
25
25
25
0226
0828
1426
91.7
100. 1
108.2
525.6
626. 6
731.9
4.8
5. 7
9.3
0. 1
0. 1
0.2
0.7
0. 2
0.6
1.0
0. 6
1.3
1.8
2. 0
1.4
26
26
26
0226
0827
1425
222. 3 3089. 4
251. 0 3938. 3
411. 6 10588. 3
0. 7
0. 9
2.4
0. 4
0. 4
0. 3
0. 2
1. 1
0. 9
0. 3
0.8
5. 7
1. 6
1. 6
15. 5
7
4
2
5
6
0
4
5
5. 4
As...=
7
0
5
7
7.
8.
3.
6.
8
0
0
0
11.6
5. 3
12.9
..
5. 1
10. 3
38.4
3
7
8
2
2
2
6
1
6
5
4
5
8
4
6
6
1
5
2
1
6
3
7
4
4
5
5
8
24.8
32. 9
34.9
36.2
34.6.
26.3
19.3
19. 0
13.6
30. 8
43. 4
19. 0
32.9
26. 4
8.8
28. 4
15. 6
9. 5
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
OCT 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
•
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
SECS)
8-6
6-4
26
2026
489.8 14995. 0
4.0
0.4
1. 1
6.4
31. 5
17.4
10.2
15.8
13.7
27
27
27
27
0226
0826
1425
2023
408. 2 10416. 2
362. 0 8190. 4
286.4 5125. 3
262. 6 4308.9
0.
2.
1.
2.
9
4
7
9
0. 2
0. 2
0.2
0. 3
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
2
3
3
5. 6
1. 7
2.4
2. 1
38.
24.
24.
25.
4
4
5
5
29. 4
32. 2
24. 1
26.2
7. 9
16. 8
21.6
18.0
10. 2
11.4
14.7
I I. 8
7. 3
11.0
10.8
13.4
28
28
28
0826
1426
2031
235. 9
200. 0
195. 1
3477. 5
2499. 1
2379. 1
0. 8
3. 6
0. 6
0. 6
0. 9
0. 3
0. 3
0.9
2. 1
0. 4
0.4
0. 2
8. 9
2. 3
0. 7
30. 6
41. 9
29. 3
27. 8
18.2
36. 0
16. 5
12. 0
20. 6
14. 6
20.4
10. 7
29
29
29
29
0228
0827
1426
2025
172. 0
160. 9
168. 8
147. 9
1848. 0
1617. 7
1781.0
1367. 5
0. 9
0. 6
0.5
0. 8
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0. 1
•-i
4. 1
1.4
0. 4
1. 2
4. 2
4.7
8. 5
1. 0
0. 9
0.7
4. 1
12. 9
8. 0
4.9
3. 5
38. 9
48. 8
38.4
34. 9
25. 7
24. 3
32.5
36. 0
17.
9.
17.
12.
30
30
30
30
0226
0825
1427
2026
130.
120.
102.
141.
1056.
905.
650.
1256.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
2
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
8
2
3
2
6.
4.
3.
3.
33.
24.
12.
27.
29.
35.
31.
28.
8
3
7
3
12. 8
14. 8
16. 5
21.9
31
31
31
31
0226
0830
1426
2026
218.6
229.8
233. 1
159. 0
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
3
0.6
0.2
0. 2
0.7
22.0
13. 2
11.0
26.0
11.7
11.0
12.7
11.4
0
4
0
8
9
6
5
4
2987.2
3301. 3
3396. 2
1580. 7
1
8
5
7
0.9
1. 2
1. 1
1. 2
.1
g..
is..
6
4
0
5
8
0
9
8
2. 4
3. 0
3. 7
9. 1
5.0
5.0
4. 0
4. 0
18.5
23. 1
15.7
10. 5
13.
17.
31.
7.
1
7
7
8
41.4
46.4
55. 4
46. 2
4
4
1
1
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
OCT
PERSISTENCE
:CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
•
METERS
0. 5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3. 5
4.0
4.5
5. 0
5.5
6.0
DAYS
1,
1,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
9,
12,
12,
12,
•
4,
1,
ILA
5,
5,
3,
4,
1,
1,
1,
5,
nn
--,
18,
18,
18,
4,
5,
1,
4,
5,
12,
40
5,
4,
5,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR OCT 1984
DATE ( OCT)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE ( OCT)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
DATE ( OCT)
SIG. HT (M. )
•
•
DATE ( OCT)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
DATE ( OCT)
4. 0
15
3. 1
22
1. 3
29
I. 7
1. 9
1. 3
1. 6
3. 9
16
2. 2
23
0. 9
30
1. 4
10
4. 7
17
2. 3
24
1. 0
31
2. 4
4. 0
11
3. 9
18
2. 1
25
1. 1
3. 1
12
3. 0
19
2. 5
26
4. 9
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
3. 6
13
6. 1
20
3. 7
27
4. 1
2. 7
14
3. 6
21
1. 7
28
2. 4
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY, ENERGY
•
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
NOV 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
0
•
0
•
•
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SG)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
1
1
0226
0827
108. 9
127. 0
741. 3
1007. 5
2. 3
0. 9
0. 3
0. 2
0. 8
0. 9
0. 7
0. 5
4. 7
1. 7
12. 8
3. 7
37.8
9. 5
le. 4
36. 6
22. 8
46. 4
4
2027
349. 2
7621.6
2. 1
1.2
5. 7
23. 6
18. 7
16. 9
12. 8
14. 2
5. 2
5
5
5
5
0226
0827
1424
2023
306. 4
243. 3
220.2
231. 0
5866. 9
3698.2
3031.6
3335. 5
3. 5
2.8
2.4
2. 6
2. 3
1.0
1.4
0. 5
2. 0
5. 1
8.6
3. 0
23. 8
16. 5
21.0
22. 4
27. 8
11.6
35.6
22. 6
15. 7
21.0
8.9
20. 8
12. 1
27. 5
9.8
9. 2
9. 2
10. 5
9.0
5. 6
4. 1
4.3
3.9
13. 6
6
6
6
6
0225
0827
1426
2025
233. 3
212. 9
281.5
338. 8
3401. 4
2833. 2
4953.7
7175. 7
1. 9
1. 2
1.5
1. 6
0. 3
O.2
0.2
0. 1
1. 9
2. 7
0.7
0. 5
17. 7
6. 2
5.8
3. 5
20. 6
26. 8
17.8
14. 9
13. 9
12. 0
22.7
21. 4
19. 1
16. 6
30.0
25. 0
12. 4
15. 7
14.3
21. 1
12. 7
19. 2
7.6
12. 3
7
7
7
7
0225
0826
1424
2022
239.2
202. 5
177. 3
146. 8
3577.
2564.
1965.
1346.
1.
1.
1.
4.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
3
3
7
2. 9
3. 1
1. 0
3. 0
11.2
12. 2
12. 5
6. 3
30.6
24. 0
21. 4
21. 0
27.7
33. 7
20. 2
35. 8
14.0
16. 8
27. 0
15. 6
12. 0
8. 6
16. 1
13. 0
8
8
8
8
0223
0827
1424
2027
141.7
154.9
181.9
367.3
1254.7
1499.9
2067. 7
8430.4
1.3
I. 3
2. 0
s. s&
n n
0.3
0. 6
4. 1
O. 9
0.8
0. 3
5. 2
12.6
1. 1
2. 6
4. 3
15.1
5.0
4. 8
7. 3
11.5
19.7
17.3
17.6
12.7
32.'8
18.8
16.8
16.0
23.4
24.7
22. 5
18.0
16.2
30. 0
20. 5
11. 6
9
9
9
9
0225
0825
1425
2026
385.8
342.9
260. 7
308.8
9301.
7349.
4247.
5958.
5
1
2
6
2. 1
2.9
2. 3
1. 0
0.9
1.6
0. 4
0. 2
1.4
4. 3
3. 9
0. 4
10.3
23.0
31. 6
1. 6
25.7
20. 1
20. 1
16. 1
16.0
13. 4
14.8
14. 9
21.2
11.9
15. 4
25. 0
12.4
14. 5
7. 9
20. 2
10.6
8.7
4. 0
21. 1
10
10
10
10
0227
0828
1428
2029
235. 1
226. 1
247. 8
186.9
3453.
3195.
3839.
2183.
3
8
1
0
1. 2
1. 2
1. 1
1. 1
0. 3
0. 3
0. 6
0.6
0. 6
0. 7
0. 3
0.5
4. 7
11. 9
22. 7
3. 4
10.3
22. 8
27. 6
28. 6
37.1
12. 1
20. 0
26. 2
18.7
23. 1
10. 1
24. 2
11.3
23. 7
15. 6
15. 5
19.7
11
11
11
11
0227
0829
1429
2026
235. 2
224.4
203.4
265. 3
3458.
3147.
2586.
4399.
0
5
3
1
4. 2
0.8
2.0
1. 3
1. 0
0.8
1.0
0.3
0.
1.
4.
2.
6.
2.
9.
17.
3
0
1
7
17. 9
26.3
35.6
43. 7
33. 3
44.2
18. 1
17. 5
16.
13.
10.
6.
7
2
1
6
19. 3
9. 9
5.2
8. 3
12
0228
267.6
4474.6
1. 7
0. 2
/. 4
11.3
28.0
17.9
16. 4
20. 5
5
2
8
5
6
4
8
3
2
2
2
8
7
4
5
5
n 2
2.
0. 6
I. 1
1.
1.
15.
2.
0
9
0
5
2. 9
COGUILLE RIVER,
NOV 1984
OR ARRAY, ENERGY
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. SO)
(CM. )
12
12
12
0828
1423
2023
214. 6
231. 1
241. 1
2878. 1
3339.4
3632. 0
1. 2
1.3
1. 6
13
13
13
13
0223
0823
1423
2023
194.
206.
201.
194.
2354.
2651.
2538.
2372.
1.
1.
0.
0.
14
14
14
14
0222
0825
1424
2023
208. 3
158. 9
119. 1
94.0
2712. 9
1578. 6
887. 1
551.7
3. 1
0. 7
1. 5
1.9
0. 2
0. 2
0.9
2.0
15
15
15
15
0223
0823
1423
2023
87. 6
118. 4
213.8
165. 1
479. 6
876.3
2857. 5
1704. 4
3. 5
0. 9
0.8
2. 1
1.
2.
1.
0.
16
16
16
16
0223
0823
1423
2023
160. 1
176. 0
168.8
163. 4
1601.
1936.
1780.
1669.
3
1
3
5
2. 3
1. 9
2. 1
2. 5
17
17
17
17
0223
0823
1423
2024
185. 8
198.4
195. 9
174. 1
2157. 0
2460.2
2398.9
1894.7
18
18
18
18
0223
0823
1423
2023
481. 8
657.8
513. 9
472. 5
14507. 7
27047.2
16504. 8
13954. 0
19
19
19
19
0223
0823
1423
2026
438. 6 12023. 2
286. B 5140. 3
249.3 3883.4
277.2 4804.1
20
20
20
0223
0821
1423
474.1 14047.1
493. 6 15228. 0
478.4 14302.9
1
0
5
8
2
0
7
1
O. 3
O.3
0. 3
1. 7
2.7
1.4
6. 7
8. 5
9. 4
21. 0.
8.8
18. 5
27. 9
18.7
30. 2
17. 8
32.8
18. 5
13. 0
16.0
12. 8
10. 9
11.2
7. 7
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
7
8
3
4
6. 3
'1 9
2.
2. 6
1.6
31.
17.
16.
17.
21.
19.
19.
22.
15.
26.
19.
22.
17.
13.
28.
24.
5.
17.
12.
9.
0. 4
0. 3
0.6
5.2
2.0
0. 6
1.2
2.7
4. 1
7. 3
2.6
3. 1
3. 7
0.8
1. 1
19. 6
19. 9
3.7
1.6
8. 7
1. 6
4. 1
8. 5
2. 7
3.
3.
8.
15.
16.
8.
8.
19.
2. 2
1.8
1.2
2. 1
n •-■
2.
2
1. 0
1. 3
2. 9
12. 5
7.2
2. 1
11.6
16. 2
21.0
5.
16.9
3.
3.
2.
2.
1.
1.
1.
1.
5
7
6
7
5. 5
27. 5
9. 1
7. 3
2. 4
2. 0
2.0
6.5
1. 8
0. 5
0.4
10.3
14.4
7. 7
4.2
37.9
31. 2
10. 3
9
3
8
7
1
6
9
5
5
4
3
2
3
3
2
5
0
8
1
9
4
5
4
9
2
9
5
6
7
7
6
3
8
2
8
9
10.0
37. 5
32. 2
30.4
36.4
24.0
20. 7
27.8
27.3
15. 6
EL 0
13.3
11.8
11. 1
30. 9
6.7
17. 2
6.
6.
40.
16.
2
2
5
1
12.
30.
28.
16.
5
1
5
3
28. 4
18. 3
11.6
10. 5
13. 8
7.2
8.6
9. 4
17.
15.
13.
13.
9
7
1
9
24. 3
28.7
29. 9
22. 7
22.
23.
16.
16.
3
7
4
7
6.
7.
8.
4.
6.
6.
5.
3.
25. 3
14.7
.1
8
21 0
2 . 4.
18. 6
12.4
4. 4
8. 3
13. 7
8.0
9. 5
16.6
6. 3
12.9
21. 6
10. 1
3. 5
21.4
43.0
11. 1
24. 6
17.2
21. 7
16. 7
21.
6.
8.
14.
6
2
6
8
9. 0
4. 5
10. 4
,In c.
n
R.=,.
6.
16.
14.
13.
17.
10.
17.
14.
12.
13.
14.
7.
4. 2
4. 6
2.8
4.3
18. 2
10. 5
11.5
4.7
23. 4
29. 7
18.9
27.4
15. 0
25. 0
21.4
14.4
9. 8
10. 5
20.4
16.2
13. 7
11. 9
11.0
8.6
11. 9
5. 6
12.1
8. 1
1. I
13. 6
15. 3
1. 1
3. 4
9.0
4.2
5. 4
11. 1
11.1
7. 7
10. 5
7.4
14. 6
20. 3
13.2
8. 2
9. 5
9.9
Et. 6
10. 3
1
4
0
1
1
4
6
5
14. 6
30. 3
-,
nn ..
a....
1
5
4
1
2
7
2
4
1
1
0
9
5
8
6
0
1
2
7
2
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
NOV 1984
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PST
DAY/TIME
•
6-4
7.6
20
2023
454.5 12912. 0
3.9
5.5
14.2
17.8
13.8
12.7
14.2
10.8
21
21
21
21
0223
0828
1423
2021
544.
417.
353.
322.
0 18498. 5
7 10904. 4
1 7793. 6
2 6487. 3
4. 2
2.4
2. 5
2. 7
5.
1.
0.
0.
0
3
7
6
6. 3
18.9
3. 6
4. 6
19. 6
18.4
23. 8
27. 6
16. 5
14.2
25. 1
14. 8
7.8
14.7
14. 9
18.6
14. 2
8.9
13. 8
9. 9
14.
13.
10.
12.
cc
22
cc
22
22
cc
cc
22
0223
0
3
9
5
3937.
2556.
8050.
8078.
1
9
2
9
2. 1
2.6
2. 9
2.5
0.6
1.1
0. 7
1.7
4.2
2.0
3. 0
2.3
11.5
17.4
14. 5
16.2
22.2 29.0
1424
2026
251.
202.
358.
359.
24.2
34. 9
32.7
19.4
24. 1
17.2
14.4
17.3
7. 1
11.1
11.5
12.0
9. 8
11.3
23
23
23
23
0223
0823
1423
2023
288.
310.
383.
370.
3
7
9
7
5195.
6033.
9208.
8590.
5
9
9
6
2.7
3. 3
2.7
2. 7
6.0
7. 6
1.4
0. 4
3. 5
10. 0
9.2
2. 0
3. 5
10. 5
24.6
19. 3
27.9
16. 5
18.2
35. 6
31. 1
13. 2
8.7
10. 8
11.0
12. 2
10.0
9. 1
8.6
14. 1
14.4
13. 6
6.0
13. 0
11.2
7. 0
24
24
24
24
0223
0823
1423
2023
416.
301.
291.
377.
4 10836. 0
5 5682. 4
2 5300. 0
8 8920. 0
2. 6
1.8
1.7
1.7
0. 6
0.4
0.5
0.4
4. 9
2.9
2.0
1.3
16. 2
18.9
17.4
6.7
25. 6
26.8
27.5
41.7
23. 5
16.6
17.3
9.4
9. 4
8.2
11.6
16.6
12. 1
12.4
14.8
12.0
5. 7
12.4
7.7
10.7
25
25
25
25
0223
0823
1423
2023
335.
346.
386.
298.
1
1
0
1
7018.
7488.
9312.
5555.
6
4
4
3
2. 1
2. 3
2.6
1.4
0.4
0. 5
1.4
0.5
0.8
4.7
7.2
0.6
10.7
10.7
8.4
21.1
31.8
22.7
33.2
17.8
21.1
26. 1
17.8
20.4
15.4
13.0
13.4
11.7
11.2
11.9
9.2
16.8
6.9
8.7
7.2
10. 1
26
26
26
26
0223
0823
.1423
2025
297.
315.
177.
206.
9
8
6
3
5547.
6231.
1971.
2660.
2
4
2
0
2. 1
1. 3
1.6
0.6
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
0.2
1.4
1. 2
0.3
0.3
4. 3
12.6
2. 5
0.8
31.6
26.8
22.6
5. 1
37. 5
22. 1
35.5
16.8
10.2
12.2
15.6
31.2
7. 5
10.0
12.3
26.6
5.7
14. 1
9.8
19.0
27
27
27
27
0223
0823
1423
2023
288.
227.
153.
243.
1
2
2
3
5186.
3226.
1466.
3699.
4
0
6
2
1.3
1. 2
1.4
1.2
1. 1
1.2
0. 4
4. 1
5. 7
1.0
0. 3
22.2
0.8
0.3
0. 7
0.3
0. 8
13. 0
11.1
2. 1
15.8
10. 1
19.0
13. 4
14.2
17. 0
14.4
20. 8
19.8
21. 3
16.0
35. 0
21.6
30. 4
35.9
26. 9
28
28
28
0223
0823
1423
2023
296.9 5508. 0
406. 8 10343. 3
616. 5 23758. 1
467. 2 13639. 5
1. 1
2. 1
3. 2
1. 8
1.4
2. 0
1. 1
0. 3
29
0223
336.4
7073.4
2.1
0.6
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
0826
8
1
5
8
12. 0
8.6
5. 6
8. 8
5.0
4.4
3. 4
5.5
3
7
4
5
17. 4
20. 1
27. 5
2.2
11.9
18. 9
13. 7
12. 5
27.
15.
10.
19.
8
2
7
0
20. 1
9. 7
7. 7
9. 5
17.
17.
16.
15.
1
4
6
6
16.7
15. 0
12. 9
12. 8
1.0
14.8
22.0
22.3
14.2
11.5
11.8
0.
2.
14.
1.
COGUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
NOV 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
29
29
29
0823
1423
2020
342. 0
247. 9
255. 5
7310. 8
3842. 2
4080. 5
3. 0
0. 8
1.9
0. 2
0. 3
0.3
30
30
30
30
0223
0823
1425
2023
294. 6
269.3
355. 5
379. 2
5425. 4
4533.8
7899. 4
8989. 1
1. 3
3.2
2. 5
3. 7
9. 4
20.2
4. 2
9. 2
0. 4
0. 2
0.6
0.
11.
22.
10.
6
5
3
3
6. 4
3. 5
0. 8
2. 0
5.7
6. 5
8.9
8. 8
9. 6
4.8
2.
8.
16.
10.
8
2
3
2
6-4
37. 1
21. 6
19. 2
14. 5
20. 8
37. 2
12. 8
24. 1
19. 9
17. 2
19. 5
15. 7
13.
8.
8.
18.
28. 2
23.6
17. 8
18. 1
22. 1
11.9
12. 4
11.4
20. 6
7.9
9. 9
9. 7
5
3
6
8
COCiUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
NOV
1984
PERSISTENCE
'CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
DAYS
METERS
0. 5
1. 0
I. 5
2. 0
2. .5
3.0
3. 5
4. 0
4. 5
5.0
5. 5
6. 0
1,
1,
1,
1,
I,
1,
I,
1,
I,
I,
".I
=1
1,
I,
4,
14,
14,
14,
14,
14,
1,
8,
8,
2,
1,
n
ii&P
9,
9,
5,
1,
2,
3,
6,
6,
1,
PI
A.,
n
C.)
n
LP
n
ILO
n
A..
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( NOV)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( NOV)
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
8
( NOV)
( NOV)
SIG. HT (M. )
3. 7
15
2. 1
nn
g.c.
3. 6
29
3. 4
0. 0
0. 0
1. 3
9
3. 9
16
I. 8
23
3. 8
30
3. 8
4
3
2
1
( NOV)
10
2. 5
17
2. 0
24
4. 2
31
0. 0
3. 5
11
2. 7
18
6. 6
25
3. 9
1984
NOV
3. 1
12
2. 7
19
4. 4
26
3. 2
7
6
5
3. 4
13
2. 1
20
4. 9
27
2. 9
2. 4
14
2. 1
21
5. 4
28
6. 2
16
12
PERIOD SEC.
8
COQUILLE RIVER. OR ARRAY. ENERGY
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
DEC 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
•
•
•
•
•
6-4
1
1
1
1
0223
0823
1423
2022
355.5
306. 3
280.9
219.4
7896.8
5862. 8
4930.2
3007.4
n n2
2.
2. 0
1.9
4. 5
2. 3
0. 6
0.2
0.4
14. 5
6. 2
3. 1
3.2
15. 7
23. 7
11. 1
21.7
7. 2
25. 4
38.0
22. 3
13. 3
19. 6
15.3
14. 1
19. 1
10. 1
18.8
15.8
15. 6
7. 6
7. 5
10.0
10. 6
5. 3
4. 5
8.4
2
2
2E.
2E.
0223
0823
1423
2023
139. 3
95.8
126. 0
159. 1
1213. 3
573.4
991. 6
1582. 6
1.
1.
0.
1.
7
3
5
0
0. 2
0. 3
0. 9
2. 2
E..m
1.
0.
0.
0.
4
6
3
8
17. 4
4. 8
1.9
1. 0
22. 0
18.7
8.9
6. 0
30.
22.
14.
33.
9
0
6
9
10. 6
10.2
19. 8
25. 0
9.
24.
26.
16.
6.5
18. 2
26. 9
13. 8
3
3
3
3
0223 . 116.0
0823 293. 3
1423 279. 7
2025 269. 8
841.6
5375. 0
4888. 1
4550. 2
0.
0.
1.
1.
9
8
5
7
9. 6
0. 5
1.0
1. 1
3.
1.
2.
3.
2
4
4
6
n n
ir...c.
4. 4
7. 6
8. 4
8. 1
3. 8
29. 1
23. 6
17.3
53. 1
30. 1
30. 4
26. 6
25. 1
14. 0
15. 9
18.3
5. 7
8. 1
10. 5
14.
5.
6.
5.
4
4
4
4
0225
0823
1427
2022
218.6
185. 7
152.7
118.3
2986.5
2155. 7
1457.2
874.7
1.2
2. 0
1. 1
1.7
0.5
0. 5
0.8
1.6
3.6
6. 0
1.5
13.1
11.5
8. 1
25.3
7.2
8.3
15. 1
21.2
22.4
28.7
26. 9
16.7
13.5
27.5
18. 8
14.3
14.2
10.2
16. 1
10.0
14.5
9.0
7. 0
9.6
12. 1
5
5
5
5
0222
0823
1423
2022
116.8
139.4
158. 9
250. 5
852. 0
1214.6
1577. 5
3921.7
1. 2
1.2
1. 5
1. 4
1.
0.
0.
0.
1
5
4
2
14.7
1. 1
1. 5
1. 4
5.6
12.7
14. 4
7. 1
13. 1
9.9
30. 1
51. 3
6. 6
26.4
15. 3
28. 1
25.7
29.7
23. 3
3.0
24. 3
11.4
7. 7
5. 2
8. 3
7.5
6. 2
2. 8
6
6
6
6
0225
0825
1425
2025
201. 7
230. 7
223.3
208. 7
2542. 6
3326. 0
3116.5
2721. 7
1. 2
2. 0
1.7
1. 3
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
0. 1
1. 0
1. 0
1. 1
0. 3
2. 1
3. 9
9.5
1. 9
40. 6
27. 1
31.6
30. 1
33. 3
44. 2
23.7
38. 4
15. 3
13. 8
19.2
13. 4
3. 1
4. 5
7.5
9. 0
3. 6
3.8
5.8
5. 8
7
7
7
7
0225
0825
1423
2024
243.
170.
224.
242.
3690.
1810.
3138.
3659.
0
1
3
5
1. 1
2. 9
2. 1
2. 6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
5.
35.
27.
12.
26.
4
2
5
2
41. 9
33. 3
57.8
22. 3
10.
16.
14.
14.
7
9
5
3
5. 8
10. 5
7. 1
8. 9
3. 9
4. 1
3. 2
4. 8
8
8
8
0224
0826
2024
199.7
202. 1
221. 6
2492. 9
2553. 4
3070. 4
2.8
2. 4
1. 2
0. 9
1. 6
1. 1
7.8
1. 0
5. 1
22. 1
13. 2
13. 5
16. 7
22. 5
23. 1
21.7
29. 7
9. 6
12. 0
13. 0
13. 1
11. 3
10. 8
22. 9
5. 1
6. 3
10. 7
9
9
0224
0824
242. 3
241.0
3668. 3
3630.0
1.5
2.8
0. 4
0.4
2. 7
14.9
8.8
16.5
40. 7
14.4
25. 1
24.9
5. 1
12.4
10. 3
8.8
5. 8
5.2
E.
•
SIG. NT TOT. EN
(CM.) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
0
2
1
0
2
3
3
6
3
5
8
2
1.
4.
2.
15.
1
9
1
7
6
5
6
8
2
6
8
2
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
DEC 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
•
•
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
6-4
9
9
1424
2027
239. 6
276.9
3587. 2
4791.6
2. 4
1.6
0. 2
0. 2
0. 9
0. 5
10. 0
2.9
33. 4
29. 1
25. 8
34. 5
12. 6
11.8
9. 6
7. 8
5. 5
12.0
10
10
10
10
0224
0824
1426
2032
208. 4 2715. 4
308.7 5955. 0
450. 3 12672. 2
381.0 9074.3
nr...c.n
1. 3
n n
3,...
1.9
O.3
0.4
0. 5
0.8
2. 1
2.7
1. 8
4.4
14. 0
8. 5
15. 5
21.3
21. 9
25. 3
38. 0
28.6
28..4
30.9
19. 1
14.9
15. 4
11.6
7. 3
10.5
10. 6
10.9
10. 8
11.6
5. 6
8.7
5. 2
6.4
11
11
11
11
0226
0826
1424
2024
369.4
363.9
397. 4
277.7
8529. 3
8276. 1
9870.7
4819.7
2.7
2. 5
2. 1
0. 7
1.
0.
0.
0.
6
4
2
2
8. 5
2.2
3. 0
0. 9
38.2
28.6
23. 9
5. 5
15.4
25.0
37. 4
30.9
12.
13.
12.
16.
3
3
2
0
6. 1
9.6
7. 5
10.8
10. 8
11.0
10. 2
19.4
4.8
7. 8
4. 1
16. 2
12
12
12
12
0224
0824
1423
2024
320.
465.
590.
545.
2 6409. 3
6 13551. 8
2 21768.8
2 18576. 7
0. 9
1. 6
4. 2
2
3
8
7
0.
0.
O.
0.
17.
15.
24.
22.
12.
34.
41.
22.
7
9
0
3
16. 3
2. 2
0.
0.
0.
5.
8. 1
9. 7
29. 1
12. 1
12. 1
17. 7
22. 3
12. 2
8. 2
13.8
13
13
13
13
0224
0827
1426
2024
578. 1
705.7
600. 5
519.3
20886. 1
31128.7
22536. 5
16851.4
2. 8
4. 4
3. 7
2.6
14
14
14
14
0227
0825
1428
2023
409. 3 10469. 3
329. 4 6783. 0
273.9 4690.0
352. 5 7765.7
15
15
15
15
0224
0826
1424
2024
375.0 8790.0
605. 9 22944. 1
523. 8 17145. 0
399.6 9981.2
16
16
16
16
0225
0824
1424
2024
554.2
542.4
442. 7
451. 1
17
17
17
17
0224
0824
1426
2024
c..
0
6
7
3
3
2
3
7
1. 7
1. 4
3. 1
4. 2
7. 9
5. 0
1. 7
0.7
4. 7
14.2
27. 4
14.7
16. 9
14.2
23. 1
15.5
21. 4
13.9
9. 2
23.9
13. 3
7.0
6. 0
10.9
10. 1
9.6
9. 6
6.0
15. 3
15.5
12. 5
16.5
8.0
16. 6
7. 1
9.4
2. 3
1. 6
1. 2
2.0
0. 7
0. 3
O.2
0.3
1.7
1. 1
0. 2
0. 5
23. 7
17. 0
1.7
1. 1
24. 5
30. 6
38. 9
16.4
22. 1
24. 4
25. 3
34.9
8. 2
12. 7
12. 5
17.0
10. 1
8. 2
10. 3
14.3
7. 1
4. 6
10. 1
14.0
1.4
3. 1
3. 2
1.8
1.2
I. 3
O. 5
0.3
1. 5
9. 6
5. 7
1.6
1.7
15. 9
27. 6
24.2
22.0
22. 0
16. 9
24.3
31.3
11. 2
15. 6
20.6
22.6
10. 2
8.0
9.5
10. 1
17. 7
14. 1
11.7
B.6
9. 5
9. 0
6.4
2
6
2
3
1. 6
2.5
1.8
2. 3
O. 5
1.0
0. 3
0. 4
1. 9
11. 5
3. 8
1.4
15. 2
40.9
22. 9
16. 4
37. 8
9.7
24. 6
26. 5
12. 8
9. 3
17. 0
25. 1
6. 5
6.4
5. 7
11. 5
15. 9
12.4
14. 2
11.4
B. 1
6.6
10. 1
5. 5
430. 8 11600.4
362. 1 8196. 9
402.3 10117.4
358.6 8036. 6
2. 1
2. 3
1.4
2. 3
O. 4
0. 7
4.5
14. 2
O. 6
0. 3
0.5
2. 6
7.
2.
2.
4.
38. 1
43. 7
34.2
27. 5
16.6
29. 2
31.7
18. 6
8. 8
5. 6
7.7
10. 0
15. 1
9. 2
9.9
14. 0
11. 3
6. 7
8.5
6. 9
19197.
18385.
12246.
12719.
e.. e.
5
8
1
3
nn 2
22.
a.
•
•
•
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
DEC 1984
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
SIG. HT TOT. EN
PST
8-6
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
DAY/TIME (CM. ) (CM. SO)
6-4
18
18
18
18
0224
0830
1429
2023
385.44
387.8
332.9
282. 0
9285. 5
9401.2
6926.7
4968. 7
19
19
19
19
0224
0825
1426
2027
228.9
203. 7
170.5
155.0
3275.5
2594. 2
1816.1
1501.9
20
20
20
20
0224
0825
1430
2024
155. 2
141.6
128.6
169. 5
1505. 1
1253.7
1034.2
1794. 8
11.3 10.9
4. 1 15. 6 19.8 20. 1
5. 2
2.00 11. 5
7. 3
7
14.
9
10.
6
7.9
21.6
20.7
2.3 13.4
1.7
18.9
12.3
12.
5
6. 5 15.3 21. 1
1.7 10. 5
1.7
9.
0
10.
2
9.
9
0. 5 12. 0 13. 8 24. 9 17. 7
2.4
6.2 18.2 25.1 11.3 10.2
8.6 19.4
0.4
1. 1
7. 2
9. 7
6.
7
25.
5
18.
8 16. 8 14. 2
0. 3
1. 3
1.8 12.4 13.9 15.7 14.7 16.6 23.8
O.4
1.0
25.0 10.6 11.0 14.1 15.1 17.7
5.2
0.4
1.5
4. 1 22.7 20. 5 17. 3
0. 6 17.6 1.6. 1
0.7
1. 1
1.3
11.2
11.0
10.6
27.2 25.6 12.0
0.6
1.0
4.7
12.5
10.7
19.0
17.7 34. 1
0.5
0.2
1.2
6.
6
21.
5
19. 5 26. 7
6.
2
17.
8
0.
2
0.
2
1. 7
21
21
21
21
0227
0825
1425
2027
222. 5
266. 1
295.4
244.0
3095. 1
4425. 8
5454.3
3722.4
0. 7
1.8
1.9
2.9
0. 2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0. 4
0. 5
0.2
0. 5
7. 9 28. 6 28. 2
8. 6 41.7 26. 6
1. 5
2.0 21.0 36.7 16.5
2.3 12.4 42.9 21.7
n
n
r...e.
18. 9 13. 3
8.0
11. 5
9.8
12.2
6. 5
11.0
4.8
7.2 37.1 31.4 11.7
3. 1
0.6
3.3
1.3
0224 224.3 3145.0
0
10.
9
18.
7
20.
9
14.
3
10.
2
5.
O. 2
1. 7 18. 5
22 0830 207. 4 2688. 4
c.c.
8.
9
2.
1
10.
7
19.
3
19.
5
11.4
2 5
3.6 22.4
22 1424 201.0 2524.7
c.c..
6.4
9.7
5.5
11.5
2
0.4
1.6 24.0 21.2
0.2
2024 244. 1 3724.5
22
n.c..
8. 5
0. 5 10. 1 13. 7 18. 4 18. 4
3. 2 26. 3
1. 4
23 0224 174. 2 1896. 0
5. 2
7.
4
5. 5 15. 9 17. 3
3. 0
0. 4 44. 1
1. 6
23 0828 187. 9 2206. 8
9.
0
3. 5 19. 3 11.4 15. 5
0.4 19.0 19.7
2.7
23 1423 170.7 1820. 3
6.
8
11.
8
19.
6
15.
7
2. 6
3. 6 36. 9
1. 8
1.7
23 2024 198. .9 2473. 1
•
22
•
24
24
24
24
0224 210. 6 2772. 2
0829 203.6 2591.0
1557 219. 4 3008. 9
2024 191.6 2293.4
1. 0 28. 6 12. 3
1. 2 13. 1
4.7 11.3
5.4
9.2
1.3
4. 0 26. 2
7
10.
8
0.
1. 7
5.4 19.0
7.2
0.2
0.9
25
25
0224
2028
179. 0
123. 8
2002. 1
957. 5
0. 7
0. 9
6. 9
5. 3
0. 3 22. 4
2. 4 22. 4 22. 3
0. 3
26
26
26
0224
0824
1427
126.2
157. 4
195. 4
995.4
1547. 8
2385. 4
1.4
0. 6
0. 6
0.3
0. 2
0. 1
6. 2
7.0
7. 1
4.8
15. 2
23.8
27. 2
26.4
12. 8
25.2
10. 2
19.6
10. 2
12.4
12. 4
16.9
8. 6 25. 2 17. 6 13. 5
7. 4 14. 2 12. 3 18. 2
2.8 20.3 17.8 18.4 17.4 11.8 10.0
9. 3
9. 5 36. 5 12. 8
1. 1 13. 1 17. 4
4. 8 16. 1 12. 3 18. 0 24. 6 23. 5
0. 4
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
DEC 1984
PST
DAY/TIME
SIG. HT TOT. EN
(CM. ) (CM. SO)
PERCENT ENERGY IN BAND
(TOTAL ENERGY INCLUDES RANGE 2048-4 SECS)
BAND PERIOD LIMITS (SECS)
22+ 22-18 18-16 16-14 14-12 12-10 10-8
8-6
26
2024
211.0
2782.5
0.7
0.2
0.3
1.2
24.2
12.7
31.5
17.7
12.0
27
27
27
27
0225
0824
1425
2023
213.
241.
269.
291.
6
8
5
9
2850.
3654.
4540.
5323.
5
9
1
9
1.
0.
0.
0.
2
5
7
7
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
7
4
3
6
14. 4
5. 7
2. 1
1. 7
18.
18.
18.
27.
2
9
3
7
38.
27.
33.
33.
3
7
3
7
17.
20.
25.
21.
9
8
2
4
9.
26.
20.
14.
2
2
3
2
28
28
28
28
0226
0826
1424
2026
286.7
265. 8
232. 9
215. 0
5136.
4414.
3391.
2888.
3
5
3
7
0. 7
0. 8
1. 0
0. 8
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0.2
0. 2
0. 2
0. 2
1.2
0. 2
0. 5
0. 6
6.7
3. 9
3. 1
3. 1
43.0
29. 8
37. 2
30. 5
22.
37.
24.
39.
1
4
1
2
15.
16.
20.
15.
3
0
2
2
11.
12.
13.
10.
2
0
9
8
29
29
29
29
0224
0824
1424
2024
190.
179.
189.
195.
2268.
2013.
2235.
2391.
9
4
3
0
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
0. 4
0. 7
0. 3
0. 1
3.
5.
3.
1.
2
6
8
0
16.
12.
8.
7.
39.
27.
14.
28.
5
8
5
2
22.
22.
34.
30.
0
2
9
9
17. 4
30.8
37. 4
32. 3
30
30
30
30
0224
0824
1423
2024
218. 6 2986. 2
203. 9 2598. 7
265. 5 4406. 7
409.0 10455.0
0. 7
0. 7
1. 0
2.4
0. 2
1. 4
7. 3
0.8
0. 1
0. 3
4. 8
27.6
0. 2
0. 3
0. 9
9.7
1.
0.
0.
13.
0
9
7
2
8. 1
4. 9
6.8
15. 6
55. 9
46. 3
45. 9
12.0
19. 3
28. 0
22.8
11.8
31
31
31
31
0224
0824
1424
2024
315.4
318. 0
238. 9
293. 9
1.5
1. 7
1. 2
1.0
0.4
0. 3
0. 2
0.2
11.5
4. 5
2. 0
0.3
25.7
23. 1
29. 8
12.2
10.9
26. 3
19. 1
52.9
17.8
13. 9
12. 7
11.9
11.3
8.7
12. 0
7.3
12.4
13. 0
13. 6
8.3
5
5
1
6
6218.3
6318. 5
3565. 9
5399. 4
2
7
4
7
2
2
1
2
5
3
9
1
6-4
15.
17.
10.
7.
0
7
4
5
8.9
8. 9
9. 9
6. 4
COQUILLE RIVER, OR ARRAY, ENERGY
1984
DEC
PERSISTENCE
CONSECUTIVE DAYS (1 OR MORE) SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT IS -N- METERS OR LESS
DAYS
METERS
O. 5
1.0
1. 5
2. 0
2. 5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4. 5
5. 0
5. 5
6. 0
1,
1
8,
8,
9,
9,
11,
11,
12,
1,
1,
11,
11,
1,
1,
1,
1,
1,
1,
3,
1,
12,
1,
15,
15,
16,
1,
s-0
1,
n
IL!
1,
15,
MAXIMUM DAILY SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT FOR
DATE
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
( DEC)
SIG. HT CM.)
DATE
( DEC)
SIG. HT CM.)
DATE
( DEC)
SIG. HT (M. )
9
8
( DEC)
2. 8
15
6. 1
c.a.
22
2. 4
29
2.0
•3
16
5. 5
23
2. 0
30
4.1
10
4. 5
17
4. 3
24
2. 2
31
3. 2
1984
DEC
2. 5
11
4. 0
18
3. 9
25
1. 8
12
5. 9
19
2. 3
26
2. 1
7
6
5
4
2. 9
1. 6
3. 6
SIG. HT (M. )
DATE
2
1
( DEC)
1
2. 3
13
7. 1
20
1. 7
27
2. 9
2. 4
14
4. 1
21
3. 0
28
2. 9
•
•
•
APPENDIX II
( the survey )
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
APPENDIX II
(Shore Profiles)
A.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BANDONM.XLS 4/5/91
163 RECORD RECORDED
BANDONO32891
Job ID:
Unit in meters, elevation in meter above MSL
Second survey
First survey
y
x
z
y
x
Station
0.00
BM1A
3.81
0.00
0.00
BM1
-23.73
BM2A
3.68
-5.89
-23.84
BM2
-19.71
DA01
3.62
10.60
-10.35
8M3
-22.60
DA02
2.16
92.91
-4.75
A01
-37.48
DA03
2.99
83.88
-4.89
A02
-44.73
DA04
4.15
71.06
-4.05
A03
-54.06
DA05
4.76
63.10
-3.98
A04
-62.81
DA06
5.40
56.70
-3.43
A05
-72.36
DA07
7.03
53.64
-2.99
A06
-83.37
DA08
7.61
52.03
-1.83
A07
-92.94
DA09
7.56
48.36
-0.96
A08
-101.70
DA10
6.64
46.15
-0.46
A09
-106.38
DAli
5.50
43.90
-0.41
A10
-109.70
DAl2
5.00
40.56
0.22
All
-117.13
DA13
4.73
35.66
0.87
Al2
-129.92
DA14
4.62
33.47
0.80
A13
-100.27
F01
4.05
20.90
3.32
A14
-100.70
F02
4.04
14.80
4.18
A15
-101.01
F03
4.11
4.84
5.58
A16
-100.94
F04
4.04
-6.70
8.02
A17
-100.85
F05
1.58
101.45
27.37
801
-100.96
F06
2.65
88.06
28.37
802
-101.57
F07
3.52
73.94
29.28
803
-99.36
F08
4.39
63.58
29.99
B04
-97.18
F09
5.60
54.31
30.94
B05
-96.16
F10
6.72
52.95
31.31
B06
-93.89
Fli
6.64
51.51
31.21
B07
-92.62
F12
6.08
50.78
31.31
B08
-88.76
F13
5.60
47.86
31.12
B09
5.31
45.46
31.14
B10
Low Slope beach profile
5.03
42.41
30.97
B11
19.90
NO1
4.96
,tu.34
30.75
B12
20.27
NO2
4.52
31.98
32.02
B13
20.20
NO3
4.42
27.29
32.64
B14
20.09
NO4
4.19
22.81
33.65
B15
20.24
NO5
3.91
17.78
34.39
B16
20.36
NO6
1.76
106.42
76.86
CO1
20.09
NO7
2.71
94.91
77.07
CO2
19.72
NO8
3.43
81.72
77.49
CO3
19.36
NO9
4.31
68.48
78.61
CO4
19.79
N10
4.97
59.19
79.39
CO5
20.13
N11
53.10
5.64
79.75
CO6
6.81
51.82
79.81
CO7
6.80
50.64
79.98
CO8
6.00
49.25
80.17
CO9
5.64
44.42
80.74
C10
5.01
39.48
81.42
C11
4.54
30.60
82.02
C12
4.06
18.68
85.61
C13
3.40
5.82
89.79
C14
3.82
-0.88
90.77
C15
4.37
-6.20
90.83
C16
4.27
-12.40
91.90
C17
3.68
-27.68
96.28
C18
3.53
-51.07
102.90
C19
3.05
-74.70
109.70
C20
2.89
-101.00
117.87
C21
Page 1
x - longshore
y - offshore
z - elevation
z
0.00
-5.86
53.09
52.60
52.40
53.23
53.99
53.25
54.06
53.18
53.72
52.12
50.09
52.07
52.93
53.97
123.51
111.76
99.64
86.14
73.04
66.42
57.66
43.06
30.45
19.50
11.21
0.33
-10.43
3.81
3.71
6.06
6.80
6.85
6.88
6.22
6.21
5.86
6.09
5.24
5.38
4.60
5.56
5.15
4.90
1.08
2.47
2.98
4.00
4.16
4.28
4.59
3.96
3.64
3.51
3.43
3.72
3.93
-27.03
-19.54
-11.51
-3.57
5.60
15.64
25.30
36.43
44.45
52.40
62.74
0.84
0.45
0.12
-0.17
-0.43
-0.76
-1.02
-1.22
-1.32
-1.51
-1.86
•
li
40
40
•
BANDONM.XLS 4/5/91
D01
D02
D03
D04
005
DO6
DO7
D08
D09
D10
Dll
D12
013
D14
E01
E02
E03
E04
E05
E06
E07
E08
E09
El0
Ell
E12
E13
DU01
DUO2
DUO3
DU04
DU05
DU06
DU07
DU08
DU09
DU10
119.82
11
120.11
120.80
120.54
120.42
120.90
121.401
9
121.91
122.37
123.77
125.94
127.92
1315.21 1
13.2
180.84
177.97
176.49
175.97
176.00
175.96
176.01
175.50
174.89
173.75
172.95
171.66
169.47
191.33
184.09
181.43
178.74
171.79
163.12
154.53
151.47
151.42
153.83
114.749
106.29
97.50
87.68
73.27
62.73
52.248
50.18
47.98
45.17
39.20
32.13
248.71
1.60
23.44
33.61
40.17
48.60
50.08
51.57
53.01
61.09
73.38
87.02
98.00
107.18
119.61
52.65
51.59
51.04
50.08
50.82
50.32
49.10
53.12
50.85
42.04
1.24
8
1.98
2.87
3. 71
4.57
4.78
57.60
17
6.39
5.49
4.87
4.57
4.22
3.95
4.33
4.85
5.04
6.25
6.65
6.59
5.53
4.87
4.63
3.97
3.33
2.64
1.11
5.94
6.19
6.01
6.74
6.55
6.53
6.83
5.33
Dull
DU12
DU13
DU14
DU15
DU16
DU17
DU18
DU19
DU20
DU21
DU22
DU23
DU24
DU25
DU26
DU27
DU28
DU29
DU30
DU31
DU32
DU33
DU34
DU35
DU36
DU37
DU38
5.57
5.49
Dull at right
•
•
Page 2
155.16
147.82
140.52
136.23
127.20
120.92
111.42
105.01
100.93
96.09
91.79
89.86
81.31
72.60
70.15
60.18
49.03
40.92
38.02
35.47
26.87
19.54
12.71
5.68
0.73
-9.26
-26.40
-20.01
36.85
46.53
48.69
49.26
50.08
48.99
50.58
50.39
50.04
50.87
50.29
51.26
51.19
50.64
50.95
52.19
51.01
51.94
51.12
51.33
51.87
51.62
51.78
52.34
50.18
52.51
52.45
57.93
4.87
7.26
6.92
7.41
6.75
7.11
6.46
6.62
6.73
6.56
6.74
6.04
6.75
6.14
6.95
6.77
6.81
6.87
6.53
6.84
7.08
6.43
7.16
6.54
7.98
7.42
7.18
5.15
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BANDON.XLC 4/2/91
B. Points of survey
PACIFIC OCEAN
Dune
400
0
■
0
■
O
■
0
0
■
200
DA
•
V
■
•
q
O
• e. • • • • • • • 0.• 0 0000
q
q
q
q
■
■
0
•
q
■
BM2
0
0
q
q
q
q
q
D
A
♦
■
0
q
q
DU
q
E
0
BM1
B
F
-200
o
q
■
q
o CD 0000 0 %0 00 0E6 0
■
a-)
q
Beach survey plane view, Bandon,
March 28, 1991
C
q
-400
-600
S
-400
-200
0
200
Longshore ( f t )
Page 1
400
600'
800
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Dune and Shore profile
(units in meters)
PACIFIC OCEAN
NORTH
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHA.XLC
D.
(1) East-west transect profile along A
(see points of survey)
Beach A
8
6
E
4
m
X
a)
O 4
.0
m
O
-1
+-1
m
>
N
,-1
w
2
0
0
I
I
I
I
20
40
60
80
EAST
I
100
WEST
Offshore distance (m)
Page 1
I
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHB.XLC
D. (2) East-west transect profile along B
Beach B
6
4
2
0
0
20
40
60
Page 1
80
100
120
BEACHC.XLC
D. (3a) East-west transect profile along C
Beach C
8
6
4
2
0
0
1
1
1
20
40
60
Page 1
1
80
100
120
D. (3b) Offshore east—west transect profile along C
Beach C
8
6
2
4
0
0
—120
—60
0
Offshore distance (m)
60
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D. (3c) Offshore east-west transect profile along C
Beach C
8
6
4
2
0
-120
-60
0
Offshore distance (m)
60
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHD.XLC
D. (4) East-west transect profile along D
Beach D
8
6
4
0
0
20
40
60
Page 1
80
100
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHE.XLC
D. (5) East-west transect profile along E
Beach E
8
6
4
2
0
0
1
I
1
20
40
60
Page 1
80
1
1
100
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHF.XLC
D.
(6) East-west transect profile along F
Beach F
8
6
4
2
0
0
20
I
I
I
I
I
40
60
80
100
120
Page 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BEACHALL.XLC
D. (7) Cumulative east-west transect profiles
Bandon Beach
8
6
4
2
1
1
0
20
0
40
80
60
EAST
100
120
WEST
Offshore distance (m)
Page 1
140