Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70120415

Coupling alongshore variations in wave energy to beach morphologic change using the SWAN wave model at Ocean Beach, San Francisco, CA

Abstract

Coastal managers have faced increasing pressure to manage their resources wisely over the last century as a result of heightened development and changing environmental forcing. It is crucial to understand seasonal changes in beach volume and shape in order to identify areas vulnerable to accelerated erosion. Shepard (1950) was among the first to quantify seasonal beach cycles. Sonu and Van Beek (1971) and Wright et al. (1985) described commonly occurring beach states. Most studies utilize widest spaced 2-D cross shore profiles or shorelines extracted from aerial photographs (e.g. Winant et al. 1975; Aubrey, 1979, Aubrey and Ross, 1985; Larson and Kraus, 1994; Jimenez et al., 1977; Lacey and Peck, 1998; Guillen et al., 1999; Norcorss et al., 2002) to analyzed systematic changes in beach evolution. But with the exception of established field stations, such as Duck, NC (Birkemeier and Mason, 1984), ans Hazaki Oceanographical Research Station (HORS) in Japan (Katoh, 1997), there are very few beach change data sets with high temporal and spatial resolutions (e.g. Dail et al., 2000; Ruggiero et al., 2005; Yates et al., in press). Comprehensive sets of nearshore morphological data and local in situ measurements outside of these field stations are very rare and virtually non-existent high-energy coasts. Studied that have attempted to relate wave statistics to beach morphology change require some knowledge of the nearshore wave climate, and have had limited success using offshore measurement (Sonu and Van Beek, 1971; Dail et al., 2000). The primary objective of this study is to qualitatively compare spatially variable nearshore wave predictions to beach change measurements in order to understand the processes responsible for a persistent erosion 'hotspot' at Ocean Beach, San Francisco, CA. Local wave measurements are used to calibrate and validate a wave model that provides nearshore wave prediction along the beach. The model is run for thousands of binned offshore wave conditions to help isolate the effects of offshore wave direction and period on nearshore wave predictions. Alongshore varying average beach change statistics are computed at specific profile locations from topographic beach surveys and lidar data. The study area is located in the San Francisco Bight in central California. Ocean Beach is a seven kilometer long north-south trending sandy coastline located just south of the entrance to the San Francisco Bay Estuary (Figure 1). It contains an erosion hotspot in the southern part of the beach which has resulted in damage to local infrastructure and is the cause of continued concern. A wide range of field data collection and numerical modeling efforts have been focused here as part of the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) San Francisco Bight Coastal Processes Study, which began in October 2003 and represents the first comprehensive study of coastal processes at the mouth of San Francisco Bay. Ocean Beach is exposed to very strong tidal flows, with measured currents often in excess of 1 m/s at the north end of the beach. Current profiler measurements indicate that current magnitudes are greater in the northern portion of the beach, while wave energy is greater in the southern portion where erosion problems are greatest (Barnard et al., 2007). The sub-aerial beach volume fluctuates seasonally over a maximum envelope of 400,000 m 3 for the seven kilometer stretch (Barnard et al, 2007). The wave climate in the region is dominated by an abundance of low frequency energy (greater than 20 s period) and prevailing northwest incident wave angles. The application of a wave model to the region is further complicated by the presence of the Farallon Islands 40 kilometers west, and a massive ebb tidal delta at the mouth of San Francisco Bay (~150 km 2 ), which creates complicated refraction patterns as wave energy moves from offshore Ocean Beach; however the cost and threat of the energetic nearshore environment have limited the temporal and spatial resolution of these measurements. Applying numerical models to predict wave and current patterns along the beach can help supplement the filed data that exists and provide opportunities to make prediction about the impacts of changing environmental forcing.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.693335° to 37.929771° latitude; -122.596909° to -122.327915° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jodi L. Eshleman, Patrick L. Barnard, Li H. Erikson, Daniel M. Hanes. 2007. Coupling alongshore variations in wave energy to beach morphologic change using the SWAN wave model at Ocean Beach, San Francisco, CA. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70120415

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Time-to-depth conversion of seismic-reflection data from eastern Lake Superior and implications for the eastern arm of the Midcontinent Rift

Seismic-reflection data were acquired in the mid 1980s along several lines across eastern Lake Superior by industry and the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE) (Fig. 1). The lines form part of a larger network of crossing lines over the entire lake, which can be used to develop three-dimensional geologic models of the Mesoproterozoic Midcontinent Rift that lies below. To better interpret these lines, we developed velocity models to convert seismic reflections versus two-way travel time (TWTT) to reflections versus depth. In addition, the velocity models themselves provide insights into the structure of the Midcontinent Rift by recognizing common velocity ranges for certain rock types (Grauch, 2023).

eastern Lake Superior

Revisiting the utility of regional-scale, high-quality geophysical data in mineral exploration - A case study featuring the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly, Pinal County, Arizona

Regional aeromagnetic surveys passively measure the total magnetic intensity (TMI) and are a foundational tool used in mineral exploration (Airo, 2015). With the increased global demand and the number of critical mineral resources required for manufacturing high-tech devices, developing high-quality, regional-scale geophysical surveys could aid critical mineral exploration efforts and geologic mapping. In 2019, the U. S. Geological Survey launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the geologic and geophysical mapping of regions that have the potential to contain critical mineral resources within the United States. In support of planning Earth MRI geophysical surveys, Drenth and Grauch (2019) defined five aeromagnetic data quality rankings (rank 1 through rank 5) applying them to the airborne geophysical survey inventory of the United States (Johnson et al., 2021). Rank 1 aeromagnetic surveys are of the highest quality, meeting modern standards and allowing best practices for qualitative and quantitative interpretation; whereas rank 5 aeromagnetic surveys are of the lowest quality, being useful only for qualitative interpretation of broad features. Through the Earth MRI effort, 48 high-quality, regional-scale rank 1 and 2 airborne magnetic and radiometric geophysical surveys have been planned, collected, or publicly release through May 2025 (U. S. Geological Survey, 2025). Here, a portion of a rank 1 Earth MRI aeromagnetic survey in southeast Arizona is presented and compared to a legacy rank 5 aeromagnetic survey over the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly (MMA), demonstrating how modern, high-quality aeromagnetic data improves our view of crustal geology, aiding mineral exploration.

Arizona

Early Miocene volcanic rocks and associated tectonics, Lava Hills and southern Bristol Mountains, California

Volcanic rocks of latest Oligocene to early Miocene age form an east-west belt across part of the central eastern Mojave Desert from the Whipple Mountains on the east to the Rosamond Hills on the west. We term this the central belt because it is separated from northern and southern belts by swaths with no volcanic rocks. Limited geochronologic data indicate that much of the belt is latest Oligocene and early Miocene in age, about 24 to 19 Ma, a finding that is consistent with these rocks being overlain by the 18.8 Ma Peach Spring Tuff in many places. We describe Miocene geology in a central area of the belt, in the Lava Hills, southern Bristol Mountains, and southern Old Dad Mountains. Sedimentary basins formed coeval with early andesite to rhyolite volcanism, progressing from fluvial and lacustrine tuffaceous sandstone to volcanic lavas, tuffs, and breccias, indicating that early basins formed proximal to volcanic edifices. Higher strata are fluvial and lacustrine with lavas punctuating the sequence. Although basins may partly have been formed within topographic lows bounded by volcanic domes, plateaus, and stratovolcanoes, consistent stratigraphic sections over wide areas indicate that tectonic basin evolution affected broad areas. The volcanic section is capped by local basalt flows and the regional Peach Spring Tuff. Limited data on normal faults support interpretations of early extensional basin development caused by northeast-southwest oriented stretching. Later extension caused stratal rotations, tilting early deposits down to the southwest. This tilted and subsequently beveled basin architecture was overlain by the youngest volcanic deposits, primarily rhyolite and basalt. The Peach Spring Tuff, 18.8 Ma, lies within this upper unit. Similar stratigraphic and structural relations are exposed in the nearby Marble Mountains and Van Winkle Mountain sections, reinforcing that a broad area underwent similar volcanism and tectonism. In our study area the upper unit is only very gently tilted except near dextral strike-slip faults of the eastern California shear zone. These late Miocene to Recent faults are represented as four main fault zones spaced about 5 km apart, representing distributed shear north of the Bristol Lake basin.

California