Friday, January 31, 2020

Kriteria Desain Struktur Dermaga


Kondisi Alam
Terdapat beberapa kondisi alam di lokasi dermaga yang harus diperhatikan dalam melakukan perancanaan dermaga, antara lain:
·         Angin dan arus
Dalam perencanaan struktur dermaga, data angin dan arus diperlukan untuk menentukan arah dermaga. Angin dan arus dominan akan menentukan besarbeban tekan dan tarikan pada dermaga.
·         Pasang surut dan gelombang
Data pasang surut diperlukan untuk mengetahui elevasi dari dermaga dan data
gelombang yang digunakan untuk pembebanan pada struktur dermaga.
·         Karakteristik tanah
Parameter tanah yang dibutuhkan untuk mengetahui karakteristik tanah di lokasi seperti nilai N-SPT, sudut geser, kohesi, dan berat jenis tanah. Selain itu data-data tersebut diperlukan untuk menghitung daya dukung tanah serta jenis pondasi yang sesuai.
·         Data gempa
Data gempa diperoleh berdasarkan klasifikasi wilayah gempa di lokasi. Data ini diperlukan untuk perencanaan beban gempa yang bekerja pada struktur.

PELABUHAN

Kondisi tanah sangat menentukan dalam pemilihan tipe dermaga. Pada umumnya tanah di dekat dataran memiliki daya dukung yang lebih besar daripada tanah di dasar laut. Dasar laut umumnya terdiri dari endapan lumpur yang padat. Ditinjau dari daya dukung tanah, pembuatan wharf akan lebih menguntungkan. Tapi apabila tanah dasar berupa karang, pembuatan wharf akan mahal karena untuk mendapatkan kedalaman yang cukup di depan wharf diperlukan pengerukan yang besar. Dalam hal ini pembuatan jetty akan lebih ekonomis karena tidak diperlukan pengerukan dasar karang.
1.  Elevasi muka air rencana yang ada (hasil analisa pasang surut).
2.  Arah, kecepatan, dan tinggi gelombang pada perairan (hasil peramalan gelombang).
3.  Penempatan posisi dermaga mempertimbangkan arah angin, arus, dan perilaku pantai yang stabil.
4.  Panjang dermaga disesuaikan dengan kebutuhan kapal yang akan berlabuh.
5.  Lebar dermaga disesuaikan dengan kebutuhan kapal yang akan berlabuh dan aktivitas bongkar muat kapal dan kendaraan darat.
6.  Berjarak sependek mungkin dengan fasilitas daratan.

Referensi yang Digunakan
1.   British Standard code of practice for marine structure - part 1-6. BS6349: British Standard Intstitution.
2.   Tecnichal Standard and Commentaries for port and harbour facilities in Japan – The Overseas Coastal area Development Institute of Japan (OCDI 2002).
3.   Port of Long Beach Wharf Design Criteria v2.0 2009
4.   Pelabuhan. Prof.Dr.Ir. Bambang Triatmodjo, CES., DEA.
SNI 03-1726-2012 Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan gempa untuk bangunan Gedung dan non gedung.
5.   SNI 03-1729-2002 Tata cara perhitungan struktur baja untuk bangunan gedung.
SNI 03-2847-2002 Tata cara perhitungan struktur beton untuk bangunan Gedung

Thursday, January 30, 2020

X-Beach : Processes and model formulation

Domain and definitions

Coordinate system

XBeach uses a coordinate system where the computational x-axis is always oriented towards the coast, approximately perpendicular to the coastline, and the y-axis is alongshore, see Figure A.1 and Figure A.1. This coordinate system is defined in world coordinates. The grid size in x- and y-direction may be variable but the grid must be curvilinear. Alternatively, in case of a rectangular grid (a special case of a curvilinear grid) the user can provide coordinates in a local coordinate system that is oriented with respect to world coordinates (xw, yw) through an origin (xori, yori) and an orientation (alfa) as depicted in Figure A.1. The orientation is defined counter-clockwise w.r.t. the xw-axis (East).


Grid set-up
The grid applied is a staggered grid, where the bed levels, water levels, water depths and concentrations are defined in cell centers, and velocities and sediment transports are defined in u- and v-points, viz. at the cell interfaces. In the wave energy balance, the energy, roller energy and radiation stress are defined at the cell centers, whereas the radiation stress gradients are defined at u- and v-points.

Velocities at the u- and v-points are denoted by the output variables uu and vv respectively; velocities u and v at the cell centers are obtained by interpolation and are for output purpose only. The water level, zs, and the bed level, zb, are both defined positive upward. uv and vu are the u-velocity at the v-grid point and the v-velocity at the u-grid point respectively. These are obtained by interpolation of the values of the velocities at the four surrounding grid points. 

The model solves coupled 2D horizontal equations for wave propagation, flow, sediment transport and bottom changes, for varying (spectral) wave and flow boundary conditions.


CMS Wave - Surface water Modeling System


The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) maintains a large number of navigation structures in support of federal navigation projects nationwide. These structures constrain currents to promote scouring of the navigation channel, stabilize the location of the inlet channel and entrance, and provide wave protection to vessels transiting the navigation channel. Such structures are subject to degradation from the continual impact of currents and waves impinging upon them. Questions arise about the necessity and
consequences of engineering actions taken to rehabilitate or modify the structures. A  ong-range maintenance and rehabilitation plan to manage navigation structures and support the federal navigation projects requires a life-cycle forecast of waves and currents in District projects along with a quantification of potential evolutionary changes in wave climates decadally with impacts to analyses and decisions.
The Coastal Inlets Research Program (CIRP) of the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) operates a Coastal Modeling System (CMS) that has established and maintained multidimensional numerical models integrated to simulate waves, currents, water level, sediment transport, and morphology change in the coastal zone. Emphasis is on navigation channel performance and sediment management for inlets, adjacent beaches, and estuaries. The CMS is verified with field and laboratory data and provided within a user-friendly interface running in the Surface-Water Modeling System (SMS).
CMS-Wave (Lin et al. 2006b, Demirbilek et al. 2007), previously called WABED (Wave-Action Balance Equation Diffraction), is a twodimensional (2D) spectral wave model formulated from a parabolic approximation equation (Mase et al. 2005a) with energy dissipation and diffraction terms. It simulates a steady-state spectral transformation of
directional random waves co-existing with ambient currents in the coastal zone. The model operates on a coastal half-plane, implying waves can propagate only from the seaward boundary toward shore. It includes features such as wave generation, wave reflection, and bottom frictional dissipation.
CMS-Wave validation and examples shown in this report indicate that the
model is applicable for propagation of random waves over complicated bathymetry and nearshore where wave refraction, diffraction, reflection, shoaling, and breaking simultaneously act at inlets. This report presents general features, formulation, and capabilities of CMS-Wave Version 1.9. It identifies basic components of the model, model input and output, and provides application guidelines.
New features added to CMS-Wave
Specific improvements were made to CMS-Wave in four areas: wave breaking and dissipation, wave diffraction and reflection, wave-current interaction, and wave generation and growth. Wave diffraction terms are included in the governing equations following the method of Mase et al. (2005a). Four different depth-limiting wave breaking formulas can be selected as options including the interaction with a current. The wavecurrent interaction is calculated based on the dispersion relationship including wave blocking by an opposing current (Larson and Kraus 2002). Wave generation and whitecapping dissipation are based on the parameterization source term and calibration using field data (Lin and Lin 2004a and b, 2006b). Bottom friction loss is estimated based on the classical drag law formula (Collins 1972).
Other useful features in CMS-Wave include grid nesting capability, variable rectangular cells, wave overtopping, wave runup on beach face, and assimilation for full-plane wave generation. More features such as the nonlinear wave-wave interaction and an unstructured grid are presently under investigation.
CMS-Wave prediction capability has been examined by comparison to comprehensive laboratory data (Lin et al. 2006b). More evaluation of the model performance is presented in this report for two additional laboratory data sets. The first laboratory data set is from experiments representing random wave shoaling and breaking with steady ebb current around an idealized inlet (Smith et al. 1998), covering a range of wave and current parameters. This data set is examined here in evaluation of wave dissipation formulations for current-induced wave breaking. The second laboratory data set is from experiments for random wave transformation accompanied with breaking over a coast with complicated bathymetry and strong wave-induced nearshore currents. Comparisons of measurements and calculations are used to (a) validate the predictive accuracy of CMS-Wave, (b) investigate the behavior of different current and depthlimited wave breaking formulas, and (c) select formulas best suitable for spectral models in nearshore applications. The diffraction calculations by CMS-Wave are tested for a gap between two breakwaters and behind a breakwater.
CMS-Wave Interface
Demirbilek et al. (2007) described the computer graphical interface in the SMS (Zundel 2006) for CMS-Wave applications. A summary of key features of the interface is provided in this chapter to familiarize users with guidelines for the interface usage and implementation of CMS-Wave. The SMS is a graphically interactive computer program designed to facilitate the operation of numerical models and creates input files and output visualization for CMS-Wave. The CMS-Wave interface in the SMS is similar to that of the half-plane model of STWAVE Version 5.4 (Smith 2001b). The SMS can generate CMS grids with variable rectangle cells and half-plane STWAVE grids with constant square cells. Both wave models can use the same grid domain with identical grid orientation and layout, and the same file formats for their bathymetric and spectral energy files. This was done to facilitate the usage of CMS-Wave and allow users to utilize the same settings and files to run both models without modifications.
CMS-Wave files
Depending on which options are selected in the *.std file, CMS-Wave may generate one to six output files. A wave field conditions file (*.wav) is always generated. Optional output files are calculated spectra (*.obs) and wave parameters with the maximum water level (selhts.out) at selected cells, wave breaking indices (*.brk), wave radiation stress gradients (*.rad), wave setup and maximum water level field (setup.wav), and nesting spectral data (*.nst). Figure 1 shows a chart of input and output files involved in a CMS-Wave simulation. Table 1 presents a list of the type and use of all I/O files, where “projname” is a prefix given by users.
The simulation file (*.sim) stores the coordinates of the origin and orientation of the computational grid, and a list of names of all files used in the simulation. All input and output files, required and optional, are listed in Figure 1 and is described in Table 1. Abbreviated output from sample files was provided in Technical Note ERDC/CHL CHETN-I-74 (Demirbilek et al. 2007) and presented in Appendix A to familiarize users with these files.
Users can run CMS-Wave with the input files of STWAVE Version 5.4 without making changes. In this case, CMS-Wave runs in a basic mode. Although doing this may be useful in some project applications, the basic mode does not take advantage of certain features of CMS-Wave, such as reflection. Users should run CMS-Wave with its special set of parameters as defined in the *.std file. That is, one can edit *.std, without modifying *.sim and *.dep, to add a few additional parameters that are specific to CMS-Wave. Guidance on various parameters and recommended values is given below.

File used simulation


Users can provide up to 15 control parameters in the *.std. They are (in
sequential orders) iprp, icur, ibrk, irs, kout, ibnd, iwet, ibf, iark, iarkr,
akap, bf, ark, arkr, iwvbk, which represent:
iprp
= 0, for wave generation and propagation (use wind input if
provided)
= 1, for propagation only (neglect wind input)
= -1, for fast-mode simulation (for wave generation and
propagation)
icur = 0, no current
= 1, with current input (*.cur), using data sets in the sequential
order
= 2, with current input (*.cur), using only the first set current data


ibrk
= 0 (no *.brk file)
= 1, for output of wave breaking indices (*.brk)
= 2, for output of energy dissipation fluxes (*.brk)
= 0 (no *.rad file)
irs
= 1, for output of wave radiation stresses (*.rad)
= 2, for output of wave radiation stresses (*.rad) and wave setup/maximum water level (setup.wav) kout = 0 (no *.obs and selhts.out files)
= n, for output of spectra (*.obs) and parameters (selhts.out) at n selected cells ibnd = 0 (no *.nst file)
= 1, for nested grid, with linear interpolation of boundary input spectra (*.nst)
= 2, for nested grid, with morphic interpolation of boundary input spectra (*.nst)
iwet
= 0, for normal wetting/drying (use water level input)
= 1, no wetting/drying (neglect water level input)
= 0, no bottom friction
ibf
= 1, for bottom friction with constant Darcy-Weisbach type coefficient (= bf)
= 2, for bottom friction with variable Darcy-Weisbach type coefficient (friction.dat)
= 3, for bottom friction with constant Manning coefficient (= bf)
= 4, for bottom friction with variable Manning coefficient (friction.dat)
iark
= 0, no forward reflection
= 1, with forward reflection
iarkr = 0, no backward reflection = 1, for backward reflection
akap = diffraction intensity factor (0 for no diffraction, 4 for strong diffraction)
bf
ark
= constant bottom friction coefficient
= constant forward reflection coefficient (0 for no reflection, 1 for
maximum forward reflection)
= constant backward reflection coefficient (0 for no reflection, 1 for
maximum backward reflection)
arkr
iwvbk = option for selection of wave breaking formula = 0, for Extended Goda (Sakai et al. 1989) = 1, for Extended Miche (Battjes 1972; Mase et al. 2005b) = 2, for formula by Battjes and Janssen (1978) = 3, for formula by Chawla and Kirby (2002)

Users can assign 0 for 15 control parameters in CMS-Wave to run in the basic mode. If only the first six parameters, iprp, icur, ibrk, irs, kout, and ibnd, are provided (minimum requirement) in *.std, a zero will be assigned to the remaining parameters, except that a default value of 1.0 is assigned to the diffraction intensity factor (akap = 1.0) to simulate a weak diffraction condition. If only the first ten parameters, iprp, icur, ibrk, irs, kout, ibnd, iwet, ibf, iark, and iarkr, are provided in *.std (no other information provided for the bottom friction and reflection coefficients), default values of bf = 0.0, ark = 0.5 (for 50 percent energy forward reflection), arkr = 0.3 (for 30 percent backward energy reflection), and akap = 1.0 are used by the model. CMS-Wave calculates wave transmission, wave runup, and overtopping as special features on selected cells. These cells can represent a floating breakwater, a bottom mound breakwater, a beach segment and the land adjacent to it, jetties, seawalls, or underwater features such as reefs or submerged structures. A trench, submerged mound, or structure can be added to the bed as features without modifying the input depth file. These feature cells need to be specified in the *.struct file. Each feature cell is described by four parameters, istruc, jstruc, kstruc, and cstruc in a line format in the *.struct
istruc = i-th column in the grid
jstruc = j-th row in the grid
kstruc = feature cell identity
= 1, for adding alternative feature or structure (immersed or
exposed) without modifying the input depth
= 2, for calculation of wave runup and overwash on beach face or
structure, and adjacent land
= 3, for calculation of transmitted waves of a floating breakwater
= 4, for a vertical wall breakwater
= 5, for a composite or rubble-mound breakwater
cstruc = feature structure depth, for kstruc = 1 (assume a land cell if not
provided)
= beach/structure elevation above mean water level, for kstruc = 2
(use the input depth if not provided; no effect for cstruc < 0)
= floating breakwater draft, for kstruc =3 (skip if not provided or
cstruc < 0.05 m)
= breakwater/structure elevation, for kstruc = 4 or 5 (use the input
depth if not provided; immersed if cstruc < 0)
Model Validation
Numerical models are validated by comparing model calculations to data and analytical solutions to determine the reliability of a model’s individual or combined features. Data for model validation come from laboratory and field measurements, whereas analytical solutions are available in the literature and engineering manuals. Validation tests are essential benchmarks for evaluating both general features and the unique capabilities of numerical models.
This chapter describes and discusses nine examples, or cases, and four depth-limited breaking wave formulas. The CMS-Wave validation is shown for eight data sets from laboratory and field studies, two sets of analytical solutions, and two sets of semi-empirical calculations. The laboratory data are from experiments that have been conducted for idealized inlets, plain sloping beaches, and jetties. These data are examined for validation of wave breaking formulas, wave-current interaction, wave runup, and overall model performance at inlets and nearshore.
Theoretical solutions for wave diffraction at a semi-infinite breakwater, a single gap, and multiple gaps in breakwaters are examined to evaluate the reliability of CMS-Wave calculations for simulating wavestructure interaction problems. The wind-wave growth capability of CMSWave is validated with semi-empirical relations given in the U.S Army Corps of Engineers Shore Protection Manual (1984) and Coastal Engineering Manual (Headquarters (HQ), USACE 2002). The wave reflection capability of CMS-Wave was tested based on a laboratory experiment conducted for an idealized inlet protected by dual jetties (Seabergh et al. 2005). Both fully reflected and absorbing jetties were tested in the experiment. Details of the experiment, data, and CMSWave predictions and comparisons were summarized in (Lin et al. 2006b). This Technical Note also includes additional tests comparing CMS-Wave results to data for wave diffraction around and behind a shore-parallel breakwater and wave diffraction measurements by Seabergh et al. (2002)
at the bay side of an inlet

X - BEACH MODEL

XBeach is an open-source numerical model which is originally developed to simulate hydrodynamic and morphodynamic processes and impacts on sandy coasts with a domain size of kilometers and on the time scale of storms. Since then, the model has been applied to other types of coasts and purposes.

The model includes the hydrodynamic processes of short wave transformation (refraction, shoaling and breaking), long wave (infragravity wave) transformation (generation, propagation and dissipation), wave-induced setup and unsteady currents, as well as overwash and inundation. The morphodynamic processes include bed load and suspended sediment transport, dune face avalanching, bed update and breaching. Effects of vegetation and of hard structures have been included. The model has been validated with a series of analytical, laboratory and field test cases using a standard set of parameter settings. 

XBeach has two modes: a hydrostatic and a non-hydrostatic mode. In the hydrostatic mode, the short wave amplitude variation is solved separately from the long waves, currents and morphological change. This saves considerable computational time, with the expense that the phase of the short waves is not simulated. A more complete model is the non-hydrostatic model which solves all processes including short wave motions, but with more computational demand.  

The original application (surfbeat mode), funded by the U.S. Corps of Engineers in the framework of the Morphos project and the U.S. Geological Survey, was to be able to assess hurricane impacts on sandy beaches. Since then with funding from the Dutch Public Works Department, the model has been extended, applied and validated for storm impacts on dune and urbanized coasts for the purpose of dune safety assessments. With support from the European Commission XBeach has been validated on a number of dissipative and reflective beaches bordering all regional seas in the EU. 

Beyond sandy coasts, the model has been applied to coral fringing and atoll reefs, in cooperation with and with funding by the University of Western Australia, the USGS and the Asian Development Bank. The model now also includes vegetative damping effects, with support of the U.S. Office of Naval Research.

The non-hydrostatic model has been developed initially by the TU Delft (as a prototype version of the SWASH (Zijlema et al. 2011) model). For the purpose of simulating the morphodynamic processes on gravel beaches, the model was extended and validated with support from the University of Plymouth. In this mode, ship-induced waves can be simulated as well, demonstrating the flight that the model has taken since its first inception.

This development of XBeach could not have been possible without all of the above mentioned funding agencies and partners. It would also not have been possible without the enthusiastic, critical and constructive approach of all consultants, researchers, M.Sc. and Ph.D. students who have taken up XBeach, and made it into the tool that it is today.

This manual serves as an introduction to the model and a reference guide to its many functionalities, options and parameters. We sincerely hope that this document will help existing and new researchers apply the model for their purposes and advance our knowledge of coastal hydro- and morphodynamics.


MODEL KERENTANAN PESISIR

Coastal Erosion Risk Assessment



Wilayah pesisir merupakan lingkungan yang sangat penting bagi masyarakat, karena mendukung sejumlah besar kegiatan yang berkaitan dengan penangkapan ikan, navigasi, perdagangan, dan pariwisata. Oleh karena itu sebagian besar penduduk dunia tinggal di wilayah pesisir, termasuk sebagian besar kota penting, juga berada di wilayah pesisir (UNEP, 2006).Kehadiran proses antropogenik di wilayah pesisir menimbulkan kekhawatiran terkait dengan ancaman bahaya yang memoengaruhi wilayah pesisir seperti gelombang pasang, bada, banjir rob, erosi pantai, dan kenaikan muka air laut. Untuk mengatasi potensi konsekuensi dari bahaya tersebut, beberapa metode dalam menilai tingkat kerentanan dan risiko erosi pantai telah dikembangkan. Sejak tahun 1991, ketika metode umum IPPC disajikan (IPCC CZMS, 1992), penilaian kerentanan dan risiko terus dikembangkan, seperti analisis kerentanan berbasis videotape-assisted (Leatherman et al., 1995), indeks kerentanan wilayah pesisir (Thieler dan Hammar-Klose, 1999), pendekatan garis cerdas (Sharples, 2006), DESYCO(Torresan et al., 2007), DIVA (Hinkel dan Klein, 2009), SimCLIM (Waeeick, 2009), Simulator wilayah pesisir (Mokrech et al., 2011), dan yang terbaru adalah kerangka penilaian tingkat risiko wilayah pesisir (Ferreira et al., 2016).Tujuan dari pekerjaan ini adalah untuk menyusun langkah-langkah pengelolaan wilayah pesisir pada setiap zona-zona yang teridentifikasi dalam tingkat kerentanan dan risiko berbeda. Klasifikasi ini bertujuan untuk mendukung pengambilan keputusan yang sesuai dengan karakteristik wilayah, dan teridentifikasinya area yang perlu mendapat perhatian lebih (zona prioritas) dalam menghadapi bahaya erosi pantai.Sebagian besar metode penilaian risiko pesisir difokuskan pada kenaikan muka air laur dan konsekuaensinya pada zona pesisir di seluruh dunia (misalnya Hinkel dan Klein, 2009). Oleh karena itu, terciptanya metode yang fous pada Bahaya spesifik seperti erosi pantai, sangat diperlukan. Pendekatan kompleks yang digunakan pada metodologi ini mengenalkan serangkaian tantangan yang membutuhkan tingkat pemahaman dan data terperinci di lokasi studi. Oleh karena itu alternatif metode yang membutuhkan lebih sedikit daya dan memiliki aplikasi yang cepat dan sederhana merupakan suatu kontribusi penting bagi pengelolaan wilayah pesisir. Saat ini harapan tersebut dapat terwujud dengan adanya penilaian risiko erosi pantai berbasis aplikasi perangkat lunak CERA (Costal Erosion Risk Assessment), yang didasarkan pada GIS (Geographic Information System).CERA dibangun berdasarkan metodologi yang diajukan oleh Coelho (2005), untuk menilai kerentanan, konsekuensi dan risiko yang terkait dengan erosi pantai. Selain mudah dimodifikasi seperti mengubah besaran bobot setiap parameter maupun mengubah parameternya, aplkasi ini bekerja pada perangkat lunak QGIS dan ArcGIS, sehingga mudah diakses dalam analisis-analisis spasial terkait pengelolaan wilayah pesisir.Metode PekerjaanDalam definisi dasarnya, risiko harus dipahami sebagai estimasi konsekuensi dari peristiwa tertentu (Faber, 2012). Di sisi lain, dalam penilaian risiko wilayah pesisir, kejadian erosi pantai didefinisikan sebagai bahaya, yang menurut UNISDR (2009) adalah fenomena berbahaya yang dapat menyebabkan hilangnya nyawa, cedera, atau dampak kesehatan lainnya, kerusakan property, kehilangan mata pencaharian dan layanan fasilitas umum, gangguan sosial dan ekonomi, atau kerusakan lingkungan.Oleh karena itu, penilaian risiko erosi pantai tergantung pada kemungkikan dan tingkat kepadatan bahaya dan konsekuensi bahaya dari suatu peristiwa erosi pantai (ISO, 2009). Untuk wilayah pesisir, dampak negative dari bahaya dinyatakan dalam dampak manusia, ekonomi dan lingkungan, serta dampak sosial/politik. Kerentanan mengungkapkan karkteristik dan keadaan masyarakat, sistem atau asset yang membuatnya rentan terhadap kerusakan yang ditimbulkan dari bahaya erosi pantai (UNISDR, 2009). Coelho (2005) mengembangkan sebuah metodologi untuk menilai risiko erosi pantai. Metode ini dipilih dalam pekerjaan ini karena tidak ada model kompleks lain yang dalam formulasinya memungkinkan aplikasu secara cepat di lokasi manapun dan memungkinkan untuk menyesuasikan jumlah dan kedetailan parameter berdasarkan ketersediaan data di lapangan.Coelho (2005) membagi penilaian risiko dalam dua bagian. Yang pertama adalah penilaian kerentanan yang memperkirakan secara kualitatif dan kuantitatif, tingkat kerentanan suatu wilayah pesisir terhadap erosi pantai. Penilaian ini berfokus pada karakteristik fisik wilayah pesisir dan potensi ancaman agen erosive. Bagian kedua adalah penilaian konsekuensi dari kejadian bahaya tersebut, dengan meninjau aspek sosial, lingkungan, budaya dan ekonomi di wilayah pekerjaan. Berikut ini merupakan parameter-paramter pengukuran dan bobotnya yang digunakan dalam CERA.Klasifikasi Tingkat Kerentanan

Parameter
Sumber
Sangat Rendah
(1)
Rendah
(2)
Menengah
(3)
Tinggi
(4)
Sangat Tinggi
(5)
Jarak terhadap garis pantai (m)
 Analisa GIS
>1000
200-1000
50-200
20-50
< 20
Topografi (m)
DEM di reclass
>30
20-30
10-20
5-10
<5
Geologi
RTRW Jatim
Batuan beku
Batuan metamorf
Batuan sedimen
Sedimen bertekstur kasar
Sedimen bertekstur halus
Geomorfologi
Interpretasi citra
pegunungan
Tebing berbatu
Tebing tererosi yang memanjang di tepi pantai
Pantai wisata, dataran fluvio marin
Bukit pasir, muara sungai, estuari
Tutupan Lahan
Data landuse dari BPN di Update
hutan
Tanaman pertanian
Lahan terbuka
Permukiman pedesaan
Permukiman perkotaan, kawasan industri
Aksi antropogenik
Interpretasi citra
Intervensi stabilisasi garis pantai
Intervensi tanpa reduksi sumber sedimen
Intervensi dengan reduksi sumber sedimen
Tanpa intervensi atapun reduksi sumber sedimen
Tanpa intervensi, namun terdapat reduksi sumber sedimen
Ketinggian signifikan gelombang maksimum (m)
Hasil analisis tim kelautan
<3
3-5
5-6
6-6.9
>6.9
Jarak maksimum pasang air laut (m)
Hasil analisis tim kelautan
<1
1-2
2-4
4-6
>6
Tingkat erosi/akresi pantai rata-rata (m/tahun)
Hasil analisis tim kelautan
>0 (akresi)
(-1) – 0 (erosi)
(-3) – (-1) (erosi)
(-5) – (-3) (erosi)
< (-5) (erosi)



Klasifikasi Parameter Konsekuensi

Parameter
Sumber
Sangat Rendah
(1)
Rendah
(2)
Menengah
(3)
Tinggi
(4)
Sangat Tinggi
(5)
Kepadatan penduduk (jiwa/km2)
BPS / Monografi / Profil Desa
500
500-1000
1000-2000
2000-4000
>4000
Tingkat Ekonomi (jumlah tenaga kerja)
Monografi / Profil Desa /Kelurahan
0
0-10
10-30
30-50
>50
Ekologi
Rencana Pola Ruang RTRW
Bukan kawasan perlindungan ekologi
Kawasan pertanian strategis
Kawasan konservasi ekologi
Kawasan lindung ekologi
Taman nasional
Situs Bersejarah
Interpretasi Data Google Earth
Bukan situs bersejarah
Terdapat beberapa konstruksi bersejarah
Terdapat konstruksi bersejarah dan aktivitas masyarakat didalamnya
Konstruksi bersejarah tingkat regional
Monumen nasional




Dalam menjalankan seluruh analisis dengan parameter-parameter dan ketentuan berdasarkan metodologi diatas, digunakan Plugin CERA yang berbasis pada perangkat lunak ArcGIS 10.5. Tampilan antarmuka (GUI) dari plugin ini dapat dilihat pada Gambar 1.1.