MARATTO

article · Sriwijaya Journal of Environment

High-Resolution Single-Beam Bathymetry and IHO S-44 Uncertainty Benchmarking for Damaged-Pile Validation at Bullnose Jetty, Lagos, Nigeria

2026Open accessUniversity of Benin

Abstract

Background: Coastal port infrastructure operates in dynamic tidal environments where seabed change threatens structural safety, yet high-resolution, standard-benchmarked bathymetric validation of damaged and replacement piles is scarce for West-African ports. Objective: To characterise seabed conditions and validate proposed replacement piles at Bullnose Jetty, Apapa Port Complex, Lagos Lagoon, Nigeria, ahead of piling and repair. Methods: A single-beam echo-sounder with RTK-GNSS and 10-minute tidal reduction produced a 0.1-m grid, interpolated by kriging (Surfer 16). The survey polygon was stratified into four hydrographic sub-zones (n = 108 nodes); six parameters were analysed by one-way ANOVA with Tukey HSD, Pearson correlation, multiple regression and PCA, and benchmarked against IHO S-44 (Ed. 6.0.0). Results: Corrected depths ranged 10.1–13.2 m and differed significantly among zones (11.66±0.86 m; F(3,104)=131.0, p<0.001, η²=0.79), deepening from the quay apron (10.65±0.35 m) to the central channel (12.76±0.42 m). Achieved total vertical uncertainty (0.23–0.27 m, k=2) met IHO Order 1a everywhere and Special Order in sheltered zones, and was governed by roughness and depth (R²=0.82). PCA captured 86.3% of variance in two components. No obstructions occurred at piles A-38/39/40; the broken pile P39A was mapped on the seabed. Conclusion: The reproducible, IHO-benchmarked protocol confirms safe pile placement and supports routine hydrographic monitoring of Lagos-area port infrastructure.

Research topics

  • Coastal and Marine Dynamics
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
  • Geotechnical and construction materials studies

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.22135/sje.2026.11.1.65-74

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.