Conclusions References Acknowledgments Sensitivity Tests Cohesive Sediment Model Modeling System Future Work Including Cohesive Sediment Processes in the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Hydrodynamics and Sediment Transport Modelling Ramiro Neves
Advertisements

Dual Use of a Sediment Mixing Tank for Calibrating Acoustic Backscatter and Direct Doppler Measurement of Settling Velocity (and Related Field Motivation.
G. M. Cartwright, C. T. Friedrichs, and L. P. Sanford.
LANDSAT Aug 31, 2011 Sediment transport and deposition: salinity fronts and storm events David Ralston, Rocky Geyer, John Warner, Gary Wall Hudson River.
Toward a Sediment Transport Model of the Louisiana / Texas Shelf Kehui (Kevin) Xu 1, Courtney Harris 1, Robert Hetland 2, James Kaihatu 2 1 Virginia Institute.
Abstract We quantified turbulent dissipation in the Raritan river using both conventional methods and a novel technique, the structure function method.
Tidal Flat Morphodynamics: A Synthesis 1) On tidal flats, sediment (especially mud) moves toward areas of weaker energy. 2) Tides usually move sediment.
Buoyant and gravity-driven transport on the Waipaoa Shelf J.M. Moriarty 1, C.K. Harris 1, C.T. Friedrichs 1, M.G. Hadfield 2 1 Virginia Institute of Marine.
TIDAL INLETS Natural of man-made cut through barrier island Allows for bay flushing Provides access for maritime traffic Normally migrate unless restrained.
Morphodynamic Equilibria in Tidal Embayments with Decreasing Cross-Section Henk Schuttelaars The Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht.
Examples of secondary flows and lateral variability.
Coastal Ocean Dynamics Baltic Sea Research Warnemünde
Chesapeake Bay Lagrangian Floats Analysis. Motivation Lagrangian float has its advantage in describing waters from different origins. We follow definition.
Scaling Up Marine Sediment Transport Patricia Wiberg University of Virginia The challenge: How to go from local, event-scale marine sediment transport.
Predictability of Seabed Change due to Underwater Sand Mining in Coastal Waters of Korea Predictability of Seabed Change due to Underwater Sand Mining.
Environmental Fluid Mechanics Laboratory
Cohesive Sediment Algorithms in ROMS and Sediment Test Cases Chris Sherwood 1, Larry Sanford 2, John Warner 1 Bénédicte Ferré 1, Courtney Harris 3, Rich.
Conference Call Summary Three solids classes –Clay settles at 5 m/d –Silt settles at 50 m/d –Sand settles at 1000 m/d Major recommendation was use formulae.
Annapolis: July 18, 2006 Outline of talk: Objective: Improve BBL in 3D model. Estimates of shear stress. Evaluate bottom boundary layer.
Model Simulation Studies of Hurricane Isabel in Chesapeake Bay Jian Shen Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences College of William and Mary.
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ERODIBILITY AND FINE-GRAINED SEABED PROPERTIES ON TIDAL TO SEASONAL TIME-SCALES, YORK RIVER ESTUARY, VA Lindsey M Kraatz, Carl T.
Suspended Load Above certain critical shear stress conditions, sediment particles are maintained in suspension by the exchange of momentum from the fluid.
The Physical Modulation of Seasonal Hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay Malcolm Scully Outline: 1)Background and Motivation 2)Role of Physical Forcing 3)Simplified.
What Controls Bed Erodibility in Muddy, Partially-Mixed Tidal Estuaries? Carl Friedrichs, Grace Cartwright, Bob Diaz, Pat Dickhudt, Kelsey Fall, Lindsey.
THEORY ABSTRACT The equations that are the basis of the DRAMBUIE scour model were developed at H.R. Wallingford (a U.K. civil engineering firm) and have.
Bathymetry Controls on the Location of Hypoxia Facilitate Possible Real-time Hypoxic Volume Monitoring in the Chesapeake Bay Aaron J. Bever 1, Marjorie.
Lower Cape Fear River Estuary Model Progress Report Jim Bowen, UNC Charlotte October 11, 2007 Charlotte, NC (via Centra)
Courtney K. Harris Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences In collaboration with Katja Fennel and Robin Wilson (Dalhousie), Rob Hetland (TAMU), Kevin Xu.
Controls on particle settling velocity and bed erodibilty in the presence of muddy flocs and pellets as inferred by ADVs, York River estuary, Virginia,
Modelling 1: Basic Introduction. What constitutes a “model”? Why do we use models? Calibration and validation. The basic concept of numerical integration.
ISPOL Ocean Turbulence Project Miles McPhee McPhee Research Co. Naches WA USA.
Spring-neap Variation in Fecal Pellet Properties within Surficial Sediment of the York River Estuary Emily Wei VIMS REU Prospectus Presentation Mentor:
Modeling the upper ocean response to Hurricane Igor Zhimin Ma 1, Guoqi Han 2, Brad deYoung 1 1 Memorial University 2 Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Evaluating the Capabilities of the Second Generation PICS Settling Column Floc Camera in a Muddy Tidal Estuary, York River, Virginia, USA Grace M. Cartwright,
Formation of Estuarine Turbidity Maxima in partially mixed estuaries H.M. Schuttelaars 1,2, C.T. Friedrichs 3 and H.E. de Swart 1 1: Institute for Marine.
Representation of Near-Bed Sediment Gravity Flows within the Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS) Courtney K. Harris and Aaron J. Bever Virginia Institute.
Dale Haidvogel, John Wilkin and Zhiren Wang Ocean Modeling Group Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences (IMCS), Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.
Controls on particle settling velocity and bed erodibilty in the presence of muddy flocs and pellets as inferred by ADVs, York River estuary, Virginia,
Abstract – The Alaska Coastal Current (ACC) is located in a region with prevailing downwelling favorable winds, flows over a long stretch of coastline.
The Littoral Sedimentation and Optics Model (LSOM)
S.A. Talke, H.E. de Swart, H.M. Schuttelaars Feedback between residual circulations and sediment distribution in highly turbid estuaries: an analytical.
Controls on particle settling velocity and bed erodibilty in the presence of muddy flocs and biologically packaged pellets: Modeling study utilizing the.
Controls on Suspended Particle Properties and Water Clarity along a Partially-Mixed Estuary, York River Estuary, Virginia Kelsey A. Fall 1, Carl T. Friedrichs.
Land-Ocean Interactions: Estuarine Circulation. Estuary: a semi-enclosed coastal body of water which has a free connection with the open sea and within.
Outline of Presentation: Tidal sediment transport due to spatial vs. flood/ebb asymmetries (1) Minimizing spatial asymmetry → predicts channel convergence.
Modeling transport and deposition of the Mekong River sediment Z. George Xue 1 * Ruoying He 1, J.Paul Liu 1, John C Warner 2 1.Dept. of Marine, Earth and.
1 A brief introduction to UMCES Chesapeake Bay Model Yun Li and Ming Li University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science VIMS, SURA Meeting Oct
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Satellite Observation and Model Simulation of Water Turbidity in the Chesapeake.
Controls on particle settling velocity and bed erodibility in the presence of muddy flocs and pellets as inferred by ADVs, York River estuary, Virginia,
NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE MEDITERRANEAN OUTFLOW WITH A SIMPLIFIED TOPOGRAPHY Sergio Ramírez-Garrido, Jordi Solé, Antonio García-Olivares, Josep L. Pelegrí.
Estuaries Chapter 8 – Talley et al. Outline: What is an estuary?
Controls on sediment availability on the continental shelf and implications for rates of morphologic evolution Patricia Wiberg University of Virginia with.
ETM: The Estuarine Turbidity Maximum
An introduction to cohesive sediment transport processes
An introduction to cohesive sediment transport modelling
Posted by Irina Overeem, May 2016
Flocs of increasing size Suspended Sediment Size Distribution in a Numerical Sediment Transport Model for a Partially-Mixed Estuary Danielle R.N. Tarpley,
Hypoxia Forecasts as a Tool for Chesapeake Bay Fisheries
FlexSim 3D Ecological modelling made user friendly
Comparison of modeled and observed bed erodibility in the York River estuary, Virginia, over varying time scales Danielle Tarpley, Courtney K. Harris,
Coupled atmosphere-ocean simulation on hurricane forecast
Consolidation and stratification within a Muddy, Partially Mixed Estuary: A Comparison between Idealized and Realistic Models for Sediment Transport in.
Elizabeth River PCB TMDL Study: Numerical Modeling Approach
Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences College of William and Mary
James River PCB TMDL Study: Numerical Modeling Approach
Title and Outline VIMS Coastal Hydrodynamics and Sediment Dynamics Lab
Volume 98, Issue 11, Pages (June 2010)
SUB-TIDAL VARIABILITY IN THE HUDSON RIVER PLUME AS A RESULT OF HIGH FREQUENCY FORCING #543 Hunter, E.J., Rutgers University, Chant, R.J., Rutgers University,
Radionuclide transport modelling
Presentation transcript:

Conclusions References Acknowledgments Sensitivity Tests Cohesive Sediment Model Modeling System Future Work Including Cohesive Sediment Processes in the Community Sediment Transport Modeling System (CSTMS) for the York River estuary, Virginia Danielle Tarpley, Kelsey Fall, Courtney K. Harris, Carl T. Friedrichs Abstract To further understand estuarine sediment dynamics in the York River estuary, Virginia, the Community Sediment Transport Modeling System (CSTMS) was implemented in a three-dimensional domain using the Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS). In addition to accounting for suspended sediment transport, erosion, and deposition, this version of the CSTMS includes cohesive processes via consolidation and swelling of the sediment bed, which change the critical shear stress of the seafloor in response to sedimentation. The model includes wind forcing based on observed timeseries of wind speed and direction, as has recently been modified through adjustments to the open boundary conditions to improve representation of salinity. Model estimates for the summer 2007 has shown good agreement with observed sediment concentration, bed stress, current velocity, salinity and tidal amplitude. We analyzed the sensitivity of calculations of the total eroded mass to the bed consolidation time scale and the critical shear stress for erosion. Further analysis showed model sensitivities to the swelling time scale and the user defined initial and equilibrium critical shear stress profiles. Model Grid – 92 cells across channel (cell width 110 m) – 334 cells along channel (cell width 170 m) – 20 vertical water column layers, higher resolution near the water and sediment surfaces. – 20 layer sediment bed. York River Critical Shear Stress Deposition: Erosion: Sediments – Two sediment classes: Settling velocities: 0.8 mm/s (Flocs) & 2.4 mm/s (Pellets) Figure 1: York River estuary model grid and ROMS model vertical structure. Figure 2: Average (dashed lines) and equilibrium (solid lines) critical stress profiles for April and September, Equilibrium profiles obtained by a power-law fit to the observed values (Rinehimer, 2008). Symbols show observed data from Dickhudt et al. (2008). Partially mixed estuary with tidal range from 0.7 m to 0.85 m from the mouth to the head. Total length of ~50 km Seasonal secondary turbidity maximum (STM) mid-estuary Location of the Multidisciplinary Benthic Exchange Dynamics (MUDBED) project, since – Observations show a physically dominated system near the head of the estuary and a biologically dominated system near the mouth of the estuary. – The STM occurs in the transition zone between a physically and biologically dominated system. TidalMay – AugJuly – Aug USCG CB TC Table 1: RMSE comparing modeled and measured water level at United States Coast Guard (USCG) pier in Yorktown, VA, Claybank (CB) and Taskinas Creek (TC) on the York River. Figure 3: Model estimates of seabed properties after two months spin-up. (a) Erodibility of the seabed, calculated as the thickness of the layer having a critical shear stress exceeded by 0.2 Pa. (b) Fraction of the surficial sediment in the “faster settling” size class. (c) Average settling velocity of surficial sediment (Sherwood et al., In Progress). Current Speed (cm/s)Concentration (mg/L)Bed Stress (Pa) Figure 5: ADV (upper) and model (lower) estimated (a) current speed, (b) concentrations, (c) bed stresses for the top 20% of tidal cycles with strongest bed stresses. Error bars denote ±1 standard error (Fall et al. 2014). Water Column Seabed Taskinas Creek Dickhudt, P., Friedrichs, C., and Sanford, L. (2008). Mud matrix solids fraction and bed erodibility in the York River, USA and other muddy environments. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of Nearshore and Estuarine Cohesive Sediment Transport Processes, submitted. Fall, K.A., Harris, C.K., Friedrichs, C.T., Rinehimer, J.P., and Sherwood, C.R. (2014). Model Behavior and Sensitivity in an Application of the Cohesive Bed Component of the Community Sediment Transport Modeling System for the York River Estuary, VA, USA. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2, Rinehimer, J.P. (2008) Sediment Transport and Erodibility in the York River Estuary: A Model Study. Master’s Thesis, School of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, VA, USA. Sanford, L.P. (2008). Modeling a dynamically varying mixed sediment bed with erosion, deposition, bioturbation, consolidation, and armoring. Computers and Geosciences 34, Sherwood, C.R., Aretxabaleta, A., Harris, C.K., Rinehimer, J.P., Ferré, B., Verney, R. (In Progress). Cohesive and mixed sediment model: Extension of the Community Sediment Transport Modeling System. In Prep. for Ocean Dynamics. Warner, J.C., Geyer, W.R., Lerczak, J.C. (2005). Numerical modeling of an estuary: A comprehensive skill assessment. Journal of Geophysical Research 110, C5. Figure 9: Modeled salinity transect of a 2-D estuary ROMS test case Update the York River forcings to represent a more recent year. Implement cohesive sediment in a 2-D estuary test case (Figure 9) Model development benefited from efforts by J. Paul Rinehimer done as part of his Master’s Thesis, and work completed by a Christopher Newport University Governor’s School summer intern, Jessica Sydnor. Funding from NSF – OCE and OCE a USCG S 0 = 25 S 0 = 32 S 0 = 29 GP S 0 = 25 S 0 = 32 S 0 = 29 b Figure 8 (Right): Daily instantaneous model calculated τ cr profiles (colored lines) shown with user defined equilibrium (τ ceq ) and initial bed profiles (τ crinit ) for model runs with swelling times defined as (a) 2 days, (b) 25 days, and (c) 50 days. The black arrows show the direction that the instantaneous τ c will nudge toward (Fall et al., 2014). Figure 6: Maximum total suspended sediment mass over a tidal cycle for varying values of consolidation time (T c ). Assuming consolidation rates ranging from T c = 1 to 48 hours. Values represent the maximum estimated for each tidal cycle (Rinehimer, 2008). Figure 7: Daily instantaneous model calculated τ c profiles (colored lines) shown with the profile used to parameterize these models (black lins). The equilibrium profile (τ ceq ) and initial bed profile (τ crinit ) were defined based on (a) September and (b) April profiles (Fall et al. 2014). Salinity and water level compared to observations – Setting S 0 =29 improved the modeled salinity (Fig. 4) versus S 0 = 25 in Fall et al. (2014). – Largest water level error from tidal propagation up river (Table 1). Figure 4: Modeled salinity compared to measured salinity at (a) United States Coast Guard (USCG) pier in Yorktown, VA and (b) Gloucester Point (GP), VA. The lowest root mean square error (RMSE) from July to August for both sites was found when S 0 = 29, 1.66 and 1.12 for USCG and GP, respectively. Increasing U Decreasing U Tidal Velocity Phase (θ/π) Increasing U Decreasing U Tidal Velocity Phase (θ/π) Increasing U Decreasing U Tidal Velocity Phase (θ/π) a b c A 3-D numerical model for the York River estuary was developed – The addition of a depth varying critical shear stress was implemented The model was most sensitive to user defined parameters such as the critical shear stress equilibrium profile and initial critical shear stress profile – Observational data needed to constrain these parameters Model output compared relatively well with both hydrological parameters and sediment transport parameters September (less erodible)April (more erodible) T s =25 Days Note: τ ceq = τ crinit a b T s =50 Days T s =25 Days T s =2 Days Min. adjustment from τ crinit to τ ceq. Rapid adjustment from τ crinit to τ ceq.Some adjustment from τ crinit to τ ceq. τ crinit τ ceq Note: τ ceq ≠ τ crinit τ crinit τ ceq τ crinit τ ceq a b c Sensitivity to both the τ crinit and the τ ceq profiles. – Positive feedback between erodibilty and concentration when τ crinit profile more erodible bed (as in April). – Instantaneous τ c profiles shift toward zero (Fig. 7). – Introducing Beryllium-7 as a tracer. – Incorporating flocculation population dynamics. – Including effects of sediment induced stratification. Incorporate these advances into the 3-D York River estuary model. Salinity –Along channel: Model estimates – Bed stress, bed mass, average settling velocity and suspended sediment concentration, – Erodibility based on consolidation time (T c ), swelling time (T s ) and a depth varying critical shear stress (Fig. 3). Model compared better to with measured current speed and suspended sediment concentrations than with bed stress (Fig. 5). Sensitivity to consolidation time (T c ) and swelling time (T s ). –Longer T c produced more asymmetry between spring and neap tide (Fig. 6) –Longer T c also produced a more erodible bed (Fig. 6). –Longer T s allowed minimal adjustment of the τ c (Fig. 8) Less Erodible Sept τ ceq =1.0m 0.62 April τ ceq =0.4m 0.55 More Erodible Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS) – Solves the hydrostatic Reynolds-averaged Navier- Stokes equations on a curvilinear orthogonal grid with vertical stretched terrain-following coordinates. Community Sediment Transport Modeling System (CSTMS) with a cohesive bed sub-model – Sub model based on Sanford (2008) including – Swelling, consolidation, and an increase in τ c with depth in the sediment