Implementing Regional Sediment Management to Sustain Navigation at an Energetic Tidal Inlet

Moritz, Hans R.; Gelfenbaum, Guy; Kaminsky, George M.; Ruggiero, Peter; Oltman-Shay, Joan; McKillip, Doris J.

doi:10.1061/40926(239)139

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The USACE Mega‐Transect experiment (MGT) provides a comprehensive data set for hydrodynamic, wave and sediment model validation [ Moritz et al , 2007]. The MGT was designed to quantify the flux of sand through the mouth of the estuary, and to elucidate important processes acting in the estuary entrance by deploying an array of five tripods across the entrance (labeled MGT 1–5 in Figure 2).…”

Section: Study Site and Field Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a coupled wave‐flow model in a high‐energy setting: The mouth of the Columbia River

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] A monthlong time series of wave, current, salinity, and suspended-sediment measurements was made at five sites on a transect across the Mouth of Columbia River (MCR). These data were used to calibrate and evaluate the performance of a coupled hydrodynamic and wave model for the MCR based on the Delft3D modeling system. The MCR is a dynamic estuary inlet in which tidal currents, river discharge, and wave-driven currents are all important. Model tuning consisted primarily of spatial adjustments to bottom drag coefficients. In combination with (near-) default parameter settings, the MCR model application is able to simulate the dominant features in the tidal flow, salinity and wavefields observed in field measurements. The wave-orbital averaged method for representing the current velocity profile in the wave model is considered the most realistic for the MCR. The hydrodynamic model is particularly effective in reproducing the observed vertical residual and temporal variations in current structure. Density gradients introduce the observed and modeled reversal of the mean flow at the bed and augment mean and peak flow in the upper half of the water column. This implies that sediment transport during calmer summer conditions is controlled by density stratification and is likely net landward due to the reversal of flow near the bed. The correspondence between observed and modeled hydrodynamics makes this application a tool to investigate hydrodynamics and associated sediment transport.Citation: Elias, E. P. L., G. Gelfenbaum, and A. J. Van der Westhuysen (2012), Validation of a coupled wave-flow model in a high-energy setting: The mouth of the Columbia River,

show abstract

Section: Study Site and Field Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a coupled wave‐flow model in a high‐energy setting: The mouth of the Columbia River

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interested reader is referred to Moritz et al . [] and Elias et al . [] for further information on the experiment.…”

Section: Validation Of the Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The frequency of the different observations obtained at the aforementioned locations are given in Tables 1 and 2. The interested reader is referred to Moritz et al [2007] and Elias et al [2012] for further information on the experiment.…”

Section: Validation Of the Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the dynamics of the Mouth of the Columbia River: Results from a three‐dimensional fully coupled wave‐current interaction model

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerical simulations were performed using a 3‐D ocean circulation model (ROMS) two‐way coupled to a phase‐averaged wave propagation model (SWAN), to expand our understanding of the dynamics of wave‐current interactions at the Mouth of the Columbia River (MCR). First, model results are compared with water elevations, currents, temperature, salinity, and wave measurements obtained by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers during the Mega‐Transect Experiment in 2005. We then discuss the effects of the currents on the waves and vice versa. Results show that wave heights are intensified notably at the entrance of the mouth in the presence of the tidal currents, especially in ebb flows. We also find nonlocal modifications to the wave field because of wave focusing processes that redirect wave energy toward the inlet mouth from adjacent areas, resulting in the presence of a tidal signatures in areas where local currents are weak. The model also suggests significant wave amplification at the edge of the expanding plume in the later stages of ebb, some tens of kilometers offshore of the inlet mouth, with potential implications for navigation safety. The effect of waves on the location of the plume is also analyzed, and results suggest that the plume is shifted in the down‐wave direction when wave effects are considered, and that this shift is more pronounced for larger waves, and consistent with the presence of alongshore advection terms in the salt advection equation, which are related to the Stokes velocities associated with waves.

show abstract

“…The river entrance requires annual dredging to maintain the navigational channel, with approximately 4.5 million cubic yards of sediment removed every year. A large portion of this dredged material is placed in specific disposal sites within the entrance of the river, adding another degree of complexity to the bathymetry (Moritz et al 2007).…”

Section: The Mcr Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the second largest river in the U.S., the Columbia River is the gateway to several commercial ports and hosts 12,000 commercial vessels and 100,000 recreational and charter vessels every year (Moritz et al 2007). The mouth of the Columbia River (MCR) is known for its extreme wave conditions and navigation hazards.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forecasting the Wave-Current Interactions at the Mouth of the Columbia River, Or, Usa

Kassem

Özkan-Haller

2012

Int. Conf. Coastal. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An operational wave forecast of the area near the mouth of the Columbia River is presented. This region is known for its large waves and strong tidal currents. The forecast is forced with full directional spectra obtained from a refined WaveWatchIII forecast of the Pacific Northwest, and tidal current inputs are obtained from an estuarine circulation forecast of the Columbia River. The forecast has been operational since August 2011 providing short-term predictive wave information at the mouth of the Columbia River. Results from a 6-month period are promising, with a normalized root-mean-squared error (NRMSE) of 16% at the location of an inshore buoy, which is located outside the zone of tidal influence in 25 m water depth. Near the river mouth and in the channel, wave heights are heavily dominated by the tidal currents which significantly increase wave heights on ebb tides. Hindcast results shows that the model is able to predict the general effect of the tidal currents with a NRMSE of 30% in wave heights at the river mouth. Despite some of the model limitations, it still provides valuable information to navigators and bar pilots since it includes the effects of the tidal currents.

show abstract

Implementing Regional Sediment Management to Sustain Navigation at an Energetic Tidal Inlet

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Validation of a coupled wave‐flow model in a high‐energy setting: The mouth of the Columbia River

Validation of a coupled wave‐flow model in a high‐energy setting: The mouth of the Columbia River

On the dynamics of the Mouth of the Columbia River: Results from a three‐dimensional fully coupled wave‐current interaction model

Forecasting the Wave-Current Interactions at the Mouth of the Columbia River, Or, Usa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About