Upload
easter-reeves
View
217
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Tampa Harbor ProjectTampa Harbor ProjectGeneral Re-evaluation Study
Presented by: US Army Corps of Engineers
Jacksonville DistrictDecember 11, 2003
Hydrodynamic Modeling
USACE South Atlantic Division
Directed Jacksonville District to seek
support for modeling tools & procedures
from
• Sponsors
Tampa Port Authority, City of St. Pete
• Other stakeholders ABM, TBEP, USGS
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Introduction
• Introduction
• Purpose for Hydrodynamic Modeling
• Model Selection
• Alternatives
• Scope of Modeling
• Other Tasks
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Outline
Introduction
• Navigation ProjectsTampa Harbor GRSSt Petersburg GRS
• Previous Corps Funded Hydro ModelCirculation Changes due to Dredge & Fill (Goodwin, ’87,’91)
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
N
TAMPA HARBORPROJECT
CLEARWATER
NASSAU COUNTY
LOCATION MAPNASSAU COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
TAMPA BAY
LOCATION MAP
ST. PETERSBURG
PORTTAMPA
PORTSUTTON
TAM
PA H
AR
BO
RC
HA
NN
EL
Gulfof
Mexico
YBOR
ALAFIARIVER
BIG BEND
PORT MANATEE
Purpose of Hydrodynamic Modeling
• Provide currents to Ship Simulator
• Evaluate changes to circulation/salinitydue to channel modifications
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Existing Conditions• Strong wind, current and tide considerations
• 43-foot deep main Federal channel by 500-foot wide (Cut A-F)
• Increased vessel sizes and port calls
• Vessel accident history from 1980 resulting in loss of life, navigation delays & environmental damage
• Tampa Bay Safety Guidelines Committee established
• Vessel Handling Guidelines for Movement established
• Commerce light-loaded, traffic flow impeded, navigation delays
• Tampa Harbor Safety Zones established
• Tampa Harbor Security Zones established
• Criteria
Represent Channel Mods
Local Mass Conservation
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Model Selection
• Model TypesStructured Grid Orthogonal – ECOM, EFDC
Boundary Fitted – CH3D
Nested – Mike2/3
Unstructured Grid Finite Element – ADCIRC, RMA, MIKE FM
Finite Volume – UnTrim, ELCIRC, FVCOM MIKE FM, Delft
UnTrim (Casulli & Walters 2000)
• Unstructured grid
• Mass Conservation
• Stability independent of surface wave speed
• Degenerate to 2D & 1D
• Flooding & Drying
• Proprietary
MIKE FM/FV (DHI)
• MIKE Zero
• (Sediment Transport)
• (Water Quality)
• (Ecolab)
• Stability dep. Surface wave speed
• Proprietary
ELCIRC (Oregon Grad Institute 2001)
• Open Source
Alternatives
• Six preliminary plans
• 2 to 6 alternatives for each
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Preliminary Alternative Plans
Orchid Orchid Daisy Daisy
Zinnia Zinnia Violet Violet Iris Iris
Rose Rose
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Scope of Modeling
• Model SimulationsCalibration & Verification (existing data)Existing Conditions – Base year w/o project (future w/o ?)Three Alternative Project Plans
• Time Scales Project Alternative Optimization – 30 daysImpacts to Circulation & Salinity – Seasonal (3-4 months)
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Revised Scope• OLD
A re-evaluation of the entire harbor projectFeasibility-level study
• NEWMain ship channel congestion relief measures - Anchorage areas - Loop channel - Non-structural alternatives
Other Tasks
• Ship Simulator - optimize channel design
• Channel Shoaling- Diagnostic Modeling System
• PORTSIM- queuing model/ economic analysis
• Ship Wake Analysis - potential impact on seagrass
• Harbor Oscillation – limited to local areas
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Project Schedule
• 1 Mar 04 - Tampa & St PeteCalibration / VerificationExisting Condition
• 1 April 04 - Alternatives (~ 3 model simulations)
• 1 Jun 04 - Recommended Plan, Locally Preferred Plan
Tampa Harbor Project General Re-evaluation Study
Vessel Calls & Cargo TypeTampa Distribution of Calls by Vessel & Cargo Type CY 2001
VESSELL TYPE CARGO TYPE % OF CALLS
Cruise Ships Passengers 6%
General Cargo ShipsBreak Bulk, Neo-bulk,
Containerized 18%
Bulk Carriers & Barges Dry Bulk
Tankers & Barges Petroleum Products
29%
47%
Environmental ResourcesDiverse, high quality fish & wildlife resources within Tampa Bay
• Bethnic Resources
• Estuarine Resources
Seagrass - beds extensive; high value fisheries nursery
Soft bottom – sand/muck (80%)
Hardbottom – invertebrate & fish habitat (850 acres)
West Indian Manatee – extensive protection zones (FWS, DEP, FWC)
Marshes & mangroves – fisheries habitat
Mud flats & salt barrens – microscopic organisms fuel for Bay productivity
Associated uplands – foraging, nesting, loafing habitat (bald eagle, osprey, wood storks)
Low salinity habitats – oysters thrive
“Charting the Course,” CCMP for Tampa Bay, December 1996
Study Guidance• ER 1105-2-100 - “Revised Planning Guidance Notebook”
• ER 1165-2-1 - “Digest of Water Resources Policies & Authorities”
• EM 1110-2-1613 - “Navigation Design Safety Component”
• ER 1165-2-131 – “Over Depth Dredging”
• EC 1165-2-203 – “Internal Technical Reviews”
• USCG 33 CFR 165 – “Security Zones”
• Port of Tampa Authority Input
• Tampa Harbor Pilot Association Input
Vessel Tonnage & MovementCY 2001 Tampa Area Ports’ Tonnage and Vessel Movements *
TAMPA AREA PORTS CY 2001 SHORT TONS CY 2001 INBOUND & OUTBOUND TRIPS
Tampa 45,793,544 6,930
Port Manatee 3,801,621 654
Weedon Island 1,038,674 124
St. Petersburg 52,000 852
Total 50,685,839 8,560
* WBC of the U.S., CY 2001, Part 2 – Waterways and Harbors, Gulf Coast, Mississippi River System and Antilles
Critical Milestones• Begin study
• Feasibility Scoping meeting
• Complete Draft GRR
• Alternative Formulation Briefing
• Project Guidance Memorandum Comments
• Release Draft GRR to the Public
• Complete Public Coordination Period
• Submit Final GRR to MSC *
• Division Commander’s Public Notice (begin design phase)
• Authorization Water Resources Development Act of 2006
• Begin construction
• Complete construction
4/11/02
9/16/03
6/30/04
9/13/04
10/26/04
2/9/05
4/7/05
7/19/05
03/10/06
2007
(tentative) 2010