1-d hec-ras model of st. clair river
DESCRIPTION
This is a presentation given at a meeting of the International Upper Great Lakes Study (IUGLS) in Detroit, MI, on the current status of the St. Clair Model.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1-D HEC-RAS Hydraulic Model of the St. Clair River
Detroit, MI
October 21, 2008
![Page 2: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction
• Two Major Questions:– What effects have past dredging events
(1962) had on conveyance in the St. Clair River?
– What effects have bathymetric changes in the St. Clair River had on conveyance since 1971?
![Page 3: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Introduction
• In response, I was given two objectives:– Using the 2007 1-D model, fill in areas
dredged in 1962 to estimate change in conveyance due to dredging.
– Using the 2007 (1971 resolution) bathymetry provided by Environment Canada and the 1971 bathymetry, determine change in conveyance since 1971 due to bathymetric changes.
![Page 4: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
1962 Dregding
• Locations of 1962 dredging provided by the Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit District.
![Page 5: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
1962 Dredging
• RAS cross-sections before and after dredging.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700164
166
168
170
172
174
176
178
St Clair Plan: Dredging 9/23/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Ch-2 RS = 104
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0264
.0239 .0264
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700164
166
168
170
172
174
176
178
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Ch-2 RS = 104
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0264
.0239 .0264
![Page 6: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
1962 Dredging
Final Result = +30.5 cms conveyance change in the St. Clair River.
![Page 7: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700150
155
160
165
170
175
180
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Channel RS = 147
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0432
.0365 .0432
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700150
155
160
165
170
175
180
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Channel RS = 147
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0432 .0365 .0432
1971
2007
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700150
155
160
165
170
175
180
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Channel RS = 147
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0432 .0365 .0432
2007 (1971 Resolution)
![Page 8: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
Final Result = +218 cms conveyance change in the St. Clair River.
Flows: 1971 = 5526 cms; 2007 = 6110 cms; 2007 (res1971) = 5744 cms
![Page 9: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Conclusions
• Dredging in 1962 has caused an increase in conveyance of only 30.5 cms.
• Bathymetric changes since 1971 have caused an increase in conveyance of 218 cms.
• During the study period of the current project (1962 – present), bathymetric changes have caused a greater increase in conveyance than dredging.
![Page 10: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Next Questions?
• Where does dredging impact conveyance the most?
• What and where are the bathymetric changes and how did they come about?
![Page 11: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
1962 Dredging
• Using the 2007 RAS model, one reach was replaced at a time with the same reach with dredged areas filled in.
MC1
MC3
ES
EF
MC5
MC2
MC4
![Page 12: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
1962 Dredging
Reach Flow Change (cms)
Percent of Total / Percent of Volume
MC1 1.3 0.17
MC2 8.0 2.55
MC3 13.2 1.31
MC4 2.4 1.28
MC5 10.6 1.57
* Total change in conveyance = 30.5 cms.
![Page 13: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
1962 Dredging
MC1
MC2
MC3
MC4/MC5
![Page 14: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
• Using 1971 bathymetry, one reach was replaced at a time with the same reach from the 2007 bathymetry (1971 resolution).
![Page 15: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
Reach Flow Change (cms)
Percent of Total / Percent of Length
MC1 107.54 1.99
MC2 35.18 1.62
ES 3.56 0.17
MC3 55.25 0.81
MC4 6.06 0.46
EF -5.11 -0.39
MC5 8.46 0.32* Total change in conveyance = 218 cms.
![Page 16: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
• Next Question:– Can we define the location to be more exact?
• Yes: Reaches 1 and 2 (x-sections 147 – 102) were chosen and split into sub-reaches of 3 to 4 measured cross-sections each.
![Page 17: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
X-Sections Flow Change
147 – 145 0.27
144 – 142 -0.52
141 – 139 22.60
138 – 136 51.15
135 – 133 -1.85
132 – 130 32.34
129 – 127 15.33
126 – 124 14.87
123 – 120 -7.82
X-Sections Flow Change
119 – 117 -5.42
116 – 114 1.26
113 – 111 8.63
110 – 108 9.99
107 – 105 3.88
104 – 102 12.23
Main Channel 1 Main Channel 2
* Total change = 107.54 cms
* Total change = 35.18 cms
![Page 18: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
• Main Channel 2: Changes in Conveyance seem to be due to uncertainties with altering the 2007 resolution.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600162
164
166
168
170
172
174
176
178
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Ch-2 RS = 110
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0264
.0239 .0264
0 100 200 300 400 500 600164
166
168
170
172
174
176
178
St Clair Plan: 1) Reach1 10/19/2008 River = St. Clair River Reach = Main Ch-2 RS = 110
Station (m)
Ele
vatio
n (m
)
Legend
WS Max WS
Ground
Bank Sta
.0264
.0239 .0264
1971
2007
![Page 19: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
• Final Question: Which are the exact cross-sections that are experiencing the greatest bathymetric changes and why?
• To answer this question, we will examine each measured cross-section between 141 and 136 to determine the exact location where bathymetric changes have been the most extreme.
![Page 20: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Bathymetric Changes since 1971
X-Section Flow Change
141 -3.46
140.05 5.33
140 2.85
139.95 2.67
139.9 12.14
139 4.97
* Total change = 22.60 cms
X-Section Flow Change
138 15.12
137 43.44
136 1.26
* Total change = 51.15 cms
141 - 139 138 - 136
![Page 21: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Cross-Section #138
1971 2007
139.9
138
1971 2007
![Page 22: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Final Results
• Full-scale: – Dredging: change = 30.5 cms – Bathymetric: change = 218 cms
• Local:– Dredging: Main Channel 2 (MC1 was least)– Bathymetric: Cross-section # 139.9 - 137
![Page 23: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Discussion (1)
• In terms of any analysis concerned with the dredging of 1962, the focus should be moved to Main Channel 2 (west of Stag Island).
• In terms of other bathymetric changes since 1971, the area downstream of Blue Water Bridge shows the greatest change (X-Sections 139.9 – 137)
• Downstream of the Blue Water Bridge is the sand tongue identified by the Sediment TWG, which may be the culprit.
![Page 24: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Discussion (2)
• This sand tongue is thought to have been created by large ships speeding up and beginning their turn when under the Blue Water Bridge. The large propellers may stir up sediment in this area which is deposited slightly downstream.
• Where is the sediment coming from if the bottom of the main channel is armored, as observed in videos and pictures taken by the Sediment TWG?
![Page 25: 1-D HEC-RAS Model of St. Clair River](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062300/556460c3d8b42a90338b4b51/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Hypothesis
• There is increased deposition in the ineffective flow area during storms. Ships speeding up and turning in this area may mix the loose sediment horizontally, causing it to be washed downstream. Effects would be greatest immediately after a storm event.
#137
IneffectiveFlow AreaShips