• TR-03-6
  • Flow Table Study of Cook Inlet, Alaska
  • ABSTRACT
  • Contents
  • Contents cont'd
  • List of Figures
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Figures cont'd
  • List of Tables
  • Conversion Factors, Non-SI to SI Units of Measurement
  • Preface
  • Introduction
  • Commerce at Port of Anchorage in 2001 (City of Anchorage Web Site)
  • Problem Background
  • Turbulent scale effect in geometrically distorted physical models
  • Task 2: Small-area idealized flow model of Cook Inlet
  • Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory Flow Table
  • Figure 3. Side view of CHL flow table
  • Figure 5. View of traversing system looking down through glass bottom
  • Idealized Cook Inlet Models
  • Figure 6. Area coverage of large-area and small-area idealized models
  • Large-Area Model Description
  • Figure 7. Idealized bathymetry in large-area model
  • Figure 8. Cutting large-area model pieces with router
  • Large-Area Model Observations
  • Figure 10. Flood flow in large-area idealized model
  • Figure 12. Alaska District engineers observe dye patterns in large-area idealized model
  • Small-Area Model Description
  • Small-Area Model Observations
  • Figure 14. Cutting small-area model pieces with router
  • Figure 16. Idealized bathymetry in small-area model
  • Figure 17. Small-area idealized model positioning on flow table
  • Conclusions From Idealized Models
  • Turbulence Scale Effect in Distored Models
  • Geometrically Distorted Models
  • Turbulence Similitude in Geometrically Distorted Models
  • Turbulence Similitude in Geometrically Distorted Models cont'd
  • Turbulence Similitude in Geometrically Distorted Models cont'd
  • Turbulence Similitude in Geometrically Distorted Models cont'd
  • Turbulence Similitude in Geometrically Distorted Models cont'd
  • Anticipated Scale Effects
  • Anticipated Scale Effects cont'd
  • Flow at Bend
  • Flow at Bend cont'd
  • Flow at Bend cont'd
  • Flow at Bend cont'd
  • Flow at Bend cont'd
  • Turbulence Scale Effect Experiments
  • Case 4: Flow separation at vertical step
  • Table 4 Distorted Model Froude Scales
  • Case 1: Flow Separation at Vertical Edge ­- Free Jet
  • Experiment setup
  • Figure 20. Experiment setup for Case 1 free jet flow separation at vertical edge
  • Table 5 Distortion Experimental Scale Factors and Parameters
  • Case 1 results
  • Figure 21. Velocity field NQ = 1.5, prototype (Case 1)
  • Figure 23. Velocity field NQ = 1.5, distortion = 4 (Case 1)
  • Figure 25. Comparison between prototype and distortion = 6, NQ = 1.5 (Case 1)
  • Figure 27. Crossflow velocity ratios, distortion = 2,4,6 over prototype (NQ = 1.5, Case 1)
  • Case 1 discussion and conclusions
  • Case 2 results
  • Case 2 discussion and conclusions
  • Figure 31. Crossflow velocity ratios, distortion = 2,4,6 over prototype (NQ = 1.0, Case 2)
  • Case 3: Flow separation at sloping edge
  • Figure 33. Cross sections showing distortion for sloping edge tests
  • Figure 35. Velocity field at 2/3 d, NQ =1.0, distortion = 2 (Case 3)
  • Figure 37. Velocity field at 2/3 d, NQ =1.0, distortion = 6 (Case 3)
  • Figure 39. Velocity field at 1/3 d, NQ =1.0, distortion = 2 (Case 3)
  • Figure 41. Velocity field at 1/3 d, NQ =1.0, distortion = 6 (Case 3)
  • Figure 42. Velocity field at 2/3 d, NQ =1.0, prototype vs. distortion = 6 (Case 3)
  • Case 3 discussion and conclusions
  • Figure 44. Crossflow velocity ratios at 2/3 d, distortion = 2,4,6 over prototype (No = 1.0, Case 3)
  • Figure 46. Crossflow velocity ratios at 1/3 d, distortion = 2,4,6 over prototype (NQ = 1, Case 3)
  • Case 4: Flow Separation at Vertical Step
  • Table 7 Distortion in Vertical Step Experiment
  • Figure 49. Comparison of horizontal flow magnitudes in lee of a vertical step
  • Conclusions from Turbulence Scale Effects Experiments
  • Impact of Dredging Planform
  • Figure 50. Experiment setup for harbor dredging planform configuration
  • Dredge Transition Test Results
  • Figure 52. Flow leaving dredged region over vertical transition
  • Figure 54. Flow entering dredged region over vertical transition
  • Figure 56. Photograph of flow entering dredged region over vertical transition
  • Figure 57. Photograph of flow entering dredged region over sloping transition
  • 7 3-D Cook Inlet Model
  • Figure 58. Area coverage of 3-D Cook Inlet model
  • Table 10 Scale Ratios for 3-D Model
  • Model fabrication
  • Figure 60. Router rough-cut of bathymetry
  • Figure 61. Router finish cut of bathymetry
  • Figure 63. Portion of 3-D model looking downstream
  • Model operation
  • Figure 66. 3-D Cook Inlet model installed for flood flow
  • 3-D Model Observations
  • Figure 67. Surface flow tracer showing reduced flow at Port of Anchorage during ebb tide
  • Figure 69. Aerial showing approximate flow separation and entrainment region in lee of Carin Point during ebb tide
  • Conclusions from Cook Inlet 3-D Model
  • Conclusions from Cook Inlet 3-D Model cont'd
  • Summary and Conclusions
  • Task 3: Turbulence scale effect in distorted physical models
  • Study Conclusions
  • Turbulence scale effects study conclusions
  • Turbulence scale effects study conclusions cont'd
  • References
  • Appendix A Case 1 - Flow Separation at Vertical Edge - Free Jet
  • Figure A1. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure A3. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure A5. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure A7. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure A9. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure A11. Case 1, Q = 1.5 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure A13. Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure A15. Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure A17: Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure A19. Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure A21. Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure A23. Case 1, Q = 1.0 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure A25. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure A27. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure A29. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure A31. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure A33. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure A35. Case 1, Q = 0.75 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Appendix B Case 2 - Flow Separation at Vertical Edge - Constrained Jet
  • Figure B1. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure B3. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure B5. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure B7. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure B9. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure B11. Case 2, Q = 1.5 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure B13. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure B15. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure B17. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure B19. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure B21. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure B23. Case 2, Q = 1.0 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure B25. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure B27. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure B29. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure B31. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure B33. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure B35. Case 2, Q = 0.75 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Appendix C Case 3 - Flow Separation at Sloping Edge
  • Figure C1. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure C3. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure C5. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure C7. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure C9. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure C11. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure C13. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure C15. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure C17. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure C19. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure C21. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure C23. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.5 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure C25. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure C27. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure C29. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure C31. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure C33. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure C35. Case 3 (1/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • Figure C37. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype
  • Figure C39. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, distortion = 4
  • Figure C41. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 2
  • Figure C43. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype vs. distortion = 6
  • Figure C45. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, prototype minus distortion = 4
  • Figure C47. Case 3 (2/3 d), Q = 1.0 L/sec, ratios between prototype and distortions 2, 4, and 6
  • REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
  • (Concluded)

Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us - Support Integrated Publishing