1 / 26

Development of a Sediment Transport Model for the Chesapeake Bay:

Development of a Sediment Transport Model for the Chesapeake Bay: Supporting Physical Data from VIMS Potomac River Intensive Surveys with Emphasis on Suspended Particle Populations and Bed Properties Carl T. Friedrichs and Grace M. Cartwright Virginia Institute of Marine Science.

teague
Télécharger la présentation

Development of a Sediment Transport Model for the Chesapeake Bay:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Development of a Sediment Transport Model for the Chesapeake Bay: Supporting Physical Data from VIMS Potomac River Intensive Surveys with Emphasis on Suspended Particle Populations and Bed Properties Carl T. Friedrichs and Grace M. Cartwright Virginia Institute of Marine Science

  2. Report cover

  3. Station locations General station locations along Potomac

  4. Table 1

  5. Data sheet

  6. ADCP, Proflier ADCP LISST 2 OBS CTD ADV Pump

  7. Bottom sampling Bed grab with 1 cm interval subsamples of top 5 cm: % water organic matter sand/silt/clay Eh profile

  8. LISST 1 LISST: Laser In-Situ Scattering Transmissometer Parts Per Million 5 m 500 m Log10 particle size (micron)

  9. LISST 2 LISST: Laser In-Situ Scattering Transmissometer Upper water column: Larger size particles, presumably low density, biologically influenced flocs. Parts Per Million Near the bed: Intermediate size particles, presumably higher density and suspended from bed. 5 m 500 m Log10 particle size (micron)

  10. Transects 1 ADCP velocity transect ADCP mass conc transect LISST D50 profiles CTD salinity profiles

  11. Transects 2 ADCP velocity transect ADCP mass conc transect ADCP shows mass conc minimum at 2-3 m depth, but LISST shows size maximum LISST D50 profiles CTD salinity profiles

  12. TSS vs. speed TSS vs. Speed Pump TSS (mg/l) Current speed (cm/s) (o 2004, x 2005)

  13. TSS vs. speed TSS vs. Speed Red = height above bed < 1 m Resuspension influence Pump TSS (mg/l) Biology/floc influence Current speed (cm/s) (o 2004, x 2005)

  14. Along axis UMCES Data: D50 depends on location, elevation and TSS.

  15. Along axis Positively correlated in z Inversely correlated in z UMCES Data: D50 depends on location, elevation and TSS. Two distinct populations indicated: (i) suspended, (ii) biology/flocs

  16. Shell at km 35 Mud at km 90 Sand at km 20

  17. August 2004 September 2005

  18. August 2004 September 2005

  19. August 2004 September 2005

  20. August 2004 September 2005

  21. August 2004 8 8

  22. September 2005 70 9 8

  23. September 2005 95 95

  24. Mied, Donato & Friedrichs, accepted, Estuaries & Coasts

  25. Conclusions: -- Two suspended populations exist: (1) inorganic, resuspended, denser with size positively correlated to mass concentration; (2) organic, advected, less dense with size negatively correlated to mass concentration and associated with stratification. -- Bed types are regionally and locally diverse, dominated by shells, sand or mud. Fraction of mud content drives other properties like water and organic content. Eh is a useful indicator of “fresh”, easily resuspended mud. -- Data is available to others and has already been passed on to other groups.

More Related