Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Indian River Lagoon Flushing Model
Indian River Lagoon Flushing Model
Indian River Lagoon Flushing Model
Submitted to the
St. Johns River Water Management District
4049 Reid Street
Palatka, FL 32177
Executive Summary
In order to examine the potential for improved flushing of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Modeling System (CMS) was used for hydrodynamic and
transport modeling. The CMS is an integrated 2D numerical modeling system for simulating
circulation, water level, constituent transport, sand transport, and morphology change in shallow
water environments. For this project, two computational model grids were constructed to cover
the Indian River Lagoon System from the north end of the Mosquito Lagoon (ML) in Volusia
County. FL to the Wabasso area of Indian River County. The north grid (Grid 1) includes the
Mosquito Lagoon and the north compartment of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) The south grid
(Grid 2) includes the Banana River and the IRL from the Cocoa area to Wabasso. A uniform grid
resolution of 50 was found to provide adequate spatial resolution and numerical stability. The
model boundaries were forced with historical time series of water level and with discharge at
major creeks and rivers entering the west bank of the IRL. Wind speed and direction were
applied over the surface of the model grid.
A total of seven model runs were conducted, including two runs to simulate existing
conditions. Model performance was validated by comparing predicted and measured water level
time series. Five model runs included hypothetical new tidal inlets, pumping stations, and
hypothetical widening of Sebastian inlet near the south boundary of Grid 2. Flushing rates were
predicted by establishing an initial numerical tracer concentration of 20 parts per thousand over
the entire model domain. Tracer concentrations at the model boundaries were then set to zero.
Model results for existing conditions were consistent with previous studies by showing
that the southern portion of the Mosquito Lagoon and the Banana River remain poorly flushed
over long periods of time. The Titusville area of the IRL also remained poorly flushed in model
simulations of existing conditions. Among the hypothetical alterations to the model grids,
additional tidal inlet and pumping station connections to the coastal ocean across narrow sections
of the barrier island, produced the best flushing results in the model grids. Either a narrow tidal
inlet or pumping station located in the south compartment of the Mosquito Lagoon produced
complete flushing of the ML and north compartment of the IRL (Grid 1) within about 70 days or
less. A tidal inlet across the South Cocoa Beach barrier island segment also substantially
improved flushing of the Banana River. Opening the water locks at Port Canaveral also
improved flushing, but at a somewhat slower rate to the tidal inlet case. This is attributed to the
long conveyance channel between the Port entrance and the Banana River, which may dissipate
tidal energy to a greater degree. Widening of Sebastian Inlet to twice its present width at the
throat section did not noticeably improve flushing rates or extent
ii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii
Introduction and Goals ................................................................................................................... 1
Model Features............................................................................................................................ 1
Model Setup .................................................................................................................................... 2
Grid Generation .......................................................................................................................... 2
Wind Time Series ....................................................................................................................... 5
Model Validation ............................................................................................................................ 5
Model Runs ..................................................................................................................................... 7
Model Results ................................................................................................................................. 8
Model Run1 Predicted Flushing, North Grid.............................................................................. 8
Model Run 2; Predicted Flushing, South Grid............................................................................ 9
Model Run 3: Tidal Inlet, Mosquito Lagoon ............................................................................ 10
Model Run 4: Pumping Station, Mosquito Lagoon .................................................................. 12
Model Run 5: Tidal Inlet South Cocoa Beach ....................................................................... 13
Model Run 6: Canaveral Locks Open ....................................................................................... 14
Model Run 7: Widening of Sebastian Inlet............................................................................... 16
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 17
References ..................................................................................................................................... 18
iii
important to understand the limitations of 2-D transport simulations, and apply them only when
the assumptions inherent in 2-D simulations are valid. Typically, 2-D salinity simulations are
valid in a well mixed the water column. These conditions are usually met for shallow bays with
open exchanges to the ocean or gulf, and strong tidal signals and sufficient wind energy to
provide the vertical mixing. Thus it is assumed that the Indian River Loon system is largely well
mixed in the vertical and over time scales of the computations performed in the study, which are
the order of 1 year.
Model Setup
Grid Generation
Two model grids were constructed, one covering the Mosquito lagoon and the north
compartment of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL. The second grid included Indian River lagoon
compartments between Titusville and the Wabasso area of north Indian River County, FL.
Having two model grids facilitated shorter computational run times and more model tests
running on several computers. Model grids resolution was set at 50 meters and both grids were
generated in the AquaveoTM Surface Water Modeling System (SMS) Platform. Figure 1
illustrates the north grid and Figure 2 shows the south grid.
Figure 3 shows the available monitoring data assembles though the efforts of the St.
Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD). In general the monitoring time series
covers the period between 1996 and 2006. Some data sets extend through 2006. The boundaries
of the two model grids were set to correspond to available water level time series and in some
cases discharge time series.
Figure 3. Location of monitoring stations throughout the north and central Indian River Logoon.
Figure 4. Model grid detials and boundary conditions in the Sebastian Inlet area
Model Validation
Two data records were used to validate model predictions relative to water elevation. A
portion of the 1999 water level record from Haulover Canal (Station Haulover, Figure 3) was
compared to predicted water levels at e same location. Figure 5 shows time series of measured
and model data at the Haulover Canal station. The R-square value of 0.90 refers to a bivariate
comparison of the data. Similar to calibration results for the hydrological and water quality mode
5
of the Mosquito Lagoon (Zarillo et al, 2010) the best fit between measured and model data was
found when the mean elevation north boundary water level time series was set down by 15 cm (0.15m)
Water level predictions on Grid 2 (south grid) were compared at station spsebars (see
Figure 3) near the mouth of the Sebastian River. Figure 6 shows the comparison between
measured and model data at this location. The R-square value of 0.90 refers to a bivariate
comparison of the data. No adjustments were made to mean water level values at Sebastian Inlet
or at the Wabasso Bridge water level time series to achieve the comparison shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Model and measured water level comparison in the Sebastian River.
Model Runs
Table 1 lists model configuration for each of the model runs conducted in this study to
evaluate flushing conditions. Each model run began with specifying an initial tracer
concentration of 20 parts-per-thousand (ppt) throughout the model domain. Tracer concentration
at the model boundaries was set to zero though each model run. The initial year-long runs were
configured for existing conditions. Subsequent model configurations included hypothetical tidal
inlets, a one- way pumping station, a widened version of Sebastian Inlet, and opening of the
water locks to the west of Port of Canaveral entrance.
Model
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Duration
Grid 1
Grid 2
Grid 1
Grid 1
Grid 2
Grid 2
Grid 2
1999/365 days
1997/ 340 days
1999/365 days
1999/365 days
1997/ 340 days
1997/ 340 days
1997/ 340 days
Existing
Existing
ML Inlet
ML pumping station
Inlet at PAFB
Canaveral Locks Open
Widen Sebastian Inlet
Model Results
The major model results of numerical flushing experiments are presented in an electronic
appendix to this document for convenient review. The appendix includes a slide presentation
that is linked animation files. A convenient video players is also included in the electronic
appendix for convenient frame by frame viewing of the animation files that show tracer
concentrations at a daily update time scale.
Model Run1 Predicted Flushing, North Grid
Results of model flushing experiments on Grid 1 (north grid) for the existing
configuration are shown in Figures 7 and 8. The tracer concentration of 20 ppt decreased to less
than half of the initial value over the north section of the grid within about 30 days. After 150
days of simulation the predicted tracer concentrations were less than 10 ppt over about 75% of
the model domain (Figure 8A) At the end of the 365-day simulation tracer concentrations were
near zero over about 80% of the Mosquito Lagoon and the north compartment of the IRL (Figure
8B). However the south end of the ML and north end of the IRL retained high tracer
concentrations.
Figure 7. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Run 1, existing configuration at day 0 (A) and day 30
(B).
Figure 8. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Run 1 existing configuration after 150 days (A) and
365 days (B)
Figure 9. Predicted tracer concentration for the Model Run 2 existing configuration at day 0 (A), day
150, and day 340 (C).
Figure 10. Location of a hypothetical tidal inlet exchange with the Atlantic Ocean across the barrier island
at south compartment of the Mosquito lagoon.
Results of the model run including the hypothetical inlet into the ML showed substantial
decrease in the time to flush the entire ML and north compartment of the IRL. Figure 12
summarizes the results and shows about 50% of the system flushed to less than half the initial
10
tracer concentration within about 30 days. After 70 days of simulation tracer concentrations are
reduced to a few ppt or less over the system.
Figure 11. Details of the ML inlet channel receiving water level forcing from the coastal ocean.
Figure 12. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Run 3, ML tidal inlet after 30 days (A) and 70 days
(B)
11
Figure 13. Pump intake canal located in the southern compartment of the Mosquito Lagoon.
Results of the pumping station model test are similar to those of the hypothetical tidal
inlet at the same location. However the predicted rate of flushing is somewhat faster. After about
12 days of simulation half of the Mosquito lagoon is reduced to tracer concentrations below
about 5 to 10 ppt (Figure 14A) After 30 days of simulation, the entire ML basin is at a tracer
concentration of 10 ppt or less (Figure 14B After 50 days both the ML and north IRL
compartments have low remaining tracer concentrations (Figure 14C).
12
Figure 14. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Case 4, pumping station located in the south
compartments of the ML (A, 12 days, B, 30 days and C, 50 days).
Figure 15. Location of hypothetical tidal inlet located aross the barrie island at South Cocoa Beach
(Model Run 5).
13
Figure 16 summarizes the results of the Model Run 5 experiment. After 30 days of
simulation, reductions in tracer concentration can be seen in the Sebastian Inlet area and in the
and South Cocoa Beach area of the IRL. After 150 days of simulation the flushing influence of
both inlets merge and extend into the Banana River compartment of the IRL. Completion of the
model run at 340 days produces flushing effects to the north end of the Banana Rive. However,
the north compartment of the IRL included in Grid 2 does not flush. Since no water level
condition was specified at the north boundary of Grid 2 and the Canaveral barge canal extension
,was not included in the grid, the lack of flushing of this compartment just to the south of
Titusville may not be realistic.
Figure 16. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Case 5, tidal inlet located at South Cocoa beach (A 30 days, B 90 days and C, 340 days).
conveyance channel across Cape Canaveral compared to the length of the inlet across the barrier
island at South Cocoa Beach.
Figure 17. Configuration of Model Run 7, hypothetical opening of the Port of Canaveral water locks
Figure 18. Predicted tracer concentration for Model Case 5, Canaveral locks open (A - 30 days, B 90
days and C, 340 days).
15
Figure 20. Predicted tracer concentration for the Model Run 7, wider Sebastian Inlet at day 0 (A), day
150, and day 340 (C).
16
Flushing rates and patterns predicted for hypothetical widening of Sebastian Inlet are
similar to those predicted for the existing inlet configuration (Figures 9 and 20). After about 150
days of simulation tracer concentrations remain above 50% percent of the initial value of 20 ppt
over more than half the model domain. More reductions in tracer concentration occur after 340
days of simulation, but similar to the existing case (Model Run 2) tracer values remain well
above 50% the initial 20 ppt over much of the area.
Conclusions
Computed flushing results for existing conditions were similar previous studies, showing
that that the southern portion of the Mosquito Lagoon and the Banana River are poorly flushed at
time scales of several months or more. The Titusville area of the IRL also remained poorly
flushed in model simulations of existing conditions.
The most improved flushing rates and extent resulted from adding either a tidal inlet
inlet or pumping station connection to the coastal ocean across narrow sections of the barrier
island. A narrow tidal inlet or pumping station located in the south compartment of the
Mosquito Lagoon produced complete flushing of the lagoon and north compartment of the IRL
(Grid 1) within 70 days or less. A tidal inlet across the South Cocoa Beach barrier island also
substantially improved flushing of the Banana River included in Grid 2. Opening the water locks
at Port Canaveral also improved flushing but at a somewhat slower rate. This is attributed to the
long conveyance channel between the Port entrance and the Banana River, which may dissipate
tidal energy to a greater degree than a shorter inlet connection. Widening of Sebastian Inlet to
about twice the width at the throat section did not noticeable improve either the rate or extent of
flushing in the IRL
17
References
Buttolph. A.M., Reed, C.W., Kraus, N.C., Ono, N., Larson, M., Camenen, B., Hanson, H.,
Wamsley, T., and Zundel, A.K. 2006. Two-dimensional depth-averaged circulation model
CMS-M2D: Version 3, Report 2, Sediment transport and morphology change. ERDC/CHL
TR-06-09, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Demirbilek, Z., and Rosati, J.D. (2011). "Verification and Validation of the Coastal
Modeling System, Report 1: Executive Summary," ERDC/CHL-TR-11-10, US Army
Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Lin, L., Demirbilek, Z., Thomas, R., and Rosati III, J. (2011). "Verification and Validation
of the Coastal Modeling System, Report 2: CMS-Wave," ERDC/CHL-TR-11-10, US
Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Sanchez, A., Beck, T., Lin, L., Demirbilek, Z., Brown, M., and Li, H. (2012) CMS User
Manual (DRAFT) ERDC/CHL, US Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Sanchez, A., Wu, W., Beck, T.M., Li, H., Rosati III, J., Thomas, R., Rosati, J.D., Demirbilek, Z.,
Brown, M., and Reed, C. (2011a). "Verification and Validation of the Coastal
Modeling System, Report 3: Hydrodynamics," ERDC/CHL-TR-11-10, US Army
Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Sanchez, A., Wu, W., Beck, T.M., Li, H., Rosati, J.D., Demirbilek, Z., and Brown, M. (2011b).
"Verification and Validation of the Coastal Modeling System, Report 4: Sediment
Transport and Morphology Change," ERDC/CHL-TR-11-10, US Army Engineer
Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Wu, W., A. Sanchez, and M. Zhang. 2010. An Implicit 2-D Depth-Averaged Finite-Volume
Model of Flow and Sediment Transport in Coastal Waters. June 30 July 5, 2010,
32ndInternational Conference on Coastal Engineering (ICCE 2010) Shanghai, China.
Zarillo, G., T.V. Belanger, K. Zarillo, J. Rosario-Lantin and D. McGinnis. 2011. The
Development of a Hydrologic Model for Mosquito lagoon in Canaveral National Seashore.
Natural Resources Report to the National Park Service. Contract No. N5180070017.
18