ESTIMATION OF FAR-FIELD DILUTION IN OCEAN

WASTE DISCHARGES

By G. V. Bogle, ~ I. A. Valioulis, 2 and L. Meiorin 3

ABSTRACT: Realistic simulation of far-field effluent concentrations depends on

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

proper representation of the spatial and temporal variability of the flow field in
the vicinity of the outfall. In this paper, a numerical procedure is presented that
uses recorded current data to develop a flow field spanning the wider area of
discharge. Information is extracted from recorded current meter data by means of
the statistical method of principal components; a finite element hydrodynamic
model is used to generate continuous flow fields. The advection and dispersion of
the effluent is simulated as a series of puffs emitted at regular intervals at the point
of discharge. The puffs are tracked as they move under the influence of currents,
and the effluent concentration at a given location at any time is calculated by adding
up the contributions from all puffs. The effect of reentrainment of previously
discharged effluent in reducing near-field dilution is accounted for. An example
application of the proposed model to an outfall in San Pedro Bay is reported.

INTRODUCTION

E n v i r o n m e n t a l implications of ocean waste discharges are addressed by

regulatory r e q u i r e m e n t s on initial dilution and allowable levels of effluent
constituent concentrations in p r o t e c t e d zones such as bathing beaches and
biological habitats. Reliable numerical models, known as near-field models,
have been d e v e l o p e d for the estimation of the initial dilution for an outfall
discharging into a clean ocean (Muellenhoff et al. 1985). This initial dilution
d e p e n d s on the geometric characteristics of the outfall and the diffuser,
which can be controlled by engineering design, and on the ambient current
and density at the discharge location. The transport and dispersion of the
effluent away from the zone of initial dilution d e p e n d s on the ocean currents.
A numerical m o d e l for this phase of the mixing process is known as a far-
field model. Such a m o d e l can be used to estimate the contamination of the
shoreline, or the buildup of effluent concentration n e a r the outfall caused
by reversing currents, which m a y result in reduction of the initial dilution.
A prerequisite for a far-field m o d e l is the accurate representation of the
ocean currents in the wider a r e a of discharge. Ocean currents occur in all
length and time scales. Identifiable current structures, such as tidal currents
and o t h e r low-frequency currents, are usually i n c o r p o r a t e d directly into far-
field models; highly variable currents are r e l e g a t e d to turbulence. A dif-
fusion coefficient is used to account for the effects of currents in scales
smaller than the length and time scale used in the far-field model.
Information on a m b i e n t currents is o b t a i n e d from arrays of current meters
in the n e i g h b o r h o o d of the discharge site. R e d u c t i o n of this information to
a form suitable for use in a far-field m o d e l has been an unresolved p r o b l e m .
A probabilistic far-field m o d e l (Chin and R o b e r t s 1985) advects effluent

1prin., Water Engrg. and Modeling, 766 N. Mentor Ave., Pasadena, CA 91104.
2prin., Water Engrg. and Modeling, 766 N. Mentor Ave., Pasadena, CA.
3Assoc., Engrg.-Sci., Inc., 9404 Genesee Ave., La Jolla, CA 92037.
Note. Discussion open until May 1, 1993. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on April 1, 1991.
This paper is part of the Journal of Waterway,Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering,
Vol. 119, No. 1, January/February, 1993. 9 ISSN 0733-950X/93/0001-0015/$1.00
+ $.15 per page. Paper No. 1630.
15

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 particles using the entire current record, which is divided into a deterministic
and a random component. To obtain current velocities at locations other
than the current stations, interpolation and spatial homogeneity in the long-
shore direction are used. The use of the entire current time series in this
way avoids parameterization of the diffusive process. A weakness of the
approach, however, is the interpolation and extrapolation of the current
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

meter records, which may lead to gross violation of the law of water mass
conservation and disregards the local bathymetry. Other probabilistic models
(Koh 1988) suffer from the same drawbacks.
To give credible results, extrapolation of currents from a finite number
of current stations to other locations must be performed in a manner that
satisfies the hydrodynamic equations of mass and momentum conservation.
In other words, a continuous, time-varying flow field must be generated
that reproduces as well as possible the recorded currents at the current
stations. The flow field must span the area where the effluent may migrate
in significant concentrations.
In this paper, a far-field model is presented that synthezises the collected
ambient current data to create a continuous, time-varying flow field in the
wider area of discharge. The resulting flow field approximates the recorded
current data at the current meter stations. An effluent-tracking model is
then used to predict the advection and dispersion of the effluent within the
spatially and temporally varying flow field. An application of the model in
San Pedro Bay is used to illustrate the method.

THE PROPOSED MODEL

The development of a continuous flow field that reproduces recorded
data can be a formidable numerical problem. Realistic flow fields can be
developed with relative ease in enclosed seas and estuaries when the currents
are tidally induced and two dimensional (Fisher 1981). A long, open ocean
boundary, however, presents particular difficulties. The correct represen-
tation of open ocean boundary conditions of the finite element or finite
difference grid, being used to represent the area being modeled, remains
unresolved (Noye 1987). The variability in the recorded current data, which,
unlike tidal currents, span a wide range of time and length scales, and the
finite number of locations where such data are available, adds to the dif-
ficulty of Creating a numerical flow-field representative of the oceanic con-
ditions. When the ocean is density stratified, its three-dimensional structure
complicates the problem further.
The approach proposed here deals with these difficulties using the fol-
lowing numerical models:

1. A current analysis model, which is used to analyze the recorded current

data by means of principal components and to establish predominant flow
patterns.
2. A hydrodynamic finite element model, which is used to produce con-
tinuous flow patterns in accord with the recorded data at current meter
stations.
3. An effluent tracking model, which is used to calculate the advection
and dispersion of effluent subjected to ambient currents and turbulence.

The flow field generated by the hydrodynamic model is two dimensional.

In a well-mixed ocean, this assumption does not compromise the results.
16

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 In a density-stratified ocean, the problem can be rendered two dimensional
by selecting the depth layer above or below the thermocline, where the
discharge plume is likely to be trapped. Further advection and dispersion
of the plume are assumed to be confined within this depth layer. Current
data recorded at the corresponding depth are used.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Current Analysis Model

The first step in the generation of a flow field from current time series
recorded at a finite number of locations involves the identification of velocity
changes that occur simultaneously at all or several stations. This is accom-
plished by the statistical method of principal component analysis. The si-
multaneous velocity changes are expressed in terms of sets of standard
deviations and directions of current speed at each station. Each set, called
mode or flow patterns, represents a portion of the total variance at all current
stations. For any one mode, the standard deviation of current speed and
its direction at each current station represent the contribution of that mode
to the current at the station. At any instant in time, the actual current at
each station is obtained by scaling the standard deviations with the mag-
nitude of the time-dependent principal component.
In the principal component method of analysis (Koh 1977), covariations
between the u- and v-components of velocities of all possible current meters
are analyzed, and a pattern is identified that corresponds to the greatest
covariance (first principal component or first mode). This pattern is then
subtracted from the time series, and the resulting time series are examined
to identify the pattern of the great covariance (second principal component
or second mode), and so on, until all variances of the original current series
are accounted for. For example, considering four current meters at the same
water level, a total of eight modes, or flow patterns, will be obtained. These
flow patterns are time dependent and may be used to characterize the
seasonal pattern of the flow in the area of current meter deployment.
The principal component analysis is performed using subtidal currents,
that is, currents with frequencies lower than the tidal frequency. Tidal and
supratidal frequencies are removed from the current time series by means
of a cosine-Lanczos filter and added to the synthetic flow field at a later
stage.

Current Synthesis and Hydrodynamic Model

Flow fields are created by extrapolating the information provided by the
principal component analysis to the entire ocean area, where the effluent
might circulate. This extrapolation is performed by means of a hydrodynamic
numerical model that obeys the laws of mass and momentum conservation.
The hydrodynamic model used is the depth-averaged, finite element hy-
drodynamic model RMA-2V (Thomas and McAnally 1985). RMA-2V solves
the nonlinear depth-averaged Navier-Stokes equations using eddy viscos-
ities to represent turbulent diffusion. RMA-2V uses a finite element grid
to solve for velocity and water depth in time and space. The finite element
grid can consist of elements of irregular shape and variable size, thus en-
abling a very accurate representation of the shoreline and bathymetry.
By means of the hydrodynamic model, a steady-state flow field is created
that reproduces the standard deviations and directions of current speed at
all stations for any one flow pattern. The steady-state flow field is trans-
formed into a time-varying flow field by scaling all current vectors with the
magnitude of the corresponding principal component. Flow fields for several
17

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 flOW patterns are then superimposed to create a synthetic flow field that
approximates the real oceanic flow field.
If all flow patterns identified in the principal component analysis were
superimposed, a flow field would have been created that reproduces exactly
the recorded currents at the current stations. In practice, only the first few
modes reveal current structures that can be reproduced numerically as a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

continuous flow field. The rest of the flow patterns usually are too irregular,
and represent largely stochastic low-frequency currents. These residual cur-
rents will introduce random perturbations in the pathways of the effluent.
Neglecting these residual currents is not a serious compromise, since the
structure-revealing modes often account for 80-90% of the total variance.
A flow field can be generated in the hydrodynamic model by imposing a
specified water elevation at the boundaries of the grid, a flow input or output
at one or more nodes of the grid, or a wind velocity on the water surface
of some area of the grid. The method of flow-field generation is not im-
portant as long as the flow field reproduces currents at the stations with a
relative strength and direction corresponding to the desired flow pattern.
(In other words, the hydrodynamic model is being used as a sophisticated
interpolation-extrapolation tool that takes into account the bathymetry and
shape of the coastline. It is not claimed that the actual forces that give rise
to the measured currents are the same as the mechanisms adopted in the
model to reproduce the flow field.)
Generating the desired flow pattern can require a lengthy process of trial
and error. Familiarity and experience with the hydrodynamic model reduces
the effort considerably. Expediting this process is crucial, since many flow
fields may be required, for example, two or three flow patterns for each
time period of analysis.
Tidal and supratidal currents are superimposed directly onto the synthetic
subtidal current field. The hydrodynamic model is used to generate two
continuous flow fields corresponding to the two principal directions of high-
frequency (i.e., tidal frequencies and above) currents at the most offshore
station where the influence of the shoreline is least. This approach often
reduces to generating a longshore and cross-shore current. These steady-
state currents are then converted to time-varying currents by scaling the
flow field with the magnitude of the high-frequency current at the offshore
station.
The synthetic subtidal and tidal/supratidal flow fields are superimposed
to create a single synthetic flow field for each time period. The synthetic
fields may not reproduce exactly the actual current at a randomly selected
location in the area of interest. They do, however, reproduce the subtidal
currents at the current meter stations while, at the same time, satisfying the
hydrodynamic equations of continuity and momentum. The synthetic flow
fields represent a legitimate extrapolation of recorded current information
from a limited number of stations to the wider area of discharge.
The selection of the length of the current time series for which flow
patterns are developed demands consideration. A very long time series will
likely result in a large number of identifiable flow patterns, each responsible
for a small fraction of the total variance. Such flow patterns often represent
structures that cannot be easily modeled as continuous flow fields. On the
other hand, a very short time series may have no statistical significance. A
good approach is to select time periods or analysis that reflect seasonal
variations. In practice, the length of the time series is often dictated by the
availability of continuous data records at various stations.
18

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 Effluent Tracking Model
The continuous flow fields will advect and disperse the effluent. A nu-
merical model was developed that tracks the effluent through the flow field
and is capable of calculating the effluent concentration within the ocean
area covered by a finite difference grid.
The computer model, which is called T R A C K E R , simulates the contin-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

uous discharge of effluent as a series of puffs released at the site of the

diffuser. The subsequent motion of the puffs under the influence of ocean
currents is simulated in the model. Since the puffs are emitted at regular
intervals, a large number of puffs must be tracked simultaneously. At any
time, the effluent concentration at a given location is estimated by adding
up the contributions from all puffs that are close enough to have an influence
at that location.
In simulating the motion of an effluent puff, the computer model keeps
track of the location of the center of the puff. The movement of a puff
center over a time step is computed from the currents that are present at
that time and at that location. The length of a simulation run is determined
by the available current data. When a puff goes outside of the finite dif-
ference grid, it continues to be tracked, using extrapolation from the currents
on the boundary of the grid. The coastline outside the grid is assumed to
be straight and parallel to the long axis of the grid. The current at a point
outside the grid is taken to be the same as the current at the nearest point
on the boundary of the grid.
While the puffs are carried about under the influence of ocean currents,
they also mix with the ambient water and spread out both horizontally and
vertically, thereby becoming more diluted. This spreading effect, or diffu-

FIG. 1. Site Map Showing Locations of Outfail and Current Meters

19

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 SURFACECURRENTS
~&
.~olO~ ~ ~ CM-1 longshore

CM 1 cross-shore
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

> -~o,~
~'~Eliiil
3oOos.~ u CM-2 longshore

CM-2 cross-shore
~ 18,o

~oo CM-3 longshore~ I[~

~ 3o.a CM-5 cross-shore

6.o
o -6,

olo ~do sdo 9;.0

Time (days)

FIG. 2. Measured Ocean Currents in San Pedro Bay (12/15/89 to 3/15/90) at Three
Current Stations. Positive Current is Toward North or East.

sion, is accounted for in the model by specifying the rates at which the puff
grows in the horizontal and vertical directions. The 4/3 law is used for the
horizontal diffusion coefficient (Fisher et al. 1979); alternatively, a constant
diffusion coefficient, or a formulation based on the diffusion velocity concept
[often recommended for coastal waters (Hendricks, personal communica-
tion, 1990)] could be used. A constant vertical diffusion coefficient is used
following Koh and Fan (1970).
The initial size, concentration, and trapping layer of a puff are determined
by an initial dilution model that accounts for the ambient current at the
diffuser location. From this point on, the model moves the puff around and
makes it grow at the predetermined rate. Within the puff, effluent concen-
tration is allowed to vary with distance from the puff center according to
the Gaussian distribution.
Additional features of the model include use of reflection of puffs at solid
boundaries (i.e., coastline) and provision for bacterial die-of. The finite
difference grid used in the tracking model spans the same area as the finite
element grid of the flow-field calculations.
The foregoing briefly summarizes the way in which the fate of discharged
effluent is simulated by tracking the motion of puffs of effluent. An addi-
tional component is included in the model to account for reentrainment.
Reentrainment occurs when previously discharged effluent is swept back to
the diffuser, changing the ambient water in the vicinity of the diffuser from
20

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 3. Standard Deviations of Contribution of First (Solid Lines) and Second

(Dashed Lines) Principal Component (Mode) to Currents

3o0 First Principal Component ~ /'/~\J1

!". ..... !.1

ii: Second Principal Component
18o

-18.
> - ~ o , ~

Time (doys)

FIG. 4. Variation of First and Second Principal Component with Time

pure seawater to seawater that already contains effluent in some concen-

tration. The effect of the effluent in the ambient water available for dilution
is to increase the effluent concentration in the initial plume. The elevation
of effluent concentration in the plume means that the effective initial dilution
is reduced. (Effective dilution is defined here as the ratio of the effluent
concentration in the pipe to the effluent concentration in the plume, ac-
counting for reentrainment.) While the details of the procedure used to
incorporate the effects of reentrainment into the computation of effective
initial dilution are too complex to report here ("Effluent" 1990), the basic
idea is fairly simple. The puff method yields an estimate of the concentration
21

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 5. Finite Element Grid

of effluent in the vicinity of the diffuser at any time, resulting from previous
discharge. This ambient concentration then modifies the effective initial
dilution achieved by the diffuser. Because the degree to which previously
discharged effluent is carried back to the diffuser depends on the current
patterns, which are constantly changing, the resulting effective dilution is a
quantity that also varies throughout the period of the simulation.

APPLICATION TO SAN PEDRO BAY

The method was used in the assessment of the water-quality impact of a

proposed outfall discharging secondary effluent in San Pedro Bay. The
bathymetry and the locations of one candidate outfall and four current meter
stations are shown in Fig. 1. Current data were recorded over a period of
eight months (December 1989-August 1990). At each current station, two
current meters were deployed at depths of l l - m and 25-m below mean low-
low water (MLLW). The current records were divided into eight month-
long periods for the analysis. The discussion here focuses on the first three
months. Initial dilution calculations showed that the effluent will surface
during these months; therefore, the current data recorded at the upper water
column were used in the analysis. All results and figures referred to hence-
forth are based on measured currents at the l l - m depth.
The time series of raw current data at three stations are shown in Fig. 2.
The gaps in the data reflect a less-than-perfect data recovery, a very common
occurrence in field-data acquisition efforts. The principal component anal-
yses of the filtered time series (i.e., the subtidal frequency part), performed
for each month separately, revealed two flow patterns that accounted for
about 80% of the total variance. The predominant mode was longshore in
all three periods, but the relative strength of the longshore current at each
station varied each month. The second mode was characterized by an abrupt
current reversal between the two offshore stations CM-2 and CM-3. The
standard deviations and directions of subtidal current speed contributed by
the first two modes for the first month are shown in Fig. 3. The time variation
of the strength of the subtidal flow patterns is reflected in the plot of the
first and second principal components versus time, shown in Fig. 4. A
22

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

~ I / / / / / / l / / l l l l i / ~

FIG. 6. Longshore Current Field Generated by Hydrodynamic Model with Super-

imposed Standard Deviations of Contribution of First Principal Component to Cur-
rents9 First Month (Arbitrary Scale)

. . . . . ~" . . . . . . .LL:
. . . . . . . \ ~ ///f':----~ . . . . . . . ,

. . . . . . / _ ;;
. . . . . . " s ~ " " J.//~A%(~'~ .'-- x s. ~ ,
. . . . . . . . ~ . . . . /'l t ~---.~ TYl 'l t , , , ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 7 {\"------.Sc~'Sl I t ~ , ,

FIG. 7. Gyre-like Current Field Generated by Hydrodynamic Model with Super-

imposed Standard Deviations of Contribution of Second Principal Component to
Currents. First Month (Arbitrary Scale)

negative value of the principal c o m p o n e n t indicates that the currents in Fig.

3 reverse direction.
The hydrodynamic model was used to generate flow fields that reproduced
the relative strength and direction of the currents at the stations 9 The finite
element grid used in the model is shown in Fig. 5. For the three months,
it was necessary to generate six different flow fields. Two such flow fields
are shown in Figs. 6 and 7 for the first and second mode in the first month.
The standard deviation of current speed, which the current field attempts
to reproduce, are also shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
23

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 raw current t.s.
{C ~} i=1,2,3

I[ o 'aoo iltor]l
high frequency t.s. subtidal~t.s.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

station CM-3 all stations

{ c . 3} = { c ~} - { c 0 ) < {CLI} i=1,2,3
.~'
c r o s s - s h o r e { V cross}
II o lysis II

2 m o d e patterns: 2 P.C. time series:

m o d e 1 = long-shore long-shore {ptO~}
mode 2 = gyre gyre {pgyr~}

2 flow fields:
long-shore F [~
gyre F gyre
I

subtidal flow f~leld time t"

F L (t) = plO~ (t) FL~g+ ~gyre(t) F ~re

c r o s s - s h o r e F cr~

high frequency flow field, time t:

F,(t) = V ~ VCr~ cr~

total flow field

F(t) = FL(t) + F"(t)

FIG. 8. Sequence of Steps in Flow-Field Generation

1
In the case of the three longshore flow fields, the desired current speeds
at the three stations were matched by a combination of choice of wind
forcing and adjustment of the bottom friction parameter. For these cases,
the shore-parallel ocean boundary was changed to a wall (flow parallel to
the boundary), and longshore flow was created by imposing a uniform wind
field, while maintaining fixed and equal water surface elevation on the east
and west open boundaries. For the three gyre-like flow fields, the entire
ocean boundary was made into a wall, and varying wind speeds were applied
to selected nodes. In all cases, the flow fields that yielded station currents
approximating the values derived in the principal component analysis were
arrived at through a process of trial and error.
The part of the each current time series containing tidal and supratidal
frequencies, which will be referred to henceforth as the high-frequency part,
is the difference between the raw time series and the subtidal time series
obtained by low-pass filtering. These high-frequency components of the
current data are not easy to handle in a systematic manner, since they are
poorly correlated at the different stations. The approach adopted in this
project was to focus on reproducing measured currents at one location,
station CM-3. The principal directions of the recorded tidal current at station
CM-3 were determined. One of the principal directions coincided with the
24

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 SYNTHETIC S U R F A C E CURRENTS

~0o CM-1 Iongshore~

~o
"~. 18.o

-18

.~, ~ 0 . ~ CM-1 cross-shore

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

"~. la.e
E 60

> - 5 o . ~

~o0 C M - 2 longshore

-18.
..... ~ . . . . F '" '

30.0 CM-2 cross-shore

> -~o.c~

!
500
~" l&e
~. ~
C M - 3 longshore

CM-3 cross-shore
16.0

~ 18. [11 ~'IL

3o.c~e
~ , , r

Time (doys)

FIG. 9. Synthetic Currents Generated by Proposed Method at Locations of Three

Current Stations

direction at that location of the mode-1 velocity field shown in Fig. 6;

therefore, this flow field was used to extrapolate the longshore component
of CM-3 high-frequency current. To account for current components per-
pendicular to the longshore direction, a cross-shore velocity field was gen-
erated using the hydrodynamic model. An oscillating solution was obtained
by applying a sinusoidal variation of water-surface elevation along the shore-
parallel part of the ocean boundary, with a period of 12 hr. A snapshot of
the velocity field at the instant of peak currents was selected, with a current
direction at station CM-3 roughly perpendicular to the longshore current
direction. Synthetic high-frequency current fields were generated by re-
solving the high-frequency part of the recorded current at station CM-3 into
a long- and a cross-shore component, and using each one to scale the cor-
responding flow field.
Subtidal and tidal/supratidal synthetic current fields were superimposed
to generate flow fields for the effluent tracking model. Fig. 8 is a flowchart
summarizing the sequence of steps used to generate a total flow field. The
synthetic currents are shown in Fig. 9 for three current stations. The error
in the synthesized currents at the stations is shown in Fig. 10. The differences
at subtidal frequencies between the synthetic currents and the recorded time
series are due to neglecting the low-frequency residual currents, which are
not captured by the first two modes. At stations CM-2 and CM-1, it can be
25

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 SYNTHETIC - MEASURED SURFACE CURRENTS
-~. 3o0 CM-1 longshore

~ -18.
>

CM-1 cross-shore
300
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

"~ 18+0

C M - 2 longshore
"-~ 1B.o
Eu +. . . . , +.~J ~k~l+.tmJl
+ -+0~ "+++Tll,+l"+'r"
:;3:#
C M - 2 cross-shore

++:++ ,, , +
C M - 3 tongshore
. . . . ,,

> -3o.

20.0
C M - 3 cross-shore
18.0
E 8.o~ ..~.~ .,~,,,,~

0!0 ~60 &o g&0

TTme (days)

FIG. 10. Synthetic-Measured Currents at Locations of Three Current Stations

seen that the high-frequency current components are poorly reproduced; in

fact, at station CM-1, the standard deviation of the error is of similar mag-
nitude to that of the measured currents. These results are not surprising,
given the complexity of the actual tidal/supratidal currents and the simplistic
assumption of smooth, fixed-phase flow fields for the high-frequency cur-
rents. Since it is the subtidal currents that contribute most to the far-field
migration of the effluent, accuracy in reproducing high-frequency currents
was not considered essential in this study.
Effluent tracking simulations were performed to calculate the spreading
of the effluent concentration in San Pedro Bay and to estimate the reduction
in the initial dilution caused by previously discharged effluent. To facilitate
the spatial and temporal interpolation of currents required in T R A C K E R ,
the flow fields generated by the finite element model were translated onto
a rectangular grid spanning the same region. This grid was based on a square
cell 609.8 m (2,000 ft) on the side, giving 92 cells in the longshore direction
and 55 cells in the cross-shore direction. The diffusion coefficient was as-
sumed to increase with time according to the 4/3 law. Sample dilution con-
tours at 100 hr and 200 hr after discharge are shown in Figs. 11 and 12.
These figures refer to calculations initiated at day 5 and day 60 in the
synthetic current series shown in Fig. 9. An ocean clean of effluent was
assumed at the beginning of the calculations.
In contrast to other far-field models, which typically show smoothly vary-
26

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 11. Effluent Dilution Contours. Calculation Started at Day 5 of Synthetic-

Current Series

FIG. 12. Effluent Dilution Contours. Calculation Started at Day 60 of Synthetic-

Current Series

ing concentration (or dilution) contours, the contours generated here reveal
an effluent distribution that is patchy, reflecting the spatial and temporal
variability of the currents. Patches of high effluent concentration, formed
near the outfall site during times of weak ambient current, are swept away
when the current intensifies. Such patches persist for some time, as shown
by the dilution contours in Figs. 11 and 12, while growing in extent because
of diffusion. A reversing current could bring back to the site of the outfall
effluent discharged previously, contaminating the ambient waters and re-
ducing the initial effluent dilution.
Calculations of the reduction in the initial effluent dilution were per-
formed, and the results are shown in Fig. 13, where the percent increase in
initial effluent concentration is plotted versus time. The sudden bursts of
27

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 350. -

~ 300. -
tJ
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Q)
~ 200.

L
CUISO.

Uloo.
8
M
50.

0.0.
15.
,,,,LI ,11,,
r~me (Oays)
lj
50.
,
FIG. 13, Percent Increase in Initial Effluent Concentration Caused by Reentrain-
90.

ment of Previously Discharged Effluent

concentration in this plot reflect the passage of a highly concentrated patch

of previously discharged effluent over the outfall site.

SUMMARY
This paper presented a novel approach in making use of recorded current
data to generate synthetic flow fields for use in a far-field effluent-tracking
simulation. Unlike previous models, which are based on simple interpolation
or on probabilistic techniques to create flow fields, the proposed model
makes use of the statistical method of principal components and of a finite
element hydrodynamic model to create flow fields that obey the laws of
mass and momentum conservation. For subtidal frequencies, the synthetic
flow fields reproduce very closely the recorded data at the current stations,
and extrapolate these currents in a consistent fashion over a wider area
where the effluent might migrate. The systematic treatment of tidal and
supratidal currents presents greater difficulties.
To complement the flow-field synthesis model, an effluent-tracking model
was developed that uses the synthetic flow field to simulate the advection
and dispersion of the effluent over a finite difference grid. The continuous
source of effluent is simulated by means of Gaussian puffs emitted at fixed
intervals from the outfall. The size and position of each puff is determined
by a standard initial dilution (near-field) computer model. Contributions of
all previously emitted puffs are summed up to calculate the effluent con-
centration at a location. In addition, an iterative procedure is employed to
calculate the reduction in initial effluent dilution caused by reentrainment
of ambient water contaminated by previously released puffs that are brought
back to the outfall site by reversing currents.
An example application of the proposed model in San Pedro Bay revealed
an effluent distribution that is patchy. This result is unlike the results from
previous far-field models, which typically show smoothly varying contours,
and reflects the variability of the ambient current. Although the proposed
model has not been verified yet, experience with field efforts to detect outfall
plumes suggests that the patchiness of the effluent is all too real.
28

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.

 APPENDIX REFERENCES
Chin, D. A., and Roberts, P. J. W. (1985). "Model of dispersion in coastal waters."
J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 111(1), 12-28.
"Effluent reentrainment simulations." (1990). South Bay outfall preliminary planning
study. Engineering-Science, Inc., San Diego, Calif.
Fisher, H. B., ed. (1981). "Transport models for inland and coastal waters." Proc.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Symp. on Predictive Ability, Academic Press, New York, N.Y.

Fisher, H. B. List, E. J., Koh, R. C. Y., lmberger, J., and Brooks, N. H. (1979).
Mixing in inland and coastal waters. Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
Koh, R. C. Y. (1977). "Analysis of multiple time series by principal components
with application to ocean currents off San Francisco." W. M. Keck Technical
Memorandum 77-4, California Inst. of Tech., Pasadena, Calif.
Koh, R. C. Y. (1988). "Shoreline impact from ocean waste discharges." J. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 114(4), 361-376.
Koh, R. C. Y., and Fan, L. N. (1970). "Mathematical models for the prediction of
temperature distributions resulting from the discharge of heated water into large
bodies of water." Water Pollution Control Research Series No. 16130 DWO 10/70,
Water Quality Office, U.S. Envir. Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Muellenhoff, W. P., Soldate, A. M., Baumgartner, J. D., Schmidt, M. D., Davis,
L. R., and Frick, W. E. (1985). "Initial mixing of municipal ocean discharges:
Volume I. Procedures and applications." U.S. EPA-600/3-85-O73a, U.S. Envir.
Protection Agency, Newport, Ore.
Noye, J., ed. (1987). Numerical modeling: Applications to marine systems. Elsevier
Science Publishers, New York, N.Y.
Thomas, W. A., and McAnally, W. H. (1985). "A generalized numerical modelling
system for open channel flow and sedimentation, TAB-2." IR HL-85-1, U.S. Army
Corps of Engrs., Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.

29

J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 1993.119:15-29.