Mobile Harbor, Alabama navigation study : ship simulation report

Mobile Bay is a large estuary located in the southwest corner of Alabama, which connects to the Gulf of Mexico. Mobile Harbor contains the only port in the state that supports ocean-going vessels. Some of the larger vessels calling on the port experience transit delays and limited cargo capacity, so a study was conducted by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District (CESAM), and the Alabama State Port Authority to investigate channel improvements. In 2017, the US Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) assisted CESAM in screening proposed deepening and widening alternatives in Mobile Bay by completing a Feasibility Level Ship Simulation (FLSS) study using the ERDC Ship/Tow Simulator. These lower-resolution databases from the FLSS study were used as a foundation to complete a more robust navigation study in 2020 to test the proposed modifications to Mobile Harbor. During this study, three main areas were focused on: a bend easing, a passing lane, and a turning basin. Testing of the proposed design was evaluated over the course of 2 weeks with eight pilots. Assessment of the proposed modifications was accomplished through analysis of ship simulations completed by experienced local pilots, discussions, track plots, run sheets, and final pilot surveys.

Download Full-text

Brunswick Harbor numerical model

10.21079/11681/40599 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jennifer McAlpin ◽

Jason Lavecchia

Keyword(s):

Army Corps ◽

Army Corps Of Engineers ◽

Engineer Research ◽

Corps Of Engineers ◽

Us Army ◽

Navigation Channel ◽

The Us ◽

Model Setup ◽

Hydraulics Laboratory ◽

Development Center

The Brunswick area consists of many acres of estuarine and marsh environments. The US Army Corps of Engineers District, Savannah, requested that the US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, develop a validated Adaptive Hydraulics model and assist in using it to perform hydrodynamic modeling of proposed navigation channel modifications. The modeling results are necessary to provide data for ship simulation. The model setup and validation are presented here.

Download Full-text

Difficulties Associated with Predicting Depth of Freeze or Thaw

Canadian Geotechnical Journal ◽

10.1139/t64-017 ◽

1964 ◽

Vol 1 (4) ◽

pp. 215-226 ◽

Cited By ~ 27

Author(s):

W G Brown

Keyword(s):

Theoretical Calculations ◽

Army Corps ◽

Army Corps Of Engineers ◽

Corps Of Engineers ◽

Us Army ◽

Design Curve ◽

Theoretical Support ◽

The Us ◽

Frost Penetration ◽

Small Alteration

Calculations using the Neumann solution (as modified by Aldrich) and thermal properties of soils (obtained by Kersten) show that the frost penetration depth for the same freezing index for essentially all soils with any moisture content and for dry sand and rock varies by a factor of about 2 to 1. The extremes calculated in this way bracket the experimentally determined design curve of the US Army Corps of Engineers and give it theoretical support. The theoretical calculations and additional experimental data are used as a basis for a small alteration in the slope of the design curve. This modified design curve is recommended for field use because of (1) inherent imperfections in existing theory and (2) practical limitations to precise specification of field conditions.

Download Full-text

Quantifying coastal system resilience for the US Army Corps of Engineers

Environment Systems & Decisions ◽

10.1007/s10669-015-9548-3 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 35 (2) ◽

pp. 196-208 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Julie Dean Rosati ◽

Katherine Flynn Touzinsky ◽

W. Jeff Lillycrop

Keyword(s):

Army Corps ◽

Army Corps Of Engineers ◽

Corps Of Engineers ◽

Coastal System ◽

Us Army ◽

The Us ◽

System Resilience

Download Full-text

Assessment of resistance definitions used for blast analysis of unreinforced masonry walls

International Journal of Protective Structures ◽

10.1177/2041419617697518 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 125-151 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Eric M Gagnet ◽

John M Hoemann ◽

James S Davidson

Keyword(s):

Unreinforced Masonry ◽

Degree Of Freedom ◽

Masonry Walls ◽

Army Corps ◽

Army Corps Of Engineers ◽

Corps Of Engineers ◽

Single Degree Of Freedom ◽

Us Army ◽

Single Degree ◽

The Us

Over recent decades, three distinct methods have evolved that are currently being used to generate resistance functions for single-degree-of-freedom analyses of unreinforced masonry walls subjected to blast loading. The degree of differences in these resistance definitions depends on whether the wall is assumed to be simply supported or whether compression arching forces result from rotation restraint at the supports. The first method originated in the late 1960s as a result of both experimental and analytical research sponsored by the US Department of Defense. That method, referred to as the Wiehle method, is the basis of Unified Facilities Criteria 3-340-02 and other derived analytical software such as the Wall Analysis Code developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center. The second method is based on elastic mechanics and an assumed linear decay function that follows and is the basis of the widely used Single-Degree-of-Freedom Blast Effects Design Spreadsheets software distributed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Protective Design Center. The third method is largely based on concrete and masonry behavioral theories developed by Paulay and Priestly in the early 1990s. This article systematically compares the resistance methodologies for arching and non-arching scenarios, demonstrates the implications by plugging the disparate resistance functions into blast load single-degree-of-freedom models, compares the analytical results to full-scale blast test results, and offers conclusions about the accuracy and efficacies of each method.

Download Full-text