Hydrodynamic modeling of the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, 2013

Dates

Start Date: 2013-05-09
End Date: 2013-06-15
Publication Date: 2017

Citation

Stevens, A.W., Gelfenbaum, G., MacMahan, J., Reniers, A.J.H.M., Elias, E.P., Sherwood, C.R., Carlson, E.M., 2017, Oceanographic measurements and hydrodynamic modeling of the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, 2013: U.S. Geological Survey data release, http://dx.doi.org/10.5066/F7NG4NS1.

Summary

A process-based numerical model of the mouth of the Columbia River (MCR) and estuary, Oregon and Washington, was applied to simulate hydrodynamic conditions for the time period of the Office of Naval Research-funded River and Inlets Dynamics (RIVET II) experiment between May 9 and June 15, 2013. The model application was constructed using Delft3D, an open-source software package used to solve the unsteady shallow water equations to simulate water motion due to tides, waves, wind, and buoyancy effects (Lesser and others, 2004). This portion of the USGS data release describes the model application for this experiment and presents input files necessary to run the Delft3D model. Model Description The model application for this study [...]

Summary

A process-based numerical model of the mouth of the Columbia River (MCR) and estuary, Oregon and Washington, was applied to simulate hydrodynamic conditions for the time period of the Office of Naval Research-funded River and Inlets Dynamics (RIVET II) experiment between May 9 and June 15, 2013. The model application was constructed using Delft3D, an open-source software package used to solve the unsteady shallow water equations to simulate water motion due to tides, waves, wind, and buoyancy effects (Lesser and others, 2004). This portion of the USGS data release describes the model application for this experiment and presents input files necessary to run the Delft3D model.

Model Description

The model application for this study was adapted from Elias and others (2012) who provide a detailed description of the model formulations and setup. Changes were applied to the existing model grid and boundary conditions, as described below, to simulate hydrodynamics in quasi-real time for the time period of the RIVET II field experiment. A curvilinear grid consisting of approximately 68,500 grid cells was used to simulate hydrodynamics throughout the MCR and adjacent coast and estuary (fig. 1). Ten equally spaced vertical sigma layers were used to simulate 3D effects within the model domain. The grid was aligned with coastal engineering structures including the three primary jetties, as well as several training dikes in the vicinity of Baker Bay. Flow through the structures was limited in the model using thin dams (no transmission). The spatial extent of the grid was expanded in the ocean, extending roughly 150 km and 100 km north and south of the MCR, respectively.

Figure 1. Maps of the computational grid used in the model application of the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington. The grid resolution in B was reduced by a factor of 3. The locations of measurement sites used for model input and calibration are shown in A and B.

The model bathymetry was derived from recent datasets including the swath bathymetry collected as part of this study (Gelfenbaum and others, 2015). Additional bathymetric data used in the model setup included swath bathymetry collected by NOAA between 2007 and 2009 (online data available at https://maps.ngdc.noaa.gov/viewers/bathymetry/) and unpublished single beam bathymetry collected in 2004 and 2012 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A previously published DEM of the lower river (http://www.estuarypartnership.org/lower-columbia-digital-terrain-model) was used for the tidal river between the Astoria Bridge and upstream boundary. A regional digital terrain model (Love and others, 2012) was used in areas where more-recent datasets were not available. The source bathymetry data were converted to a common horizontal datum (NAD83, CORS96) and the land-based North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), projected in the Cartesian UTM Zone, 10, meters coordinate system, and interpolated onto the computational domain of the model (fig.2). Deep areas associated with the Astoria submarine canyon were removed from the model bathymetry to improve stability along the oceanic boundaries.

Figure 2. Map showing the bathymetry used for the Delft3d model of the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington.

Oceanic boundaries of the MCR model were forced using astronomic tidal constituents initially derived from the TPXO 7.2 global tide model (Egbert and Erofeeva, 2002) and adjusted during calibration. An initial vertical offset of 1.15 m (positive up) derived from NOAA VDatum (version 3.2; http://vdatum.noaa.gov/) was applied at the oceanic boundary to account for the difference between local mean sea level and NAVD88. Water levels in the MCR and estuary are influenced by coastal processes such as regional upwelling and downwelling events that induce variations at subtidal frequencies (MacMahan, 2016). Oceanic subtidal variations were imposed as at the oceanic open boundary as a time-varying correction to the astronomic tides. The subtidal time-series was derived from observations of water levels at NOAA stations 9440910 (Toke Point, WA) and 9437540 (Garibaldi, OR). Water-level time series from the two stations were obtained for 2013 and a low-pass filter was applied to remove fluctuations at tidal frequencies. The low-pass filtered values from both stations were highly correlated, and an average for the two stations was applied to the oceanic model boundaries. The landward boundary was forced with a time-series of river discharge measured at 30 min intervals at the USGS river gauge 14246900 (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/uv?site_no=14246900), located at the Beaver Army Terminal near Quincy, Oregon. The oceanic and landward boundaries were prescribed with uniform salinities of 33 and 0 psu, respectively. The effects of wind, waves, and variations in temperature on circulation were neglected in the present model application.

Model Calibration

Water-level dynamics in the MCR and estuary are controlled by various processes including tides, river discharge, atmospheric forcing, and to a lesser degree hydropower operations (Jay and others, 2015). Analyses of long-term records collected in the study area (Jay and others, 2015) suggest that tides dominate lower estuary, accounting for 60-70% of the total water-level variance. Therefore, accurate modeling of tidal propagation is essential to simulate hydrodynamics in the MCR. Tidal propagation into inlets like the Columbia River is modified by bed friction, topographic funneling, and opposing river flow. While river flow and topographic variability are well represented in the model by recent high resolution inputs, bottom roughness is poorly constrained. Previous modeling studies of the MCR and estuary found that tidal propagation is sensitive to bed roughness (Elias and others, 2012).

Tidal propagation in the estuary was calibrated using the Manning roughness coefficient as the primary calibration parameter. Simulated water levels were compared against time-series measurements of observed water levels from four locations throughout the study area (Table 1, fig. 1) for the time period spanning the RIVET II experiment simulations (May 9, 2013 to June 15, 2013). The sensitivity of tidal propagation to bottom roughness was examined for a range of Manning roughness coefficients between 0.0202 and 0.0260 in a series of six otherwise identical simulations. A Manning roughness coefficient of 0.0218 best represented mean water levels and variance throughout the domain. Additional adjustments to the oceanic boundary conditions were applied to the model using this roughness coefficient. First, the mean water-surface elevation applied at the oceanic boundary, or so-called A0 astronomic constituent, was adjusted to account for the offset between mean sea level and the model bathymetry datum, NAVD88. The original A0 estimated from VDatum, as previously mentioned, was adjusted to match water-level observations at Astoria. Next, harmonic tidal analysis was performed (Pawlowicz and others, 2002) on the simulated and observed water levels over the analysis time frame. Tidal constituents applied at the boundary were corrected using measurements obtained at Astoria. The final calibrated model accurately simulated water levels at each of the four observation stations with total RMSE less than 10 cm.

Table 1. List of tidal water-level stations used for calibration of the Delft3d model. Station locations are labeled in figure 1.
Map Label	Longitude (deg. E)	Latitude (deg. N)	Data Interval (s)	Agency	Agency Station ID	Reference Elevation (m)	Station Datum	Datum Offset (m, STND-NAVD88)
Asto	-123.76830	46.20720	360	NOAA	9439040	0.0	MLLW	0.061¹
Skama	-123.45650	46.27030	360	NOAA	9440569	0.0	CRD	0.3383²
Wauna	-123.40900	46.16160	360	NOAA	9439099	0.0	CRD	0.4023²
Beaver	-123.18350	46.18120	600	USGS	14246900	-0.3048	NGVD29	0.6325³

¹Offset between Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) and the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 derived from National Geodetic Survey Tidal Elevation database (http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/Tidal_Elevation/)
²Offsets between the Columbia River Datum (CRD) and NAVD88 were provided by the Army Corps of Engineers Portland District (written communication)
³Offset between NGVD29 and NAVD88 were computed using VDatum (http://vdatum.noaa.gov/)

Digital Data

The hydrodynamic model was run on Delft3d-Flow version 6.01.07.3574. Model input files compatible with this windows executable are provided below in the zip archive "mcr13_hydromodel_input.zip".

Selected model output files are provided in netCDF format. Gridded data for a subset of model parameters including, water levels, velocities, salinity, and depth are provided at 1-hr intervals throughout the simulation. The gridded data were separated into six files with each file representing seven days of model output to reduce the size of individual files. In addition to the gridded data, time-series data at selected locations including the three tripods deployed for this study and water-level stations used for model calibration, are provided at 10-min intervals in a single file for the entire simulation time period.

References

Egbert, G.D., and Erofeeva, S.Y., 2002, Efficient inverse modeling of barotropic ocean tides: Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, v. 19, p. 183-204.

Elias, E.P.L, Gelfenbaum, G., and Van der Westhuysen, A.J., 2012, Validation of a coupled wave-flow model in a high-energy setting; The mouth of the Columbia River: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 117, C09011.

Gelfenbaum, G.R., Finlayson, D.P., Dartnell, P., Carlson, E., Stevens, A.W., 2015, Bathymetry and backscatter from 2013 interferometric swath bathymetry systems survey of Columbia River Mouth, Oregon and Washington: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7T72FHB.

Jay, D.A., Leffler, K.L., Diefenderfer, H.L., Borde, A.B., 2015, Tidal-fluvial and estuarine processes in the lower Columbia River; I. Along-channel water level variation, Pacific Ocean to Bonneville Dam: Estuaries and Coasts, v. 38, p. 415-433.

Lesser, G.R., J.A. Roelvink, J.A.T.M. van Kester, and Stelling, G.S., 2004, Development and validation of a three-dimensional morphological model: Coastal Engineering, v. 51, p. 883–915.

Love, M.R., Friday, D.Z., Grothe, P.R., Carignan, K.S., Eakins, B.W., and Taylor, L.A., 2012, Digital elevation model of Astoria, Oregon; Procedures, data sources and analysis. NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center. 30 p.

MacMahan, J., 2016, Observations of oceanic-forced subtidal elevations in a convergent estuary: Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, v. 181, p. 319-324.

Pawlowicz, R., B. Beardsley, and S. Lentz, 2002, Classical tidal harmonic analysis including error estimates in MATLAB using T_TIDE: Computers and Geosciences, v. 28., p. 929–937.

Contacts

Point of Contact :: PCMSC Science Data Coordinator
Originator :: Andrew Stevens, Guy R Gelfenbaum, Jamie MacMahan, Ad Reniers, Edwin P Elias, Christopher R Sherwood, Emily Carlson
Metadata Contact :: PCMSC Science Data Coordinator
Publisher :: U.S. Geological Survey
USGS Mission Area :: Natural Hazards
SDC Data Owner :: Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Distributor :: U.S. Geological Survey - ScienceBase

Attached Files

sorting

Metadata First

Recent First

Alphabetical

Click on title to download individual files attached to this item.

mcr13_hydromodel_ts.nc “NetCDF time-series model data ”		206.13 MB	application/x-netcdf
mcr13_hydromodel_metadata.xml Original FGDC Metadata	View	32.66 KB	application/fgdc+xml
mcr13_hydromodel_bathy.png “Image of model bathymetry”		1.55 MB	image/png
mcr13_hydromodel_grid.png “Image of model grid”		2.96 MB	image/png
mcr13_hydromodel_0613.nc “NetCDF gridded data”		401.64 MB	application/x-netcdf
“NetCDF gridded data”		1.34 GB	application/x-netcdf
“NetCDF gridded data”		1.34 GB	application/x-netcdf
“NetCDF gridded data”		1.34 GB	application/x-netcdf
“NetCDF gridded data”		1.34 GB	application/x-netcdf
“NetCDF gridded data”		1.34 GB	application/x-netcdf
mcr13_hydromodel_input.zip “Zip file containing model input files”		9.39 MB	application/zip

Hydrodynamic modeling of the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, 2013

Dates

Citation

Summary