ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No.

107

Ship Channel Design

and Operation

Task Committee
Bruce L. McCartney, Chair and Editor
Laurie L. Ebner
Lyndell Z. Hales
Eric E. Nelson

Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Ship channel design and operation/ Bruce L. McCartney, chair and editor. . . [et al.].
p. cm. — (ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice; no. 107)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-7844-0770-3
1. Channels (Hydraulic engineering)—Design and construction.
I. McCartney, Bruce L. II. Series.

TC175.S56345 2005
627
.23—dc22 2005012333

Published by American Society of Civil Engineers

1801 Alexander Bell Drive
Reston, Virginia 20191
www.pubs.asce.org

Any statements expressed in these materials are those of the individual authors
and do not necessarily represent the views of ASCE, which takes no responsibility
for any statement made herein. No reference made in this publication to any spe-
cific method, product, process, or service constitutes or implies an endorsement,
recommendation, or warranty thereof by ASCE. The materials are for general in-
formation only and do not represent a standard of ASCE, nor are they intended as
a reference in purchase specifications, contracts, regulations, statutes, or any other
legal document.
ASCE makes no representation or warranty of any kind, whether express or
implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or utility of any infor-
mation, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this publication, and assumes
no liability therefore. This information should not be used without first securing
competent advice with respect to its suitability for any general or specific applica-
tion. Anyone utilizing this information assumes all liability arising from such use,
including but not limited to infringement of any patent or patents.
ASCE and American Society of Civil Engineers—Registered in U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.

Photocopies: Authorization to photocopy material for internal or personal use un-

der circumstances not falling within the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act is
granted by ASCE to libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clear-
ance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service, provided that the base fee of
$25.00 per article is paid directly to CCC, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923.
The identification for this book is 0-7844-0770-3/05/ $25.00. Requests for special
permission or bulk copying should be addressed to Permissions & Copyright Dept.,
ASCE.

Copyright C 2005 by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

All Rights Reserved.

ISBN 0-7844-0770-3
Manufactured in the United States of America.
 MANUALS AND REPORTS
ON ENGINEERING PRACTICE
(As developed by the ASCE Technical Procedures Committee, July 1930,
and revised March 1935, February 1962, and April 1982)

A manual or report in this series consists of an orderly presentation

of facts on a particular subject, supplemented by an analysis of limitations
and applications of these facts. It contains information useful to the average
engineer in his everyday work, rather than the findings that may be useful
only occasionally or rarely. It is not in any sense a “standard,’’ however;
nor is it so elementary or so conclusive as to provide a “rule of thumb’’ for
nonengineers.

Furthermore, material in this series, in distinction from a paper (which

expressed only one person’s observations or opinions), is the work of a com-
mittee or group selected to assemble and express information on a specific
topic. As often as practicable the committee is under the direction of one or
more of the Technical Divisions and Councils, and the product evolved has
been subjected to review by the Executive Committee of the Division or
Council. As a step in the process of this review, proposed manuscripts are
often brought before the members of the Technical Divisions and Coun-
cils for comment, which may serve as the basis for improvement. When
published, each work shows the names of the committees by which it was
compiled and indicates clearly the several processes through which it has
passed in review, in order that its merit may be definitely understood.

In February 1962 (and revised in April 1982) the Board of Direction

voted to establish:

A series entitled “Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice,’’ to

include the Manuals published and authorized to date, future Manuals
of Professional Practice, and Reports on Engineering Practice. All such
Manual or Report material of the Society would have been refereed in a
manner approved by the Board Committee on Publications and would
be bound, with applicable discussion, in books similar to past Manu-
als. Numbering would be consecutive and would be a continuation of
present Manual numbers. In some cases of reports of joint committees,
bypassing of Journal publications may be authorized.
 MANUALS AND REPORTS
ON ENGINEERING PRACTICE
No. Title No. Title
13 Filtering Materials for Sewage Treatment 76 Design of Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Plants Plants
14 Accommodation of Utility Plant Within the 77 Design and Construction of Urban
Rights-of-Way of Urban Streets and Stormwater Management Systems
Highways 78 Structural Fire Protection
35 A List of Translations of Foreign Literature 79 Steel Penstocks
on Hydraulics 80 Ship Channel Design
40 Ground Water Management 81 Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Augment
41 Plastic Design in Steel: A Guide and Precipitation
Commentary 82 Odor Control in Wastewater Treatment
45 Consulting Engineering: A Guide for the Plants
Engagement of Engineering Services 83 Environmental Site Investigation
46 Pipeline Route Selection for Rural and 84 Mechanical Connections in Wood
Cross-Country Pipelines Structures
47 Selected Abstracts on Structural 85 Quality of Ground Water
Applications of Plastics 86 Operation and Maintenance of Ground
49 Urban Planning Guide Water Facilities
50 Planning and Design Guidelines for Small 87 Urban Runoff Quality Manual
Craft Harbors 88 Management of Water Treatment Plant
51 Survey of Current Structural Research Residuals
52 Guide for the Design of Steel Transmission 89 Pipeline Crossings
Towers 90 Guide to Structural Optimization
53 Criteria for Maintenance of Multilane 91 Design of Guyed Electrical Transmission
Highways Structures
55 Guide to Employment Conditions for Civil 92 Manhole Inspection and
Engineers Rehabilitation
57 Management, Operation and Maintenance 93 Crane Safety of Construction Sites
of Irrigation and Drainage Systems 94 Inland Navigation: Locks, Dams, and
59 Computer Pricing Practices Channels
60 Gravity Sanitary Sewer Design and 95 Urban Subsurface Drainage
Construction 96 Guide to Improved Earthquake
62 Existing Sewer Evaluation and Performance of Electric Power Systems
Rehabilitation 97 Hydraulic Modeling: Concepts and
63 Structural Plastics Design Manual Practice
64 Manual on Engineering Surveying 98 Conveyance of Residuals from Water and
65 Construction Cost Control Wastewater Treatment
66 Structural Plastics Selection Manual 99 Environmental Site Characterization and
67 Wind Tunnel Studies of Buildings and Remediation Design Guidance
Structures 100 Groundwater Contamination by
68 Aeration: A Wastewater Treatment Process Organic Pollutants: Analysis and
69 Sulfide in Wastewater Collection and Remediation
Treatment Systems 101 Underwater Investigations
70 Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Water 102 Design Guide for FRP Composite
Requirements Connections (ON HOLD)
71 Agricultural Salinity Assessment and 103 Guide to Hiring and Retaining Great Civil
Management Engineers
72 Design of Steel Transmission Pole 104 Recommended Practice for Fiber-
Structures Reinforced Polymer Products for
73 Quality in the Constructed Project: A Guide Overhead Utility Line Structures
for Owners, Designers, and Constructors 105 Animal Waste Containment in Lagoons
74 Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line 106 Horizontal Auger Boring Projects
Structural Loading 107 Ship Channel Design and Operation
 CONTENTS

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii

1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 National Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Economic Value to the Nation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 Project Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.6 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 PROJECT DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Design Philosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Typical Project Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 Preliminary Design Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 U.S. Coast Guard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.6 Baseline Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.7 Typical Engineering Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.8 Cargo Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3 SHIP CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.2 Methodology and Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.3 Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Dry Bulk Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2.1 Description and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2.2 Ship Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3 Container Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.1 Description and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.2 Future Ship Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
v
vi CONTENTS

3.4 Liquid Bulk Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.4.1 Description and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.5 Navy Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.6 Other Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.6.1 Description and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.7 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.8 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

4 FACTORS INFLUENCING CHANNEL DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4.1 Water Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.2 Tide Predictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3 Wind, Waves, and Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.4 Design Vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.5 Sedimentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.6 Accident Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.7 Environmental Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.8 Local Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.8.1 Pilot Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.8.2 U.S. Coast Guard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.1 Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2 Purpose of Estuary Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.3 Classification Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.3.1 Topographic Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.3.2 Classification by Salinity Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.4 Flow Predominance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.5 Null Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.6 Salinity Effects on Shoaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.7 Summary of Estuary Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.8 Tide-Generating Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.9 Tide Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.10 Types of Tides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.11 Spring and Neap Tides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.12 Influence of Moon and Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.13 Tide Prediction Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.14 Nonastronomical Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.15 Waveforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.16 Winds and Wind-Generated Waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.17 Setup, Setdown, and Storm Surge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.18 Seiche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.19 Freshwater Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.20 Episodic Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
 CONTENTS vii

5.21 Changes in Sea Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.22 Apparent Sea Level Rise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.23 Sea Level Rise Impact on Navigational Channels . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.24 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6 CHANNEL DEPTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.1 Channel Depth Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.2 Design Ship Loaded Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.3 Effects of Fresh Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.4 Ship Motion from Waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.5 Squat Underway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.6 Safety Clearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.7 Advance Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.8 Dredging Tolerance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.9 Nautical Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.10 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

7 CHANNEL ALIGNMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.2 Variable Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.3 Straight Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
7.4 PIANC Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

8 CHANNEL WIDTHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
8.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
8.2 Maneuvering Lane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
8.3 Ship Clearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.4 Bank Clearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.5 Channel Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.6 Preliminary Design Guidelines for Straight Segments . . . . . 66
8.7 Preliminary Design Guidelines for Channel Bends . . . . . . . . 69
8.7.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
8.7.2 Channel Width in Turns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
8.7.3 Turn Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
8.7.4 Successive Turns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8.8 Channel Width Final Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

9 SEDIMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
9.1 Native Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
9.2 Riverine Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
9.3 River Reaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
9.4 Littoral Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
viii CONTENTS

9.5 Predictive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

9.6 Channel Shoaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
9.7 Beach Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
9.8 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

10 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

10.1 Dredges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
10.2 Hopper Dredges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
10.3 Hydraulic Pipeline Dredge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
10.4 Dustpan and Sidecasting Dredges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
10.5 Mechanical Dredges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
10.6 Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
10.7 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

11 JETTIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
11.1 Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
11.2 Spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
11.3 Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
11.4 Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
11.5 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

12 SHIP LOCKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

13 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

13.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
13.2 Turning Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
13.2.1 Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
13.2.2 Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
13.2.3 Shoaling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
13.3 Anchorages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
13.4 Salinity Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
13.4.1 Ship Locks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
13.4.2 Submerged Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
13.5 Diversion Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
13.6 Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
13.6.1 Horizontal Clearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
13.6.2 Vertical Clearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
13.6.3 Bridge Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
13.6.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
13.7 Hurricane Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
13.8 Sediment Traps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
13.9 Training Dikes and Revetments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
 CONTENTS ix

13.9.1 Dikes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

13.9.2 Revetments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
13.10 Port Berthing and Maneuvering Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

14 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

14.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
14.2 Altered Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
14.3 Dredging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
14.4 Dredged Material Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
14.4.1 Open Water Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
14.4.2 Upland or off Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
14.4.3 Agitation Disposal Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
14.5 Jetty Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
14.5.1 Water Quality Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
14.5.2 Biological Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
14.6 Recent Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
14.6.1 Houston Ship Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
14.6.2 Columbia River Ship Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
14.7 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

15 MODEL STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

15.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
15.2 Physical Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
15.3 Numerical Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
15.4 Ship Simulator Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
15.5 Vessel Traffic Flow Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

16 ICE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

16.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
16.2 Design of Channels with Ice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
16.3 Locks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
16.4 Erosion and Sediment Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
16.5 Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
16.6 Mitigation of Ice Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
16.7 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

17 ECONOMIC OPTIMUM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

17.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
17.2 Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
17.3 Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
17.4 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
x CONTENTS

17.5 Transportation Savings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

17.6 Evaluation Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
17.7 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

18 CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
18.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
18.2 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

19 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

19.1 Weather and Channel Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
19.2 Ship Movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
19.3 Pilotage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
19.4 Normal Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
19.5 Maintenance as a Result of Extreme Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
19.5.1 Volcanoes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
19.5.2 Earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
19.5.3 Major Floods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
19.5.4 Hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
19.6 Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
19.7 Operation and Maintenance Plan (O&M) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

20 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT

NAVIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
20.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
20.2 Maritime Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
20.2.1 Aids to Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
20.2.2 Private Aids to Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
20.2.3 Western Rivers Marking System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
20.2.4 Notice to Mariners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
20.2.5 Ice Breaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
20.2.6 Bridge Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
20.2.7 Waterways Management/Vessel Traffic Service . . . . 179
20.3 Maritime Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
20.3.1 Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
20.3.2 Response (Search and Rescue) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
20.3.3 Casualty Investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
20.4 Maritime Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
20.4.1 General Maritime Law Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
20.4.2 Drug Interdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
20.4.3 Alien Migrant Interdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
20.4.4 EEZ and Living Marine Resource Law/Treaty
Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
 CONTENTS xi

20.5 National Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188

20.6 Protection of Natural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
20.6.1 Pollution Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
20.6.2 Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
20.7 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

21 NOAA ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION . . . . . . . 191

21.1 National Ocean Service (NOS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
21.2 Authorizing Mandate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
21.3 Nautical Charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
21.4 Tides and Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
21.5 Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
21.6 Global Positioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
21.7 Coast Pilot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
21.8 Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
21.9 Marine and Coastal Weather Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
21.10 Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

22 CASE HISTORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

22.1 Case History 1—Grays Harbor, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
22.2 Case History 2—Norfolk Harbor, Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
22.3 Case History 3—Savannah Harbor, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
22.4 Case History 1—Grays Harbor, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
22.4.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
22.4.2 Proposed Channel Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
22.4.3 Hydrodynamic and Wind Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
22.4.4 Design Vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
22.4.5 Channel Depth Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
22.4.6 Channel Width and Alignment Design . . . . . . . . . . 203
22.4.7 Outer Harbor Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
22.4.8 Inner Harbor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
22.4.9 Hydrodynamic and Sediment Studies . . . . . . . . . . . 204
22.4.10 Dredge Material Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
22.4.11 Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
22.4.12 Relocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
22.4.13 Project Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
22.5 Case History 2—Norfolk Harbor and Channels, Virginia 206
22.5.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
22.5.2 Proposed Channel Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
22.5.3 Hydrodynamic and Wind Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
22.5.4 Design Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
22.5.5 Channel Design Simulation Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
xii CONTENTS

22.5.6 Channel Depth Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

22.5.7 Channel Width Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
22.5.8 Hydrodynamic and Sedimentation Studies . . . . . . 210
22.5.9 Dredge Material Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
22.5.10 Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
22.5.11 Relocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
22.6 Case History 3—Savannah Harbor Widening Project
Savannah, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
22.6.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
22.6.2 Proposed Channel Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
22.6.3 Hydrodynamic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
22.6.4 Design Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
22.6.5 Channel Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
22.6.6 Project Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

Appendix A BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Appendix B DIMENSIONS OF SELECTED U.S. DEEP-DRAFT
NAVIGATION ENTRANCE CHANNELS IN 1993. . . 221
Appendix C ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS
LEARNED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

COLOR PLATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . following 130

 PREFACE

This manual was completed by ASCE’s Task Committee for updating Man-
ual 80, Ship Channel Design, 1993. Task Committee members were: Bruce
L. McCartney, Chairman and Editor; Dr. Laurie L. Ebner, Portland District,
Corps of Engineers; Dr. Lyndell Z. Hales, Waterways Experiment Station,
Corps of Engineers; and Eric E. Nelson, Seattle District, Corps of Engineers.
Chapter 3, “Ship Characteristics’’ was authored by Ogden Beeman, Mar-
itime Consultant. Eric Christensen, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, au-
thored Chapter 20, “Coast Guard Activities that Support Navigation.’’ All
other chapters and appendices were assembled by Bruce L. McCartney.
Additional contributions were made by the following: Dr. Cyril Galvin,
Coastal Engineer; Andrew M. Tuthill, Cold Regions Research and En-
gineering Laboratory, Corps of Engineers; R. Anne Sudar, Institute for
Water Resources, Corps of Engineers; and Charles C. Calhoun, Jr., President
COPRI, 2003–2004.
Waterways Committee Review was performed by the following:
Dr. Anatoly B. Hochstein, Director, National Ports and Waterways Insti-
tute; Dr. B. K. Lee, Consulting Engineer; and E. Clark McNair, Jr., Consult-
ing Engineer.
Peer review was performed by the following: Dr. James R. Houston,
Director, Engineering Research Directorate, Corps of Engineers; Doug
Thiessen, Chief Harbor Engineer for Port of Long Beach, California; Dr.
William H. McAnally, Research Professor, Mississippi State University;
and Dr. Kees d’Angremond, Professor Emeritus, Delft University of Tech-
nology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Department of
Hydraulic Engineering.

xiii
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

This manual provides an overview of the design process and operation

of deep-draft navigation projects. Information was obtained from many
sources with significant contributions from recent U.S. Army Corps of En-
gineers Manuals, publications of the Permanent International Association
of Navigation Congresses (PIANC) and the following web sites:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers COE, Digital Visual Library
www.images.usace.army.mil
U.S. Coast Guard U.S. Coast Guard Digital
www.equi.uscg.mil
National Oceanic and Atmospheric NOAA Photo Library
Association www.photolib.noaa.gov
It should be noted that web site addresses can be temporary and may dis-
appear in the long term as agencies reformat navigation information.
English measurement units are used for the U.S. navigation system and
design guidance, metric is used for guidance reported by PIANC (1 m =
3.3 ft).
Ship Channel Design and Operation (ASCE Manuals and Reports on En-
gineering Practice No. 107) was prepared by a task committee of the Wa-
terways Committee, which is part of the Coasts, Oceans, Ports, and Rivers
Institute.
This manual provides an overview of the design process and operation
of deep-draft navigation projects. The reliability of ship channels is not
only of immense importance to commerical navigation but is also vital to
national defense interests for rapid deployment of Navy, Army, and Coast
Guard vessels.
The manual covers channel design practice, dredging and disposal, con-
struction practices, operation activites, environmental considerations, and
contributions of the United States Coast Guard and National Oceanic and

1
2 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 1-1. Long Beach Harbor (spl.usace.army.mil).

 INTRODUCTION 3

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to navigation. Channel design prac-

tice includes both the United States experience, primarily by the United
States Army Corps of Engineers and methods used in other parts of the
world as reported by the Permanent International Association of Naviga-
tion Congresses (PIANC).
This manual is intended as a design guide for practicing engineers, a
reference for government agencies involved with the design and operation
of deep draft navigation systems, and a text book for classes or short courses
related to navigation engineering.

1.2 BACKGROUND

The reliability of ship channels is not only of immense importance to

commercial navigation but is also vital to our national defense interests for
rapid deployment of our Navy vessels.
Ship channels are the connecting link between the ocean shipping lanes
and coastal or inland deep-water ports. These channels can be very short
when the port is immediately behind coastal breakwater, such as in the
Port of Long Beach (Figure 1-1).
The ship channel also could wind its way up a major river, like the 106-
mi-long Columbia River channel that serves the Port of Portland, Oregon
(Figures 1-2 and 1-3).
The 965-ft Evergreen Class container ship (4,200 TEU Capacity) is an
example of a commercial vessel that uses ship channels (Figure 1-4).

FIGURE 1-2. Columbia River Ship Channel (COE, Digital Visual Library).
4 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 1-3. Ports of Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington (Port of

Portland/Spencer Gross Photography).

1.3 NATIONAL DEFENSE

A major component of the U.S. national defense system is the Navy

war ships. The U.S. Army also has a considerable fleet of vessels. These
ships need a home port in a protected harbor. Ship channels provide the
vital link between the home port and the vessel operation in the open
ocean. Therefore, a safe and reliable navigable channel is crucial to the
rapid deployment of the Navy and Army fleets. Figure 1-5 shows one of
the aircraft carriers in the Chesapeake Bay ship channel.
The investment in these military ships is considerable. For example,
the eight Nimitz-Class aircraft carriers cost about $4.5 billion each. The
27 Ticonderoga Class cruisers cost about $1 billion each.

1.4 ECONOMIC VALUE TO THE NATION

Despite the growth in high-tech communication and high-speed trans-

portation, the nation’s ports and waterways remain the crucial backbone
 INTRODUCTION 5

FIGURE 1-4. Evergreen Class Ship in Columbia River Channel (Port of

Portland/Ackroyd Photography).

FIGURE 1-5. USS George Washington at Hampton, Virginia (Navy

Newstand www.news.navy.mil).
6 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

of our economy. Nearly 25 billion tons of cargo are shipped to, from, or
through 40 states each year.

r More than 95% of imported and exported goods to and from overseas
move by ship, including nine million barrels of oil per day.
r The U.S. marine transportation industry supports nearly $1 trillion
in commerce and 13 million jobs.
r The unit cost to transport commodities over inland waterways is
two to three times lower than that of other forms of transportation.
The ability to ship goods safely and reliably via inland waterways
translates into about $7 billion annually in transportation savings for
American businesses.
r More than 67% of all consumer goods purchased by Americans pass
through U.S. harbors.

An example of regional economic values is the Port of Houston, Texas.

This port moved a total of 148 million tons of cargo in 1996 and is respon-
sible for some 200,000 jobs. In 1996, 5,400 ships and 50,000 barges moved
on the channel.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. interna-
tional traffic is expected to double by 2020.

1.5 PROJECT RESPONSIBILITIES

The deep-draft navigation system in the United States includes most

major coastal ports, some river systems, such as the Mississippi to Baton
Rouge and Columbia to Portland, and the Great Lakes. The major entities
in design and operation of this system include the following:

r U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—channel design, construction, and

maintenance.
r U.S. Coast Guard—safety issues, aids to navigation, accident as-
sessments, search and rescue, and vessel traffic control at some
projects.
r NOAA—charts, global positioning systems (GPS), and weather fore-
casts.
r Ports Authorities—design, operation, and maintenance of port facil-
ities.
r Users—shipowners and captains who are responsible for safe ship
operations.
 INTRODUCTION 7

1.6 SCOPE

This manual focuses on ship channels 20 ft and deeper. Design of the

inland navigation system, primarily 9-ft-deep channels for barge traffic, is
presented in ASCE Manuals and Reports No. 94, Inland Navigation: Locks,
Dams, and Channels (1998). Small boat navigation (recreation and fishing
boats) is covered in ASCE Manuals and Reports No. 50, Planning and Design
Guidelines for Small Craft Harbors (1994).
These three manuals present the latest information on design and oper-
ation of the U.S. navigation system. The ultimate goal of these and future
publications on the navigation system is to provide a body of technical
literature for development of a “Navigation Engineering’’ specialty in the
Civil Engineering profession.
The major subjects covered in this manual include the following:

r Design philosophy
r Vessel characteristics
r Hydraulic and weather conditions
r Channel dimensions
r Environmental sustainability
r Dredging and disposal
r Model studies
r Coast Guard activities
r NOAA activities
r Construction
r Operations and maintenance
r Lessons learned
r Case histories

The subject of port and harbor safety, for example, potential terrorist at-
tacks, is an ongoing effort and is beyond the scope of this manual.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 2
PROJECT DESIGN

2.1 DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

The design of a navigation project requires an understanding of the

problem, the assembly and evaluation of all pertinent facts, and the devel-
opment of a rational plan. The design engineer is responsible for develop-
ing the design rationale and sufficient alternatives so that the economically
optimum plan is evident and the recommended plan is substantiated. To
accomplish this goal, the design must recognize the needs and practices of
the user.
In developing or improving deep-draft waterways, safety, efficiency, re-
liability, and cost must be considered. Before optimizing the project with
respect to cost, the designer must first consider safety and efficiency. The
safety of the project will depend on the size and maneuverability of the
vessels that will use the waterway, the size and type of channel, the aids to
navigation, the effects of currents and wind, and the experience and judg-
ment of pilots. Because evaluating the human factor (i.e., experience and
judgment) is difficult, potentially hazardous conditions should be elimi-
nated insofar as practicable. Therefore, the optimum design of a specific
waterway requires an evaluation of the physical environment, currents,
and weather conditions, as well as the judgment of safety factors that de-
pend on pilot response (ASCE, 1993).
A recent report, Breakwaters and Closure Dams (d’Augremond, 2001),
which explores design philosophy and design process, further devel-
ops this subject. Although this book focuses on breakwaters and closure
dams, the same philosophy and process can be applied to ship channels.
Following are some excerpts from d’Augremond’s report (pages 23, 24,
and 25):

When designs of specific structures are studied, one must realize that
for any structure the design process follows certain procedures and
routines. It is important that such procedures and routines are stan-
dardized in the design organization, especially when large numbers

9
10 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

of people are participating in the design. It is essential that each in-

dividual speaks the same language, uses the same terminology, and
understands what is expected in each phase of the design process. To
familiarize its students with a particular design philosophy, the Fac-
ulty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences attempts to use the same
systematic lines through the curriculum. In following this philoso-
phy, it is essential that the subject of the design is something that
is required in practice, in this case a harbor or a closure dam. The
objective of the design process is to find a concept that meets the re-
quirement(s) and that can be realized, not only in terms of technical
feasibility, but also in terms of cost-benefit ratio and social and legal
acceptance. This implies that the solution of the design process must
combine the following elements:

Functionality
Technology (what is feasible)
Environmental (what is allowed or accepted)
Cost and benefit
Paper work (drawing board)
Matter (actual construction)

During the design process, one can also recognize certain phases that
in some countries are related to the general conditions of contract be-
tween employer and consultant. Therefore the phases may vary from
country to country. The contractual contents of each phase are subject
to modifications in the same way. A logical set of phases include:

Initiative
Formulation of the ultimate goals of the design object as part of the
system.
Feasibility
Review of the system with respect to technical, economic, social,
and environmental consequences and feasibility. Requirements are
formulated on the component level.
Preliminary Design
Giving shape to the system on broad lines, including determina-
tion of the exact functionality of the components and definition of
requirements at the element level.
Final Design
Composition of a set of drawings and specifications for the system in
which the final shape of the components is fixed and the functionality
of the elements is determined.
Detailed Design
Composition of a set of drawings and specifications in which the
final shape of the elements is fixed.
 PROJECT DESIGN 11

2.2 TYPICAL PROJECT ELEMENTS

Figure 2-1 shows an example of a generic harbor that defines many of

the typical project elements discussed below.

1. Entrance channel. A navigable channel connecting the ocean or lake

to an enclosed body of water, such as a bay, estuary, river, or mouth
of a navigable stream.
2. Jetties. Structural features that provide obstructions to littoral drift,
control entrance currents, prevent or reduce shoaling in the entrance
channel, maintain channel alignment, and provide protection from
waves for navigation.
3. Interior channel. The access channel system inside a body of water
that connects the entrance channel (inlet or bar) to a port or harbor
with appropriate ship facilities. Interior channels usually are located
to provide some protection from waves and weather, and are present
in bays, estuaries, or rivers.
4. Turning basin. An area that provides for the turning of a ship (bow to
stern). Turning basins usually are located at or near the upper end of
the interior channel and possibly at one or more intermediate points
along long channels.
5. Anchorage area. An area where ships can lie at anchor to wait for favor-
able conditions for a bar crossing or to wait for berthing areas to be-
come available. These anchorage areas are usually in wave-protected
areas. However, they can be offshore, such as the anchorage areas off
the mouth of the Mississippi River.
6. Special features. Specifically designed structural elements that provide
for special-project design requirements, such as salinity control bar-
riers, ship locks, ice control booms, bridge pier protection (fendering
systems), hurricane barriers, sediment traps, and other similar con-
trol works.

2.3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN CHECKLIST

The following checklist should be used during preliminary project de-

sign:

1. Review appropriate literature.

2. Consult with local port authority, pilot associations, and harbor
terminal users.
3. Collect and analyze pertinent physical and environmental data.
4. Review appropriate local pilot or captain ship maneuvering strategy
and evaluate existing project navigation conditions.
 TIDAL
PROJECT BAY
DEPTH
PREVAILING WIND CONTOUR
AND SEAS

TI
CU
BUOYS

DA
RR
OR

L
EN
JETTY BEACONS

TS
RANGE MARKERS

L
SEA

A
ENTRANCE

IN
M
CHANNEL ANCHORAGE

R
TE
BUOY AREA
JETTY

EB
L
MANEUVERING DOCKS

CH
TS
MARINA

DA
T

B
AN

FL

AN
AREA

EN
TI
N
MI

OO

NE
RR
O
ED L

L
CU

D
TURNING

C
PR EL

TI RE

LI
U
BERTHING

D N

M
W

R
A T
S

IT
BASIN

L S
BASIN

S
BAR OR ENTRANCE INTERIOR
CHANNEL CHANNEL DOCKS

PORT
OCEAN

PROJECT
DEPTH BEACH
CONTOUR

FIGURE 2-1. Generic Harbor with Typical Project Elements (EM1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).
 PROJECT DESIGN 13

5. Estimate volume and type of ship traffic and largest ships to be

accommodated.
6. Estimate volume and type of commodity that will be moved.
7. Estimate amount, type, and frequency of hazardous cargo (e.g., liq-
uefied natural gas [LNG], ammunition, oil, radioactive material)
movement, and evaluate special requirements.
8. Select and list the required project design operational conditions.
9. Select channel layout and alternative dimensions to be considered
and determine advantages and disadvantages with annual costs.
10. Assess any adverse environmental and other impacts.
11. Define environmental mitigation needs and enhancement opportu-
nities, especially beneficial uses for dredged material.
12. Review accident records for existing ship channels that are to be
enlarged.
13. Security issues.

Economic analysis and cost/benefit studies are not discussed in this

manual.

2.4 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

The amount and type of ship traffic that will use the navigation channel
are very important in project planning and design. Economic considera-
tions of the project will require information on commodities that will be
moved by the ship traffic. The designer will use the information on traffic
type to select the design ship—usually the largest major commodity mover
expected to most frequently use the project improvements. The amount of
ship traffic and the length of the access channel will determine the mode of
navigation traffic to be provided, whether one- or two-way. Consideration
also should be given to providing one-way traffic for large ships and two-
way traffic for smaller vessels, and to providing channel segments with
passing lanes. The designer should consider a stepped channel with dif-
ferent depths, with the deeper portion intended for loaded ships and the
shallower for empty ships. The project layout should be prepared using
various channel alignments and dimensions, each alternative evaluated
on the basis of economic efficiency involving commodity tonnage to be
moved, ship transit time, safety, environmental and social impact, and
construction and maintenance costs.
The channel design should permit safe passage of the design vessel, at
the helm of a competent pilot or captain, under most weather conditions.
The probability of unsafe conditions for a design vessel that might use the
channel only a few times a year could have some effect on channel design.
Extreme weather or flow conditions should be analyzed for their effects
on the design vessel and smaller commercial vessels, and the frequency of
14 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

unsafe periods should be indicated. Weather conditions exceeding those

that produce unsafe conditions at sea should be considered but should
not dictate design. For example, hurricane winds and waves would not
normally be selected as the design conditions for a navigation channel, as
a ship at sea would not normally enter a channel under adverse weather
conditions.
An example of evaluating the safety of channel and port configurations
has been developed by Delft University (Groenveld, 2003). This method
involves a vessel traffic-flow simulation model (SHIPRISK) to estimate
the number of encounters (i.e., potential accidents) during a given period
under different weather conditions and changing traffic patterns. (See
Chapter 15 for further discussion.)

2.5 U.S. COAST GUARD

The local Coast Guard office should be consulted during the prelimi-
nary and final design processes. Coast Guard recommendations should
be considered for navigation channel and ship safety, ship maneuver-
ability, navigation traffic management, navigation operational restrictions,
stable and unstable shoal locations, and optimum placement of aids to
navigation.
The Coast Guard and Port Authorities are primarily responsible for
harbor safety. Because of the present possibility of terrorist attacks, port
safety will be an evolving effort.

2.6 BASELINE STUDIES

The design of a navigation project requires an analysis and evaluation

of baseline information, which includes the following:

1. Design vessel and other deep-draft vessels using waterway

a. Dimensions (length, beam, draft)
b. Maneuverability and speed
c. Number and frequency of use (congestion), including recreational
traffic
d. Type of cargo handled
2. Other traffic using waterway
a. Types of smaller vessels and congestion
b. Cross traffic
3. Weather
a. Wind (velocity, direction, and duration)
b. Waves (height, period, direction, and duration)
 PROJECT DESIGN 15

c. Visibility (rain, smog, fog, and snow, including duration and fre-
quency of impairment)
d. Ice (frequency, duration, and thickness)
e. Abnormal water levels (high or low)
4. Characteristics of channel
a. Currents, tidal and river (velocity, direction, and duration)
b. Sediment sizes and area distribution, movement, and serious
scour and shoal areas
c. Type of bed and bank (soft or hard)
d. Alignment and configuration
e. Freshwater inflow
f. Tides
g. Salinity
h. Dredged material disposal areas
i. Temperature
j. Water quality
k. Biological population (type, density, distribution, and migration)
l. Obstructions (e.g., sunken vessels and abandoned structures)
m. Existing bridge and power line crossings (location, type, and clear-
ances)
n. Channel constrictions
o. Submerged cables and pipelines
p. Significant cultural sites (e.g., sites of archeological interest)

2.7 TYPICAL ENGINEERING STUDIES

Following are examples of topics that require detailed coverage in nor-

mal navigation project design. More information on some of these topics
is presented later in this manual.

1. Design ship
2. Water level
3. Currents
4. Waves
5. Sedimentation
6. Channel depth
7. Channel width
8. Channel alignment
9. Dredging and disposal
10. Turning basins
11. Entrance channel
12. Jetties and breakwaters
13. Environmental impacts
16 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

14. Accident record

15. Pilot interviews
16. Aids to navigation
17. Model testing
a. Hydraulic/tidal
b. Sedimentation
c. Salinity
d. Water quality
e. Ice
18. Ship-simulation study
19. Construction
20. Operation and maintenance plan

2.8 CARGO TYPES

Cargo is commonly classified as one of the following:

1. Bulk—loose, flowable material that can be loaded or unloaded by

pipeline, conveyor, or grab (clamshell). These include dry products,
such as grain, coal, ore, and chemicals, and wet products, such as
petroleum products, chemicals, and water.
2. Container (also called Lift-on/Lift-off, or Lo/Lo)—material con-
tained in closed boxes. These usually include perishable (e.g., ba-
nanas) or higher-value goods (e.g., electronics) that need protection
from damage and pilferage.
3. Breakbulk—material loaded and unloaded piecewise by lifting and
lowering. These materials often are palletized, and include metal
sheets, rolls, and bars; lumber; and food products.
4. Roll-on/Roll-off (Ro/Ro)—vehicles or wheeled containers that can be
rolled on and off via a ramp. These include cars/trucks, agricultural/
military vehicles, and loaded truck trailers.
5. Walk-on/Walk-off (Wo/Wo)—human or animal passengers.
6. Lighterage—the process of transferring cargo from a large ship to a
smaller ship. This operation is used when the harbor channel depths
are less than the draft of the loaded ship.
 Chapter 3
SHIP CHARACTERISTICS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

3.1.1 Purpose
The design navigation features for channels and harbors generally begin
with selection of the ship types to be accommodated. For single-purpose
channels or port facilities, this is accomplished by selecting the ship type
to be served as the basis for design. For multiuser channels, it is necessary
to look at an array of ships. The selection of the “design ship” often is com-
plicated by the need to look ahead and forecast the future ship types that
are expected to use the channels and facilities. Because marine terminals
and facilities generally have design lives of 25 years and more, this aspect
of the design problem is challenging, to say the least.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe standard ship types and the
characteristics of the present world fleet, and to discuss issues affecting
the characteristics of future fleet for design purposes. It is not intended to
forecast future ship sizes for channel design purposes. That task falls to
the designer.

3.1.2 Methodology and Sources

Methodology starts with the identification of commonly accepted ship
types and categories. Note that new technologies and trades give rise to
new types of ships, for example, container and auto carriers and liquefied
natural gas (LNG) carriers. Thus, the designer must not only forecast the
size of the ships but also must, at least, consider the new types of ships that
may use the channel or harbor.
Many sources were used in the writing of this chapter. The Corps of
Engineers Water Resources Center (WRC) compiles information on ship
types and characteristics. The WRC’s primary purpose is to supply data
that can be used in economic studies of channel and harbor projects.
Clarkson Research Studies (London) publishes registers of bulk carrier
17
18 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

and container and other ships in the world fleet, with detailed descriptions
of ship characteristics. Lloyds Registry (London) is the most complete
source of ship data, compiled in three large volumes. Containerisation
International and International Bulk Shipping, as well as other maritime
publications, such as the NY Journal of Commerce, are good sources of
news on new orders and ship characteristics. Some shipbuilders post ship
characteristics on the Web or in their marketing material and are, thus,
a source of information on special ship types, such as LNG carriers. The
compilation of tables on ship dimension are from the author’s substantial
file of ship types, which are based on a number of years of maritime
consulting in the United States and abroad.
Because of the variety of information available and used, specific ref-
erences are not called out for each entry. In addition to the sources listed
earlier, Janes Merchant Ships, Ocean Ships by David Hornsby, and data from
the Port of Portland, Oregon, also were used as sources. Where character-
istics are common to many ships in the fleet, these are presented based
on data generally available through public sources. Where dimensions are
for a specific ship, the ship name is given. The selection of such ships was
purely arbitrary and used only to demonstrate the dimensions of a ship in
the size range shown.
The information in this chapter is intended to provide the designer with
an overview both of ship types and their important dimensions for channel
design. For work on a specific design project, in-depth research beyond the
scope of this chapter should be pursued. This may include checking the
references previously mentioned and talking with shipowners, operators,
and builders.

3.1.3 Presentation
The chapter is divided into sections on several common types of ocean
carriers. Included are sections on dry bulk carriers, container carriers, liq-
uid bulk carriers, and other ships, specifically auto carriers and cruise ships.
Each section includes a brief description of the purpose served by the ship
type, with some mention of its typical cargo, as well as further descriptions
of subtypes of ships within general categories, if applicable. Finally, tables
are used to summarize the primary characteristics that are needed for, or
will assist in, channel or harbor design.

3.2 DRY BULK SHIPS

3.2.1 Description and Purpose

The dry bulk ship is the most common ship in the world fleet. The most
important characteristic of this ship type is its versatility. It can be used
 SHIP CHARACTERISTICS 19

to haul mineral ores, grain, and other commodities in bulk. It also can be
used to carry forest products, including logs, chips, and packaged lumber,
as well as finished steel products. It can be adapted to carry break-bulk
commodities, that is, general cargo including commodities packaged and
shipped in bags, boxes, or loose stowed without packaging. This type of
ship also can be used to carry containers, often in conjunction with other
types of general or bulk cargo. This mixed-cargo versatility is usually a
capability of smaller ships. Larger, dry-bulk cargo ships tend to have a
single commodity capability.

3.2.2 Ship Types

The versatility of this ship type comes from its capability to carry many
types and forms of cargo. Therefore, in its basic form, the ship generally is
not modified for specific commodities. Important terminology used in the
discussion of this ship type includes the following:

1. Geared versus Gearless. A geared ship has cargo-handling gear,

which typically is a number of cranes positioned to access each hold
of the ship. These cranes can range from a simple mast and boom to
sophisticated straight-line cranes for handling containers and other
unitized cargo. The cranes may be equipped with hooks, slings, or
buckets, depending on the type of cargo to be handled.
2. Handy Size. Refers to the numerous dry bulk carriers in the world
fleet, generally weighing between 10,000 and 40,000 dead weight tons
(DWT). Ships smaller than 10,000 DWT are likely to be coasters or
small bulk carriers in regional or cabotage trades, and are not covered
in this chapter.
3. Handymax Size. Describes a carrier with a beam less than Panamax
limits but larger than the typical handy sized carrier. Typical carrying
capacities range from 40,000 to 50,000 DWT. This ship type is widely
used in trades with draft restrictions or when economic load sizes are
less than suitable for a Panamax carrier. In general, it is the largest ca-
pacity ship that can transit the Panama Canal at or near design draft.
4. Panamax. This defines a ship with the maximum beam that can transit
the Panama Canal. The Canal locks are 110 ft wide; typically a ship
has 2 ft of clearance on either side, resulting in a typical beam of 106 ft.
It should be noted that the term applies only to beam. Most Panamax
ships in the world fleet have a design draft greater than that of the
Panama Canal and will transit the canal at less than maximum load
or draft. The canal locks are 1,000 ft long, and typical draft restrictions
are in the range of 39 ft.
5. Cape Size. Refers to certain trades that do not use the Panama Canal.
But, where shipping economics call for large loads, the Cape Size ship
20 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

is used. “Cape” generally means the ship sails around the Cape Horn
in South America rather than transiting the Panama Canal. Iron ore
and coal are typical commodities carried by this size ship. There is
little incentive to build ships slightly larger than the largest Panamax–
for example, over approximately 80,000 DWT. Therefore, many Cape
Size bulk carriers start in the range of 120,000 DWT and can run up
to 300,000 DWT.
6. Suezmax. This describes a ship that can transit the Suez Canal fully
loaded. This is a ship with a draft of approximately 53 ft and a carrying
capacity in the range of 150,000 DWT.
7. Lakers. This is a special class of ship designed for use on the Great
Lakes and is unique to that trade. They are not covered in this chapter.

For channel design purposes, the important characteristics of these ships

are draft, beam, and length overall (LOA). The draft is important for chan-
nel depth and calculations of under keel clearances. The beam is important
for channel width and considerations of bank clearance and in ships pass-
ing in two way traffic. LOA is important for channel turns and provision
of turning basins for ships in constrained channels or harbors.
Draft and future draft is an important consideration for pier and wharf
design. Beam is an important consideration for cranes and other cargo

TABLE 3-1. Dry Bulk Ships.

Dimensions in Feet
Ship Types DWT LOA Beam Draft Notes

Handy Size Typicals 15,000 470 70 27

25,000 550 80 32
35,000 600 90 35
Handymax Typical 45,000 630 100 38
Panamax Typical 60,000 715 106 42
Lionsgate Bulker 69,100 738 106 44
Siboeva 83,000 810 106 48 1
Cape Size Typicals
Soma Maru 91,000 787 141 42 2
Victoria Spirit 103,000 799 138 41 2
Grafton 122,000 873 133 51
Karoo 161,000 919 148 58
SGC Capital 180,000 951 151 60
SGC Express 211,000 1024 164 60
Notes: 1. Practical size limit for Panamax.
2. Wide-beam ships, shallow draft.
 SHIP CHARACTERISTICS 21

or commodity-handling equipment. Length must be considered in berth

length and provision of mooring dolphins or devices located on or off the
wharf or pier structure.
Table 3-1 is a general guide to the important characteristics of various
bulk carriers.

3.3 CONTAINER SHIPS

3.3.1 Description and Purpose

Container ships are the dominant carrier of dry cargo in world water-
borne trade. Containerization was introduced in the 1960s and since then
essentially has replaced dry bulk and break bulk ships for carriage on inter-
national routes. The purpose of this section is to describe typical container
ships and their characteristics that affect channel design.
Container ships are described by their carrying capacity in 20-ft equiv-
alent units (TEUs). A TEU measures 8 ft (width) × 8.5 ft (height) × 20 ft
(length) and is the standard measurement unit. Other common container
lengths are 40 ft long and 45 ft long, both with 8 ft width and 8.5 ft lengths.
Ship types include:

1. Feeders versus mainline carriers. In some regions, including South-

east Asia and the Mediterranean, many small ports serve coastal and
short sea routes by use of feeder ships connecting the port to a larger
regional port, where containers are transshipped to mainline carri-
ers. The word “feeder’’ implies the service more than the size of ship,
although feeder ships generally are under 1,200 TEU capacity but can
be in the 3,000 TEU range. These feeder vessels often are ships that
have been retired from service on longer routes.
2. Geared versus gearless. Large container ships are gearless and are
dependent on shoreside cranes for loading and unloading containers.
Feeders and ships on short haul or regional routes often are geared so
they have the flexibility of calling at ports without shoreside cranes.
3. Panamax. A Panamax ship has a beam that is approximately the max-
imum width for the Panama Canal, that is, 110 ft or 106 ft beam with
clearance. Post Panamax are ships with beams greater than 106 ft.
Ships sometimes are described by how many containers they can ac-
commodate in a row, which usually is a multiple of 8 ft plus some
allowance for the structure of the ship. A Panamax ship with beam of
106 ft can accommodate 13 rows (13 ft × 8 ft = 104 ft). Note that the
number of containers in a row also governs the design of shoreside
cranes.
22 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

TABLE 3-2. Container Ships.

Dimensions in Feet
Ship Type or Name Capy TEU LOA Beam(1) Draft(2) DWT-mt

Typical Line Haul Ships

Typical Panamax
Akashi Bridge 3500 907 106 39.4 47425
Evergreen R Class 4229 965 106 41.3 49000
Typical Post Panamax
President Kennedy 4340 903 129 41.8 54665
Hyundai Baron 4469 903 122 43.7 61152
Ever Ultra 5364 936 131 41.7 63388
OOCL Shenzen 8063 1063 140 47.5 99518
Notes: 1. Over 106
is Post Panamax.
2. Salt water. Add 1
for fresh water.

3.3.2 Future Ship Sizes

At the time of writing (2003), the largest container ships on the order
books range just over 8,000 TEU capacity. There is disagreement in the
industry about future ship sizes. Ships much larger than 8,000 TEU will
require twin propulsion systems, offsetting some other economies of scale.
These large ships raise design issues for channel dimensions as well as port
crane sizes. In addition, there are market factors involved because of the
amount of cargo required to sustain the ship. On major trade routes, the
larger ships are deployed in “strings,” which refers to the number of ships
required by the carrier to provide weekly service.
One school of thought suggests that the 4,000 TEU carrier, which is the
approximate maximum capacity within Panamax beam constraints, will
dominate the “all water’’ trades between Asia and the United States East
Coast (USEC). This, of course, would likely change with the expansion of
the Panama Canal, (which is being studied but has not yet been confirmed).
This would suggest that ships in the range of 5,500 TEU would be the
larger of the ships on the Asia–United States West Coast (USWC) trade.
The 8,000 TEU ships are expected to be employed on the Asia–Europe, via
Suez Canal routes.
Table 3-2 shows the characteristics of typical container ships.

3.4 LIQUID BULK SHIPS

3.4.1 Description and Purpose

The largest of the liquid bulk carriers transport crude oil from various
origins to refineries. Many of these carriers are too large for U.S. ports
 SHIP CHARACTERISTICS 23

and call at offshore sites, where refineries are located; at U.S. ports with
natural depths suitable for the ships, such as Puget Sound in Washington;
or at offshore single point mooring systems. The most interesting ships
from the design standpoint are product carriers delivering product from
refineries and the fleet of U.S. flag carriers transporting crude from Alaska
to the U.S. West Coast.
Product carriers transport refined products from refineries to markets.
There also is a significant use of oceangoing barges in this trade. Prod-
uct carriers tend to be in the range of 40,000 DWT and can be accom-
modated in channels designed for larger container and dry bulk ships.
Conversely, crude carriers often exceed deep-draft channel dimensions,
which leads to use of offshore piers or single-point mooring transfer
systems.
Because of increased demand for energy, there is interest in the import
of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to U.S. ports. These carriers are large and
the characteristics of length, beam, draft, and exposed surface to wind are
all of interest in channel design.
Crude oil carriers have several categories. Smaller tankers are called
product tankers, and newer ships are double-hulled in accordance with
current practice and regulations. The Suezmax carrier is the largest that can
transit the Suez Canal loaded. The draft constraint is around 53 ft, which
results in ships of around 150,000 DWT. Larger crude oil carriers transit the
Suez Canal in ballast on return trips to the Middle East. Carriers in the range
of 300,000 DWT are called Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC); the largest
ships are Ultra Large Crude Carriers (ULCC), which range in sizes up to
and exceeding 500,000 DWT. Of increasing interest are LNG carriers, which
carry natural gas under pressure. They are usually rated in cubic meters of
capacity.
Table 3-3 shows characteristics of typical ships in these trades.

TABLE 3-3. Liquid Bulk Ships.

Dimensions in Feet
Ship Type or Name DWT LOA Beam Draft Comment

Torm Alice 41,000 600 106 38 Product Tanker

Neptune Auriga 102,000 790 138 48 Crude Tanker
Samuel Ginn 157,000 902 164 56 Suezmax
Tarim 300,000 1076 187 72 VLCC
Batillus 554,000 1358 206 94 ULCC
Samsung 138 68,200 914 140 37 LNG Carrier
Samsung 200 n/a 1020 158 41 LNG Carrier
24 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

3.5 NAVY SHIPS

Another important user of ship channels is the U.S. Navy, with Naval
ships coming in many sizes. Following is a list of surface ships in the U.S.
Navy active fleet:

Aircraft carriers
Ammunition ships
Amphibious assault
Amphibious command
Amphibious transport dock
Command ships
Cruisers
Destroyers
Dock landing ships
Fast combat support ships
Frigates
Landing craft, air cushioned
Landing craft, mechanized
Mark U special operations craft
Minehunter, coastal
Mine countermeasures
Patrol coastal
Rescue and salvage
Submarine tender

The largest of these ships is the Nimitz Class aircraft carrier, which is
also the largest warship in the world. This carrier class has the following
dimensions:

Length 1,092 ft
Deck Width 252 ft
Beam 132 ft
Displacement approximately 97,000 tons full load

The Navy currently has eight of these ships in active service.

Another of the larger Navy ships is the Ticonderoga Class cruiser
(27 ships in active service). This cruiser has the following dimensions:

Length 567 ft
Beam 55 ft
Displacement 9,600 tons

Additional information on Navy vessels is available at http://www.

navy.gov.
 SHIP CHARACTERISTICS 25

3.6 OTHER SHIPS

3.6.1 Description and Purpose

Of the many other types of ships in the world fleet, there are two types, in
addition to those covered earlier, that are likely to have widespread influ-
ence on channel design: auto carriers and cruise ships. These two ship types
are covered together because they have some common characteristics.
Auto carriers are special-purpose ships designed for the worldwide
trade in automobiles and light trucks. They were developed in the late 1960s
when the number of cars imported to the United States increased sharply.
Auto carriers are essentially floating parking lots with deck after deck of
auto parking places. They usually are drive-on/drive-off ships equipped
with side and stem ramps that facilitate loading and unloading. The unique
characteristic of these ships is their high sides (which protect cargo from
the weather) and shallow draft (because of the amount of air carried).
The ships often are described in terms of the number of units they can
carry; the larger ships carry a range of 6,000 units. Because of the impor-
tance of the Panama Canal in this trade, nearly all large auto carriers are
limited to the Panamax beam. The loaded drafts are in the range of 30
to 34 ft so they can be accommodated in most deep-draft channels in the
United States. The ships’ high sides also result in a very large exposure
to wind. These ships, therefore, have to be considered in channel width
design where their large exposure to wind and shallow draft may result
in difficulty maintaining a sailing track.
Cruise ships are simply one class of passenger ship. Other passenger
ships include ferries and day trip boats, which are not discussed here be-
cause they are unlikely to govern deep-draft channel design. Cruise ships
are of increasing importance in channel and harbor design because of the
size of the fleet and the tendency of ports to seek cruise ship service.
The most important feature of large cruise ships is their length and
beam, particularly for the Post Panamax fleet. For many years, the large

TABLE 3-4. Auto Ships.

Dimensions in Feet
Ship Type or Name Capy Units LOA Beam(1) Draft DWT

Delphinius Leader 5,000 656 106 33 21,514

Fidelio 5,574 623 106 29 15,861
Tanabata 5,856 622 106 33 20,082
Aida 6,118 653 106 31 29,213
Grand Pioneer 6,500 655 106 32 19,120
Note: 1. Ships tend to be Panamax beam.
26 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

TABLE 3-5. Cruise Ships.

Dimensions in Feet
Ship Type or Name LOA Beam(1) Draft GT(2)

The World 644 96 22 43,200

Disney Magic 965 106 26 83,300
Carnival Spirit 960 106 26 85,900
Norwegian Star 965 106 26 91,700
Carnival Victory 892 117 27 101,300
Grand Princess 950 132 28 109,000
Voyager of the Seas 1,020 155 29 137,300
Queen Mary II 1,132 135 33 150,000
Notes: 1. Panamax beam is 106 ft or less.
2. Ships are measured in gross tons.

ships in the fleet had Panamax beams. This has changed in recent years
with the addition of one-ocean ships or Cape Class, which require long
voyages to redeploy the ship. As is the case with auto carriers, the large
exposed surface of the ship along with the shallow draft raises concerns
about course-keeping ability. Furthermore, the wide beams of the Post
Panamax fleet can provide governing dimensions for channel width.
Large cruise ships today carry upward of 3,000 passengers; this is com-
parable to the Titanic, which was put into service in 1911. However, today’s
ships are longer and wider. The Titanic was 882 ft long, with 92-ft beam,
and 35-ft draft.
Tables 3-4 and 3-5 show the dimensions of some typical carriers in the
world fleet of auto ships and cruise ships, respectively.

3.7 SUMMARY

This chapter described the dimensions of certain ships and ship types
affecting channel design. These ships are typical of much of the world’s
fleet. However, the designer should use these ship types and characteris-
tics as the starting point for further research when performing deep-draft
channel design.

3.8 SOURCE

This chapter was authored by Ogden Beeman, Maritime Consultant,

Portland, Oregon. The U.S. Navy ships information was obtained from the
www.navy.gov web site.
 Chapter 4
FACTORS INFLUENCING CHANNEL DESIGN

4.1 WATER LEVELS

Information on maximum and minimum water levels and frequencies,

durations, and amplitudes of water-level fluctuations is needed for design
of a navigation project. Water levels can be affected by storm surges, seiches,
river discharges, seasonal lake-level changes, and ocean tides. Data on
high water levels are used to determine wave penetration and height of
jetties, training structures, and overhead obstructions. Data on low water
levels are used to determine available and needed depths for various-size
vessels.

4.2 TIDE PREDICTIONS

The National Ocean Service (NOS) predicts tide height and tide ranges.
Figure 4-1 shows spring tide ranges for the continental United States. Pub-
lished tide predictions are sufficient for many channel designs; however,
prototype observations often are required. Water-level datum generally
is selected to conform to the chart datum on applicable NOS navigation
charts for tide-affected waterways. Mean lower low water or mean low
water is normally the tidal datum plane.

4.3 WIND, WAVES, AND CURRENTS

Estimates of wind, waves, and currents are needed to determine their

effects on vessel motions and controllability, to estimate the rates of sed-
iment erosion and deposition, to determine the extent and characteristics
of salinity intrusion, and to define flushing characteristics. Historical wind
data is usually available from the National Climatic Data Center. Informa-
tion should be coordinated with the U.S. Coast Guard for any particular
problems affected by local topography. Studies should include seasonal
27
28 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 4-1. Ocean Tide Ranges.

variations, which can be significant. Currents generally are caused by tides,

tributary streams, or river discharge. Tide predictions and river flow data
will be required to determine magnitude and alignment of currents and
periods affected. Tide current predictions by NOS also are available. Wave
heights and periods can be estimated from (1) wind records, (2) proto-
type observations, or (3) regional wave records. River discharge data is
published by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Wind effects on a project include the direct forces on ships sailing
through the navigation channels and the indirect development of wind
waves in the harbor or coastal ocean region. The height of waves gener-
ated in the harbor or bay area is usually low, thus, such waves normally
have minor effects on typical design ships. However, wind waves gener-
ated by local storms near the port entrance channel (seas) may have an
impact on ships. Estimates of wind are needed for project design, mainly
because of the effect on ship motions and controllability. The following
situations are especially important and require careful consideration:

1. Tankers in ballast (light ship) condition

2. Bulk: carriers in ballast (light ship) condition
3. Automobile or car carriers
4. Container ships with containers on deck
5. Ferry boats
6. LNG and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) ships
 FACTORS INFLUENCING CHANNEL DESIGN 29

4.4 DESIGN VESSEL

The projected vessel fleet over the economic life of the project is required
for channel design and economic studies. Channel dimensions should be
selected to safely and efficiently accommodate the volume and type of
traffic anticipated. The design vessel is selected from the vessel fleet and
normally will be one of the larger vessels expected to use the channel. The
maximum-size and least-maneuverable vessels in the fleet must be able to
make a safe transit, but the following special conditions may exist:

1. Suitable wind, wave, and current conditions and visibility limitations

2. Use of high tide for additional water depth
3. One-way traffic with bridge-to-bridge communications between
other vessels
4. Speed restrictions to reduce squat, ship-generated wave heights, and
shore damage

4.5 SEDIMENTATION

The aspects of sedimentation that must be considered for deep-draft

navigation projects are: (1) characteristics of the native soils through which
the project passes; (2) characteristics of sediments introduced into the up-
per reaches of the project by riverine flows; (3) characteristics of sediments
introduced into the lower reaches of the project by littoral processes and
salinity intrusion; and (4) hydrodynamic and water chemistry conditions
in the project region.
Sediment budget and shoaling studies are needed for before- and
after-construction conditions. These studies provide the basis for estimat-
ing maintenance dredging requirements, disposal area locations, training
structures, and need for entrance sand-bypass. Shoaling rates are needed
for river expansions caused by port facilities and basins.

4.6 ACCIDENT RECORDS

Marine accident records are available from the U.S. Coast Guard. Ac-
cident data on existing navigation channel projects proposed for enlarge-
ment or improvement should be studied to determine the number, cause,
and location for analysis. In some accidents, the Coast Guard will conduct
an inquiry, which also may be valuable in determining navigation prob-
lems. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) also reviews spe-
cific accidents and develops reports and recommendations on site-specific
30 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

safety issues. Information from the local pilots and, at some ports, data
from vessel traffic services (VTS), if available, can provide valuable in-
formation in designing proposed channel improvements. The local Coast
Guard District Office and Captain of the Port should be consulted for any
available data and investigation summaries.
At present, marine risk can be addressed by model studies that calculate
the risk of vessels “meeting,’’ given a pattern of movement to and from ter-
minals. The models can be calibrated and validated with historic accident
figures and then be used to assess additional risk by changes in port de-
sign or traffic density. See Section 15.5 for additional discussion of a vessel
traffic flow model.

4.7 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

The development of a navigation channel that is larger than previously

existed in an estuary or bay could cause physical, biological, and water
quality changes affecting the ecosystem. The following physical changes
require evaluation:

1. Salinity
2. Tide heights (water levels)
3. Current velocities and duration
4. Water circulation pattern
5. Shoaling and erosion in the vicinity of the channel
6. Possible effects on adjacent shoreline resulting from changes in wave
patterns
7. Tidal flushing rate
8. Pollution dispersion rate

These changes could be negligible compared with the natural ecosystem

cross-sectional area when the channel improvement is small. When the
physical changes are estimated, a biological assessment of project effects on
estuary aquatic life is needed to determine if design changes and mitigation
measures are justified.

4.8 LOCAL COORDINATION

4.8.1 Pilot Interviews

Navigation project planners/designers should develop strong coordi-
nation with the local pilot groups throughout the project development.
Pilot interviews can be used to determine the user’s opinion on existing
 FACTORS INFLUENCING CHANNEL DESIGN 31

channel navigation safety and wind and wave conditions to be used for
design analysis as well as the feasibility and safety of proposed channel
design alternatives.

4.8.2 U.S. Coast Guard

The local U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) office also should be contacted early
in the project development to solicit views and coordination on channel
dimensions and alignment relative to safe navigation. The USCG also can
provide guidance on aids to navigation placement and waterway analysis
study results.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 5
ESTUARY HYDRAULICS

5.1 DEFINITION

An estuary is an area of interaction between salt and fresh water. It is

most commonly defined as “a semi-enclosed coastal body of water which
has a free connection with the open sea and within which sea water is mea-
surably diluted with fresh water derived from land drainage’’ (Pritchard,
1963). The majority of U.S. deep-water ports are located in this mixture
of salt and fresh water. An understanding of the hydraulic process in this
dynamic environment is essential to the development of a functional deep-
draft navigation project.

5.2 PURPOSE OF ESTUARY CLASSIFICATION

There are many types of estuaries, and design problems may vary
greatly with the type of estuary. Correct classification alerts the de-
signers to potential environmental and maintenance-dredging problems.
To more fully understand what an estuary is, a classification system
must be established. Pritchard’s definition refers to a positive estuary
(Pritchard, 1952a), an estuary in which freshwater input (river flow
and precipitation) exceeds losses as a result of evaporation. Thus, the
surface salinities in a positive estuary are lower than in the open
ocean. When freshwater input is less than freshwater losses because of
evaporation, a negative estuary results, such as the Laguna Madre in
Texas. Most estuaries are positive; however, a negative situation can
occur, resulting in different circulation patterns caused by hypersaline
conditions.

33
34 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

5.3 CLASSIFICATION OPTIONS

Estuaries also are classified by topography and salinity structure. Ratio

parameters of flow, stratification, and stratification-circulation can be used
to identify the salinity structure class.

5.3.1 Topographic Classification

Pritchard (1952b) suggested a topographic classification of three groups:
coastal plain estuaries, fjords, and bar-built estuaries.

1. Coastal Plain Estuaries. Coastal plain estuaries, or drowned river val-

leys, were formed as the melting waters from the last ice age flooded
existing river valleys. River flow is normally small compared to tidal
prism (the volume of water between high and low tides) and sedi-
mentation has not kept pace with inundation. The resulting estuary
maintained the topography of the former river valley, but is rela-
tively shallow (rarely deeper than 100 ft). There are extensive mud
flats with a sinuous, deeper central channel. Coastal plain estuaries
generally can be found in temperate latitudes. Examples include the
Chesapeake Bay estuary system in the United States and the Thames
and Mersey systems in England.
2. Fjords. Fjords, estuaries that have been formed by glacial erosion,
generally occur at higher latitudes, are relatively long and deep, and
possess a shallow sill at the fjord mouth and intersections. These shal-
low sills can restrict the free exchange of ocean and estuary waters, in
some cases producing a small tidal prism. Examples of fjords include
Alberni Inlet (British Columbia, Canada), Sogne Fjord (Norway), and
Milford Sound (New Zealand).
3. Bar-built Structures. Bar-built estuaries are formed by the same pro-
cesses as the drowned river valleys. However, in bar-built estu-
aries, sedimentation has kept pace with inundation, resulting in
a characteristic bar forming at the mouth. Associated with depo-
sitional areas, bar-built estuaries are shallow, with extensive la-
goons and waterways inside the mouth. Entrance velocities can be
quite high but quickly diminish as the estuary widens. This type
of high-volume sediment-estuary is most often found in tropical
or active coastal deposition areas. Examples of bar-built estuaries
include the Roanoke River (United States) and the Vellar Estuary
(India).
4. Other. A fourth group of estuaries includes estuaries formed by vol-
canic eruptions, faulting, landslides, or other processes.
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 35

FIGURE 5-1. Vertical Salinity Structure: Classification Depends on Salinity

Difference Between Surface and Bottom Values (EM1110-2-1607, 1991).

5.3.2 Classification by Salinity Structures

Most estuary systems are coastal plain estuaries with individually
unique salinity and flow characteristics. These estuaries can be classified
using stratification and salinity distribution as the governing criteria. The
major classifications are highly stratified, partially mixed, and well-mixed
(homogeneous) (Figure 5-l).
Classification depends on salinity difference between surface and bot-
tom values.

1. Highly Stratified. A highly stratified, salt wedge type estuary is one

in which the outgoing lighter fresh water overrides a dense incom-
ing salt layer. The dense salt wedge will advance along the bot-
tom until the freshwater flow forces can no longer be overcome.
At this point, the tip of the salt wedge will be blunt during rising
tide and tapered during falling tide. Mixing occurs at the saltwater/
freshwater interface by entrainment, a process caused by shear forces
between the two moving layers. As small amounts of dense water
36 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

a.

b.

c.

d.

FIGURE 5-2. Estuary Classification by Salinity Structure: a, Highly Stratified

Salt Wedge Estuary; b, Highly Stratified Fjord Estuary; c, Partially Mixed
Estuary; d, Well-Mixed (Homogeneous) Estuary (EM1110-2-1607, 1991).

are mixed in the upper layers, more fluid enters the estuary near
the bottom to compensate for the loss; more fluid leaves the estu-
ary in the upper layers to attain equilibrium of forces (Figure 5-2a).
In these river-dominated, poorly mixed estuaries, such as Southwest
Pass on the lower Mississippi River, upstream flow occurs in the
salt wedge regardless of tidal phase, with downstream flow on the
surface. In the shallower South Pass; also on the Mississippi River,
upstream flow occurs in the wedge during flood tide simultaneously
with surface downstream flow, whereas during ebb tide flow at all
depths is in the seaward direction. Examples include the lower Mis-
sissippi River (United States) and Vellar Estuary (India). Another
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 37

form of a highly stratified estuary is the fjord type system. Similar

to the salt wedge type, in a fjord, the lower, almost isohaline layer
is very deep. The freshwater surface layer is almost homogeneous,
and only during low-flow periods does the maximum salinity gra-
dient ever reach the surface. Circulation over the sill may be very
different from the rest of the fjord estuary because of large tidal ve-
locities and weaker stratification at the sill. The inflow over the sill is
usually a mixture of coastal and outflow water. As the water passes
the sill and the tidal action decreases, the denser water settles, fre-
quently forming a layered structure, which is the result of successive
saltwater intrusions (Figure 5-2b). If water renewal is infrequent,
anoxic conditions can develop on the bottom. Silver Bay (Alaska,
United States) and Alberni Inlet (British Columbia, Canada) are
examples.
2. Partially Mixed. A partially mixed estuary is one in which salinity
stratification is reduced but not eliminated by turbulent mixing of
higher salinity water near the bottom with lower salinity near the
surface. These turbulent eddies mix salt water upward and fresh wa-
ter downward with a net upward flow of saline water. As the salinity
of the surface water increases, the outgoing surface flow correspond-
ingly increases to maintain river flow, in addition to the additional
upward-mixed saline water. This causes a compensating, incoming
flow along the bottom. This well-defined, two-layer flow is typical of
partially mixed estuaries. The salinity structure is very different from
a highly stratified estuary because of the efficient mixing of salt and
fresh water. The surface salinity increases steadily down the estuary
with undiluted fresh water, now occurring only near the head of the
estuary. A longitudinal salinity gradient along the bottom also exists
(Figure 5-2c).
In a partially mixed estuary, river flow is low compared to tidal
prism. Examples include the James River (United States) and Mersey
and Southampton Water estuaries (England).
3. Well-Mixed or Homogeneous. In estuaries in which tidal flow is much
larger than river flow and bottom friction is large enough to mix the
entire water column, a vertically homogeneous (well-mixed) estuary
results (Figure 5-2d). If the estuary is wide, Coriolis force may form
a horizontal flow separation; and in the northern hemisphere, the
seaward flow would occur on the right side (looking downstream),
whereas the compensating landward flow would be on the left. This
vertically homogeneous, laterally nonhomogeneous condition can be
found in the lower reaches of the Delaware and Raritan estuaries in
the United States. A vertically and laterally homogeneous (sectionally
homogeneous) condition occurs in narrow estuaries in which salinity
increases evenly toward the mouth.
38 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

6 6

TOTAL AREA SUBTENDED BY BOTH EBB AND FLOOD CURVES = TOTAL FLOW
4 4
VELOCITY. FEET PER SECOND

VELOCITY. FEET PER SECOND

2 2
FLOOD

0 0

EBB
2 2

4 4
AREA SUBTENDED BY EBB CURVE DIVIDED BY TOTAL AREA = PERCENT OF TOTAL FLOW DOWNSTREAM

6 6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
TIME, HOURS

FIGURE 5-3. Definition Sketch: Flow Predominance (EM1110-2-1607, 1991).

5.4 FLOW PREDOMINANCE

The concept of flow predominance is useful in understanding the effects

of density-induced currents on velocities. In a conventional 12-hr plot of
velocity versus time, velocity values will be positive (flood flow into the es-
tuary) and negative (ebb flow out of the estuary) (Figure 5-3). To determine
flow predominance, the area under the ebb portion of the curve (all nega-
tive values) is divided by the total area under the curve (ebb portion plus
flood portion). The result, ebb predominance, is the percentage of the total
flow per tidal cycle that is moving in the ebb direction at a given velocity
sampling depth. In a highly stratified estuary, the freshwater surface flow
will always be ebb dominant, whereas the bottom salt wedge layer will be
strongly flood dominant. Near the entrance of a well-mixed estuary, the
bottom flow will be slightly flood dominant, whereas the surface will be
strongly ebb dominant. Further upstream, the flow will be ebb dominant
throughout the entire depth. In a partially mixed estuary, the bottom flow
will be mainly flood dominant within the salinity wedge, and the surface
flow predominantly in the ebb direction. Examples of flow predominance
in Savannah Harbor, Charleston Harbor, and the Hudson River are pre-
sented in Ippen, 1966.

5.5 NULL POINT

Along with the concept of flow predominance, it should be noted that

the net flow may be balanced at a certain point (i.e., no net flow occurs in
either direction). This point is called the null point.
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 39

1000-FT STATIONS IN AN EAST COAST ESTUARY

100 120 140 160 180
20 75

PREDOMINANCE OF BOTTOM FLOW

SHOALING
DISTRIBUTION OF SHOALING

IN PERCENT OF TOTAL
IN PERCENT OF TOTAL

EBB
10 50

FLOOD
PREDOMINANCE
NULL POINT

0 25

FIGURE 5-4. Relationship of Shoaling and Predominance of Bottom Flow

(EM1110-2-1607, 1991).

5.6 SALINITY EFFECTS ON SHOALING

Saltwater intrusion is important to estuary sedimentation because saline

water enhances flocculation of suspended clay particles, and density cur-
rents tend to move sediments upstream along the bottom. Thus, sediments
entering the estuary may become trapped instead of moving out to sea. Fre-
quently, shoaling occurs between the high-water and low-water positions
of the upstream limit of salinity intrusion. The region most likely to ex-
perience heavy shoaling is the reach that brackets the 50% value (or null
point) of the bottom flow predominance (Figure 5-4).

5.7 SUMMARY OF ESTUARY CLASSIFICATION

The classification of estuaries uses variables of topography, river flow,

and tidal action as factors influencing saltwater and freshwater mixing.
Ultimately, the salinity characteristics of an estuary determine the unique
features of the system. No two estuaries are alike, but one can hope to find
general principles rather than unique details to use when studying and
comparing similar systems.

5.8 TIDE-GENERATING FORCES

To understand the effect of tides on an estuarine system, a brief comment

should be made on the tide-generating forces and rhythms.
40 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

1. Newton’s laws of gravitation state that the force of attraction be-

tween two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and
inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their
centers. In our sun-moon-earth system, the sun is the largest body,
but because its distance is so great from the earth, its influence on
tides is only 46% of the moon’s influence.
2. All forces in the sun-moon-earth system are in equilibrium; however,
individual particles on the earth’s surface are not. In this system of
varying distances and rotation rhythms (i.e., the earth rotates around
the sun once every 24 hrs, and the moon rotates around the earth
once every 24 hrs, 50 min), these tide-generating forces are never
constant. These forces act on land, water, and air. However, the land
mass is not as elastic as liquids, and air, although elastic, has such a
low density that the effects of the tidal forces, although measurable,
are small. The media most free to respond in an observable manner
are the earth’s water masses, the oceans. Tide-generating forces are
the residual forces between attraction (earth/moon and earth/sun)
and centrifugal force (the rotation of two bodies about a common
axis).

5.9 TIDE TERMS

Several basic terms are used to describe tides. High water is the water-
surface level at its highest extent during one cycle. The term is also used
to denote the time at which highest water-surface level occurs.
Similarly, low water refers to the lowest water level. Two unequal high
waters and two unequal low waters occurring in one day are distinguished
by referring to them as higher high water, lower high water, lower low
water, and higher low water. A tidal current that flows landward is termed
a flood current, whereas one that flows seaward is called an ebb current.

5.10 TYPES OF TIDES

The basic tide is the cyclic rise and fall of the water surface as the re-
sult of the tide-generating forces. There are three types of tides—diurnal,
semidiurnal, and mixed—which are a result of tide-generating forces and
location on earth.

1. Diurnal. A diurnal tide is one high and one low water level in a
lunar day (24.84 hrs). Diurnal tides occur in the Gulf of Mexico (at
most locations); in some parts of the Pacific Ocean, for example, the
Philippines; and in certain places in Alaska.
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 41

2. Semidiurnal. Semidiurnal tides produce a tidal cycle (high and low

water) in one-half the lunar day (12.42 hrs) or two nearly equal tidal
cycles in one lunar day. Semidiurnal tides occur along the East Coast
of the United States.
3. Mixed. Mixed tides are a combination of diurnal and semidiurnal
characteristics and are found on the West Coast of the United States.
There is a marked inequality in the heights of the succeeding tides,
especially low waters, and there also is an inequality in time. Usually,
two high and two low waters occur each day. Typically, there is a high
tide, then a low tide, followed by a scanty high tide and a moderate
low tide.

5.11 SPRING AND NEAP TIDES

Because of the unequal rotational rhythms of the members of the sun-

moon-earth system, their forces are periodically in and out of phase. Every
14.3 days (twice a month), the earth, moon, and sun are aligned in phase. At
this time, the gravitational forces reinforce each other to form higher than
average tides called “spring tides.’’ The moon and sun are at right angles
to the earth also twice a month, and these forces are subtracted from each
other to form lower than normal tides, called “neap tides.’’

5.12 INFLUENCE OF MOON AND SUN

Another factor that influences tide is the declination of the moon and
sun—the angular distance north or south of the equator. The relationship of
the earth’s axis to the plane of its orbit around the sun results in an apparent
yearly north-south movement of the sun. The plane of the moon’s orbit
is tilted also, and the apparent north-south migration across the equator
occurs every 27.33 days. This monthly migration results in observable tidal
changes. During this month, spring tides (new and full moon) happen
to occur when the moon is crossing the equator. Neap tides occur at the
quarter moon, and apogee (moon furthest from the earth) and perigee
(moon closest to the earth) effects are noted. The spring tide occurring at
perigee is larger because of the increase in tidal forces. The tides at New
York are semidiurnal with a strong spring and neap influence. Tides at Port
Adelaide, Australia, go from mixed to semidiurnal when the moon is over
the equator, whereas tides at Seattle, Washington, are mixed at all times.
Tides at Los Angeles, California, and Honolulu, Hawaii, are diurnal during
neap tide when the moon is south of the equator, semidiurnal during spring
tide, and mixed at other times of the month. Tides at Pakhoi, China, are
strongly diurnal except when the moon is over the equator.
42 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

5.13 TIDE PREDICTION TABLES

Tide predictions were published by NOAA until the mid-1990s. NOAA

tide information and predictions currently are available at http://www.
co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/tide or nongovernment commercial publishers.

5.14 NONASTRONOMICAL FORCES

Nonastronomical forces also can produce waves. A tsunami, or seis-

mic sea wave, is a very long wave that originates in a disturbance in the
sea floor. The wave train generated from such an event (earthquake, mud
slide, volcanic explosion) contains huge amounts of energy and moves at
high speeds. When it reaches shallow water and the shoreline, it can be ex-
tremely destructive. Other nonastronomical waves are produced by boat
wakes, explosions, landslides, and any force that can disturb the surface
of the water.

5.15 WAVEFORMS

The tide may enter the estuary as a progressive wave manifested by

the forward movement of the waveform. Some estuaries experience tides
that are standing waves against the coast. The current velocity and water-
surface elevations in this waveform are in phase. As the wave progresses up
the estuary, the waveform changes shape, the face becomes steeper, and
the rear slope becomes more gradual. Areas of constriction increase the
wave amplitude, and boundary friction is a means of energy dissipation.
At some point in time, as the wave reaches the end of the estuary, it may be
reflected. The interaction of the forward-advancing progressive wave and
the returning reflected wave may produce a standing wave. In a standing
or stationary wave, the current velocity and water-surface elevation are out
of phase by 90◦ . Most estuaries are intermediate, displaying characteristics
somewhere between progressive and standing wave features.

5.16 WINDS AND WIND-GENERATED WAVES

Meteorological factors such as changes in barometric pressure and the

uneven heating and cooling of the earth produce pressure differences that
result in winds. Winds blowing across the surface of bodies of water trans-
mit energy to the water, and waves are formed. The size of these wind-
generated waves depends on the wind velocity, the length of time the wind
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 43

is blowing, and the extent of open water over which it blows (fetch). Water
depth is also a factor in limiting growth of waves.

5.17 SETUP, SETDOWN, AND STORM SURGE

In addition to the creation of wind waves, wind also can cause a condi-
tion known as “setup’’ or “setdown.’’ Wind stress on the water surface can
result in a pushing or piling up of water in the downwind direction and
a lowering of the water surface in the upwind direction. When the wind
blows landward, water will set up against the land. This setup, superim-
posed on the normal tidal elevation, causes apparent higher than normal
tides. This frequently produces flooding during storms. A seaward wind
will push water toward the sea and away from land, causing a lower than
normal water level. When the wind stops, the setup or setdown water sur-
face will return to normal levels. In enclosed waters, this return may occur
as successive oscillations that are diminished by friction.
During a storm, there may be a substantial rise in sea level along the
coast, called a “storm tide’’ or surge caused by wind setup, wave setup,
and air pressure drop. The difference in pressure between an atmospheric
low-pressure area and the surrounding high-pressure area causes the sea
surface to “hump.’’ The wind-generated storm waves superimposed on
the normal tides and storm surge can have disastrous effects on shore
structures and lead to flooding of coastal and inland areas.

5.18 SEICHE

If the surface of an enclosed body of water, such as a harbor or bay, is

disturbed, long waves may be generated that will rhythmically slosh back
and forth as they reflect off the opposite ends of the basin. These waves,
called seiches, will travel back and forth until the energy is lost to frictional
forces. The period of a seiche is dependent on the size and depth of the
basin. If an arriving wave train has a period similar to the natural frequency
of a harbor, each arriving wave will increase the intensity of the seiche,
producing rougher waters inside the harbor than on the surrounding sea.

5.19 FRESHWATER SOURCES

So far, we have discussed the topographic classification of estuaries, as-

tronomical tide-generating factors, and meteorological and seismic wave-
generating factors. The final critical forcing function of an estuary is the
amount of fresh water delivered to the system. This fresh water can flow
44 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

from the drainage basin of the river, ground water, discharge from dams
and reservoirs, and rain falling on the water surface. The U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Water Resources Division, in cooperation with state and
local governments, collects and disseminates hydrologic data of stream
discharge or stage, reservoir and lake storage, groundwater levels, and the
quality of surface and ground water. All data is stored in the USGS Na-
tional Water Storage and Retrieval System (WATSTORE) and is available
on request from the USGS regional office or the USGS in Reston, Virginia.

5.20 EPISODIC EVENTS

Episodic events that produce extreme quantities of water in a drainage

basin can have a significant effect on the freshwater/salinity balance of an
estuary. The seaward displacement of the salinity zone by sediment-laden
fresh water will result in drastically different salinity and shoaling patterns.

5.21 CHANGES IN SEA LEVEL

Sea level rise or the apparent rise in the ocean surface when compared
to a stable landmark is a very general description for a more complicated
event. The actual rise in the ocean is not one that is readily noticeable,
especially when historic records indicate an average value of 0 to +1 centi-
meters per year. The geologic record indicates that shifts in climate and the
associated changes in sea level are attributed to the global freeze and thaw
cycles. These trends have been most noted in the Pleistocene Epoch, or ice
age, when the ocean level was much lower because much of the available
water was frozen in the glaciers. Other events and factors can affect the
rate of change:

1. The Greenhouse Effect. Overall global warming (postulated by the

greenhouse effect) will cause thermal expansion of the seas and melt-
ing of snow and ice at increased rates and, thus, increase ocean levels.
The greenhouse effect is not a part of the cyclic warming or cooling
periods of natural weather patterns but is related to man-influenced
changes in the atmosphere and ozone layer. Future low, medium, and
high rates of sea level rise are estimated by the National Research
Council.
2. Subsidence. Along coasts that consist of deposited materials, subsi-
dence may occur, due in part to consolidation of recent sediments.
Subsidence also may occur as a result of man’s activities, such as
withdrawal of oil, natural gas, and water, or by the additional weight
of structures or land reclamation.
 ESTUARY HYDRAULICS 45

3. Tectonic Activity. Events such as earthquakes and earth crust move-

ments may raise or lower coastal areas somewhat and, as a result,
negate or magnify the rising sea level.
4. Geomorphology of the Area. Some coastlines are defined as sinking (such
as the U.S. East Coast), whereas some are considered to be rising (U.S.
West Coast). Few, if any, reliable measurements are available.

5.22 APPARENT SEA LEVEL RISE

Because of certain factors, including those that were previously men-

tioned, use of the term “apparent sea level rise” would be more accurate
because of the possibility that the particular area in question may actually
be subsiding. Additional reading on this topic can be found in books on
oceanography, geology, and geomorphology.

5.23 SEA LEVEL RISE IMPACT ON NAVIGATIONAL CHANNELS

Although historic estimates of sea level rise could impact shoreside facil-
ities over the long term, it would have a negligible effect on a navigational
channel which has a 50 year design life. A rise in the sea level datum would
result only in less dredging to maintain authorized channel depth.

5.24 SOURCE

The information for this chapter came from EM 1110-2-1607, Tidal

Hydraulics, March 15, 1991.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 6
CHANNEL DEPTH

6.1 CHANNEL DEPTH DESIGN METHODS

The depth of the project design channel should be adequate to safely ac-
commodate ships with the deepest drafts expected to use the waterway.
Normally, depth is based on the development of one or more design ships
with an appropriately loaded or ballasted draft. Selection of the design
ship and project design depth is determined by an economic analysis of
the expected project benefits compared with project costs.
The two most commonly used methods for channel depth selection
are the Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses
(PIANC) guidance report and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers engi-
neering manuals.
The design details of these two methods are very similar. Site-specific
wind, wave, and ship motion are evaluated with the use of vessel simula-
tors or other mathematical or physical models.
The PIANC method, used to estimate channel depth for concept de-
sign, is presented in PIANC (1997), page 20. This supplement states the
following:

Depth is estimated from:

r at-rest draught (draft) of the design ship;

r tide height throughout transit of the channel;
r squat;
r wave-induced motions;
r a margin depending on type of bottom;
r water density and its effect on draught (draft).

The values for draught (draft), which include water density effects, squat,
wave-induced motions, and margin, are additive. After the depth/draught
(draft) ratio has been calculated, it should be checked to ensure that it is
not less than a safe minimum. A minimum of 1.10 should be allowed in
47
48 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

sheltered waters, 1.3 in waves up to 1.0 m in height, and 1.5 in higher

unfavorable waves.
The Froude Depth Number, Fnh , must be less than 0.7.
The hydrodynamic resistance to motion of a ship in shallow water is
governed by the Froude Depth Number, Fnh , which is, broadly, a non-
dimensional ratio between speed and depth. It is defined as

Fnh = V/(gh) /2
1

where
V = the speed through the water in feet/second
h = the undisturbed water depth in feet
g = the acceleration due to gravity (about 32.2 ft/sec2 )
When Fnh approaches or equals unity, the resistance to motion reaches
very high values, which most displacement ships have insufficient power
to overcome. In fact, such ships are unlikely to be able to exceed Fnh values
of 0.6 or 0.7 (the former for tankers, the latter for container ships), which
results in an effective speed barrier.
These depth/draft ratios can be applied to channels worldwide. How-
ever, local conditions may indicate that deviations are justified. Detailed
Design, which would follow Concept Design, would address the particular
features of a given site.
The following steps would be used for the (PIANC) channel depth de-
termination during concept design (first rough estimate).

Step 1. Estimate - Ship draft

- Tide height through transit of the channel
- Squat
- Wave-induced motion
- A margin of safety
- Water density and its effect on draft.
Step 2. Select the appropriate safe minimum depth/draft ratios:
Wave conditions Minimum depth/draft ratio
Sheltered waters 1.1
Waves up to 1 m 1.3
Higher waves with unfavorable
periods and directions 1.5
Step 3. Compare estimated channel depth for a site-specific project (step 1)
with safe minimum depth (step 2). The concept design chan-
nel depth will be the larger (deeper channel) depth of these two
values.

The Army Corps of Engineers method for both preliminary and final
design evaluates each component of channel depth determination for each
 CHANNEL DEPTH 49

project using site-specific information of wind, wave, and design shop

characteristics. These components include:

Sinking because of fresh water

Ship motion from waves
Ship squat when under way
Safety clearance
Advance maintenance
Dredging tolerance

These components are shown in Figure 6-1.

Further discussion of the components of the Army Corps of Engineers
method follow.

6.2 DESIGN SHIP LOADED DRAFT

This component also would include an estimate of trim. Trim is defined

as the difference in draft from bow to stern and controlled by loading. Ship
operators generally prefer to trim a ship to an even keel, but this is often
a complex and expensive operation and in rare instances could induce
some undesirable stresses in the hull structure. A vessel down by the bow
loses some of its maneuverability and therefore is often loaded to keep the
stern lower than the bow. Information on trim is becoming of increased
importance in channel design as vessels become larger. For instance, a
1000-ft-long ship trimmed 1% (less than 1◦ ) by the stern would have a
draft at the stern about 5 ft greater than that at midship. Information on
trimming can be obtained through observations of actual operations and
through consultations with port shipping officials.

6.3 EFFECTS OF FRESH WATER

When passing from sea water to fresh water, the vessel draft increases
because of the decrease in the density of the water. When passing from sea
water with a specific gravity of 1.026 (64 lb/cu ft) into fresh water with a
specific gravity of 0.999 (62.4 lb/cu ft), a vessel’s displacement will increase
approximately 3%. Therefore, a vessel with a saltwater draft of 35 ft will
have a draft of 36 ft in fresh water, and intermediate drafts in brackish
waters.

6.4 SHIP MOTION FROM WAVES

Waves and swells affect vertical ship motion by three components, pitch,
roll, and heave, as shown in Figure 6-2. The deepest excursion of the vessel
 MHHW

MEAN
TIDE
VARIATION
MEAN LOW WATER DATUM
MLLW
DESIGN SHIP
LOADED DRAFT
(SUMMER, SALTWATER)

EFFECT OF
FRESHWATER
50

SHIP MOTION
FROM WAVES
SOUAT
UNDERWAY

SAFETY
AUTHORIZED CHANNEL LEVEL CLEARANCE

ADVANCE MAINTENANCE

DREDGING TOLERANCE

CHANNEL BED LEVEL

FIGURE 6-1. Channel Depth Allowances.

 CHANNEL DEPTH 51

FIGURE 6-2. Ship Wave Motion Definitions.

52 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

bottom below the water surface, which is caused by waves, must be consid-
ered in the design of channel depth. In open-sea conditions, a pitch angle of
2.5◦ in a 1000-ft-long ship would increase draft forward about 22 ft. Proto-
type observations of ship motion in the Columbia River entrance indicated
downward pitch motions in excess of 25 ft. The maximum vertical excur-
sion, however, did not take place with the deepest draft ship but with a
small ship. It appears this ship was affected by the relationship of the ship
length to wave length during the time of crossing. Some pilots and ship
captains consider the Columbia River bar one of the most severe channel
entrances in the world; thus, this example should be considered an extreme
example. At times, the bar pilots judge the wind, wave, and current con-
ditions too dangerous to navigate, and ships must wait for more favorable
conditions (Wang and Noble, 1982). A 5◦ angle of roll for a ship having
a beam of 100 ft would increase amid-ship draft about 4.2 ft. This is not
an unusual roll at entrances or in some semiprotected waters, caused by
waves, wind, and turn angle.

6.5 SQUAT UNDERWAY

A ship in motion will cause a lowering of the water surface because

of the increase in velocity past the ship, causing the hull to be lowered
with respect to the bottom. Although this phenomenon also affects the
ship’s trim (usually by lowering the stern slightly more than the bow),
the effect is minor and normally is neglected. The amount of lowering
referred to as “squat’’depends on several factors including the vessel speed,
characteristics of the channel and vessel, and interaction with other vessels.
Squat is generally in the 1- to 3-ft range and increased in confined channels.
A model developed by Huval (1993) can calculate squat for canal, trench,
and fairway channels as shown in Figure 6-3. Prototype measurements on
the Columbia River channel indicated squat in the range of 3-ft for a 600-ft
container ship traveling 16 knots in an unconstrained channel (Beeman,
1985; PIANC Bulletin No. 51).

6.6 SAFETY CLEARANCE

In the interest of safety, a clearance of at least 2 ft should be provided

between the bottom of a vessel in motion and the channel bottom to avoid
damage to the ship’s propellers from sunken timbers and debris, to reduce
displacement of bottom material, and to avoid the fouling of pump and
condensers by bottom material. When the bottom of the channel is hard—
consisting of rock, consolidated sand, or clay—the clearance should be
increased to at least 3 ft. Actually, the minimum depth should be considered
on a project-by-project basis, and should take into account the many local
 CHANNEL DEPTH 53

FIGURE 6-3. Example of Squat Calculations (EM 110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).

variables, such as channel configuration and traffic mix, in addition to type

of bottom.

6.7 ADVANCE MAINTENANCE

Advance maintenance consists of dredging deeper than the channel de-

sign depth to provide for the accumulation and storage of sediment. Justi-
fication for advance maintenance is based on channel depth reliability and
economy of less frequent dredging. Deeper channels will tend to be more
efficient sediment traps and could shoal faster. However, a deeper channel
might tend to localize shoaling and could reduce the reach of channel to
be dredged and cost of maintenance dredging. Estimates on several depth
increments of advance maintenance and their effect on shoaling rates are
needed to determine the optimum depth. Conditions will vary with each
project, and the design depth and overdredging that might be applicable
should be based on an evaluation of conditions at each project.
54 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

6.8 DREDGING TOLERANCE

In addition to the advance maintenance dredging, an additional 1 to 3 ft

below the selected dredging depth is generally provided as a dredging pay
item because of the inability to dredge at a uniform depth with a fluctuating
water surface. This additional dredging is referred to as dredging tolerance.

6.9 NAUTICAL DEPTH

The concept of nautical depth applies to ship channels with a channel

bottom that consists of a liquid layer of silt or mud and no easily definable
bottom. Larger ships can easily transit several meters deep of this semi-
liquid layer. However, pilots and ship captains are less than enthusiastic in
this channel transit because depth records show negative keel clearance,
and all astern bells ring. Following is a discussion of fluid mud channel
bottoms from PIANC, 1997, page 43.

Many navigational channels have bottoms which are covered with

fluid mud suspensions, characterized by low density (1050–1300
kg/m3 ) and weak shear strength. For several reasons, bottom and
depth are not clearly defined in such conditions.
Traditional survey techniques, such as lead lines and echo-
sounders, are not adequate for depth determination in muddy areas.
Measurements with echo-sounders making use of acoustic signals of
different frequency may result in different values for depth, as high
frequency signals reflect on the water-mud interface, while low fre-
quency waves penetrate into the sediment deposit and yield a larger
water depth value.
For channels with a solid bottom, a minimum underkeel clearance
(UKC) is selected in order to avoid contact between the moving ship
and the bottom. In muddy areas, the question arises whether this
minimum, referred to as the water-mud interface, cannot be reduced.
Although the upper part of the mud layer has a somewhat higher
density than water, its rheologic properties are comparable to those
of water, so that a ship’s hull suffers no damage when it penetrates
this interface.
Even navigation with an underkeel clearance which is negative,
referred to as the interface, can be considered, which implies that
the ship’s keel is permanently in contact with the mud. On the other
hand, safety of navigation requires that the pilot must always be able
to compensate for the effects of mud on ship behavior by means of
its own control systems or external assistance (e.g., tugs).
 CHANNEL DEPTH 55

An acceptable compromise between the safety of navigation and

the cost of channel maintenance can only be reached by introduction
of non-conventional definitions and survey methods, and requires
additional knowledge about the navigational response of ships in
muddy areas. (PIANC, 1997)

6.10 SOURCE

Most of this information was extracted from EM 1110 -2-1613, Hydraulic

Design of Deep-Draft Navigation Projects, April 8, 1983, and PIANC-IAPH
Working Group 11-30 Report, “Approach Channels, a Guide for Design,’’
June 1997.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 7
CHANNEL ALIGNMENT

7.1 GENERAL

To minimize initial and maintenance dredging, the alignment of a nav-

igation channel is usually designed to follow the course of the deeper
channel in a river or estuary. Note, however, that there often are separate
flood and ebb channels that may not be continuous. Although bends in
the alignment should be minimized as much as possible, straight reaches
with small curves may be needed to follow the natural deep water chan-
nels in the estuary. Straight reaches between bends should be at least five
times the length of the longest vessel. Where gradual bends are not prac-
tical, cutoffs should be considered. Structures such as groins, revetments,
and wave absorbers might be required to maintain acceptable channel
alignment, channel dimensions, and wave conditions. Channel alignment
that cuts across sandbars or mud bars shou1d be avoided unless train-
ing structures to control the movement and deposition of sediment are
provided.

7.2 VARIABLE ALIGNMENT

The strength of the hydraulic forces in the estuary will usually dic-
tate channel alignment. Estuaries with high tide ranges and, therefore,
strong ebb currents or large river discharges, normally will have navi-
gation channels with changing alignments. An example is Grays Harbor,
Washington, which has high tides and a large tide prism, as shown in
Figure 7-1.
These systems may have channels that migrate, such as Grays Harbor,
where the channel has migrated to a position adjacent to the South Jetty
(Figure 7-2). Normally, the ship channel alignment is adjusted over time
to follow the natural channel migration.

57
58 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Notes:
Mean tide range 9.00 feet
Maximum tide range 17.5 feet
ship channel 26 miles long

FIGURE 7-1. Variable Alignment Ship Channels (Adapted from ASCE

Manual No 80).

7.3 STRAIGHT ALIGNMENT

Straight ship channels are possible when the hydraulic dynamics of

the system are small. Projects in the Gulf of Mexico or South Atlantic
coast have small tide ranges and, therefore, small tide prisms. The Gulf
Coast not only has low tide ranges (1 to 3 ft) but also has a tide cy-
cle that is diurnal (i.e., one high and one low tide in a lunar day [24.84
hours]). The East Coast has semidiurnal tides, which produce two nearly
equal tide cycles in a lunar day. West Coat tides are mixed with two un-
equal tide cycles a day. Therefore, channel tidal velocities are determined
by the size of the tide prism and the number of tide cycles a day. Many
of the Great Lakes ship channels have straight alignment because of the
absence of tidal effects and because river discharges often are small. Fig-
ure 7-3 shows an example of a straight ship-channel project in Mobile,
Alabama.
 CHANNEL ALIGNMENT 59

FIGURE 7-2. Grays Harbor Channel Migration (Committee on Tidal

Hydraulics, Corps of Engineers, 1995).

7.4 PIANC METHOD

The concept design guidance given in PIANC (1997) page 14 follows.

“Channel alignment should be assessed with regard to:

r the shortest channel length;

r conditions/basins, and so on, at either end of the channel;
r the need to avoid obstacles or areas of accretion, which are dif-
ficult or expensive to remove or require excessive (and, hence,
costly) maintenance dredging;
r prevailing winds, currents, and waves;
r avoiding bends close to port entrances;
r the edge of the channel should be such that ships passing along
it do not cause disturbance or damage.
60 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 7-3. Straight Ship Channel (From Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).

Straight channel legs are preferable to curved ones. The designer

should strive for an alignment consisting of a series of straight legs
connected by smooth bends, and not abrupt angles. Individual legs
may have different widths and depths and should be navigated at
different speeds.
It is preferable to have the prevailing currents aligned with the
channel to minimize cross currents and to avoid large gradients in
 CHANNEL ALIGNMENT 61

cross current along the channel. This also applies to wind and waves,
although these may come from any direction. Usually, the prevailing
wind and wave direction are considered in design, with a judgment
on whether possible downtimes as a result of strong winds or high
waves from other directions are acceptable.
Finally, it is advisable (and important in the case of channels navi-
gated by ships carrying dangerous goods) that the channel be aligned
to prevent the ship heading directly at the quay or jetty during its ap-
proach. Any channel whose direction is perpendicular to the berthing
face should be aligned to one side of the quay or jetty, so that a ship
must turn (or be swung) to arrive at the berth. This minimizes the
risk of ships demolishing the jetty or quay in the event of losing all
control on the approach.”

The use of vessel simulators to finalize channel alignment is recom-

mended for the detailed design phase.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 8
CHANNEL WIDTHS

8.1 GENERAL

Channel widths should be designed to provide for the safe and efficient
movement of vessels that are expected to use the channel. The minimum
channel width will depend on the size and maneuverability of the vessels,
channel shape and alignment, traffic congestion, wind, waves, currents,
visibility, quality and spacing of navigation aids, and whether one-way
or two-way traffic is required. Width of the channel is measured at the
bottom of the slope at the design depth. In accordance with Section 5 of
the Rivers and Harbors Act approved on March 4, 1915, “. . . . the channel
dimensions specified shall be understood to admit of such increases at
entrances, bends, sidings and turning places as may be necessary to allow
free movement of boats.’’Channel widths have to provide for the width
of the maneuvering lane, clearances between vessels when passing, and
bank clearances, particularly in restricted channels. Additional clearances
will be required in channel entrances and in channel bends. The elements
of channel width analysis are shown in Figure 8-1.
The bank clearance width, maneuvering lane width, and ship clearance
width are expressed as multiples of the ship beam, as shown in Tables 8-1
through 8-7. For example, in Table 8-1, the maneuvering lane width for
a vessel with good controllability in a straight channel would be 160% of
the beam, or 1.6B. If the design vessel has a beam (B) of 100 ft, then the
maneuvering lane width would be 160 ft (1.6B).

8.2 MANEUVERING LANE

The maneuvering lane is that portion of the channel width within which
the vessel might deviate from a straight line without encroaching on the
safe bank clearance or entering a zone that would cause danger to passing
ships.

63
64 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

TABLE 8-1. Minimum Channel Width Values (EM 1110-2-1613, 83).

Minimum Channel Width in Percent of Beam

(Ship Beam Multipliers)

Vessel Controllability
Channels with
Location Very Good Good Poor Yawing Forces
∗
Maneuvering lane, 160(1.6B) 180(1.8B) 200(2.0B) Judgment
straight channel
Bend, 26-degree turn 325(3.25B) 370(3.7B) 415(4.15B) ∗ Judgment
Bend, 40-degree turn 385(3.85B) 440(4.4B) 490(4.9B) ∗ Judgment
Ship clearance 80(0.8B) 80(0.8B) 80(0.8B) 100 but not less
than 100 feet
Bank clearance 60(0.6B) 60 plus 60 plus 150(1.5B)
(0.6+B) (0.6+B)
∗
Judgment will have to be based on local conditions at each project.

FIGURE 8-1. Channel Width Elements (ASCE Manual No. 80).

 CHANNEL WIDTHS 65

8.3 SHIP CLEARANCE

To avoid interference and danger of collision, a clearance lane is needed

between maneuvering lanes for channels designed for two-way traffic.

8.4 BANK CLEARANCE

Bank clearance is the horizontal distance between the adjacent maneu-

vering lane edge and the bottom of the channel side slopes.

8.5 CHANNEL TYPES

Two-way traffic channels allow free movement of vessels. Figure 8-2

shows an example of a two-way traffic channel.
One-way traffic channel segments are used where excavation of a larger
channel would be very expensive or traffic volume is low. Figure 8-3 shows
a one-way traffic channel.
The Suez Canal is an example of a one-way channel. The 121-mi-long
canal has long one-way segments with several passing bays. When it
opened, the canal had a 72-ft bottom width, 190-ft surface width, and 26-ft

FIGURE 8-2. Two Lakers Passing in the St. Clair River, Michigan
(COE, Digital Visual Library).
66 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 8-3. 1,000-Foot Laker in the Rock-Cut Portion of the St. Mary’s River,
Michigan (COE–Digital Visual Library).
depth. The current canal dimensions are 197-ft bottom width and 58-ft
depth with several passing segments. The long-term plan is to continue
deepening the canal to an eventual depth of 92 ft.

8.6 PRELIMINARY DESIGN GUIDELINES

FOR STRAIGHT SEGMENTS

Several guidelines have been developed to select the appropriate chan-

nel width elements. These guidelines are applicable for preliminary design
(i.e., concept design). Final design should rely on vessel simulation studies
and other computer programs for appropriate channel-width selection.
 CHANNEL WIDTHS 67

Both preliminary and final designs normally assume that the vessel (or
vessels) are guided by a competent pilot or captain and that the vessel is in
good operational condition (i.e., it has had no vessel breakdowns). How-
ever, simulations can be used to evaluate blackout (breakdown) scenarios
to investigate how serious the consequences could be.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers used the values presented in Ta-
ble 8-1 for preliminary design and final design from the 1960s until the
development of computer simulation models in the 1980s.
These values were first presented in Report No. 3 of the Committee on
Tidal Hydraulics, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, May 1965, “Evaluation
of Present State of Knowledge of Factors Affecting Tidal Hydraulics and
Related Phenomena.’’These values were again presented in EM 1110-2-
1613, Hydraulic Design of Deep-Draft Navigation Projects, April 8, 1983.
Some recent work by the Corps (2nd Ed of EM 1112-1613, 2002, Draft
awaiting publication) using information generated from ship simulation
studies suggested the minimum channel widths presented in Table 8-2.
The canal- and trench-type channels are shown in Figure 8-4.

TABLE 8-2. Minimum Channel Width Values with No Wave Effects

(EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).

Maximum Current, Knots

Design Ship Beam Multipliers—One-Way Traffic

Channel Cross-Section 0.0 to 0.5 0.5 to 1.5 1.5 to 3.0

Best Aids to Navigation

Shallow—constant cross-section 3.0 4.0 5.0
Canal—constant cross-section 2.5 3.0 3.5
Trench—constant cross-section 2.75 3.25 4.0

Average Aids to Navigation

Shallow—variable cross-section 3.5 4.5 5.5
Canal—variable cross-section 3.0 3.5 4.0
Trench—variable cross-section 3.5 4.0 5.0

Design Ship Beam Multipliers—Two-Way Traffic

Uniform Channel Cross Section 0.0 to 0.5 0.5 to 1.5 1.5 to 3.0

Best Aids to Navigation

Shallow 5.0 6.0 8.0
Canal 4.0 4.5 5.5
Trench 4.5 5.5 6.5
68 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 8-4. Canal and Trench Type Channels (EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).
 CHANNEL WIDTHS 69

TABLE 8-3. Basic Maneuvering Lane Width (PIANC, 1997, page 20).

Ship Maneuverability Good Moderate Poor

Basic Maneuverability Lane Width 1.3 B 1.5 B 1.8 B

A third set of values for channel-width selection is presented in PIANC

report “Approach Channels, A Guide for Design’’Supplement to Bulletin
No. 95, June 1997 (see Table 8-3).
These values assume a straight canal as well as favorable environmental
(wind and wave) and operational conditions. Additional width allowances
can be estimated by the factors presented in Table 8-4. These factors are
intended to compensate for less than perfect conditions.
The passing distance (ship clearance) width element is show in Table 8-5.
Bank clearance is shown in Table 8-6.
A comparison of these three suggested preliminary design values is
shown in Table 8-7. This comparison assumes very good environmental
and operational conditions, moderate vessel speed, no hazardous cargo,
and a water-depth-to-ship draft ratio of between 1.5 and 1.15.
This comparison shows good agreement for preliminary (concept) de-
sign use.

8.7 PRELIMINARY DESIGN GUIDELINES

FOR CHANNEL BENDS

8.7.1 General
The swept path of a ship that is making a turn is wider than its swept
path in a straight channel simply because of the ship’s geometry. Experience
has shown that controllability of a ship while it is turning is degraded
compared to its maneuverability in a straight channel, thus causing a wider
swept path. The width of the swept path is dependent on the following
factors:
r Ship yaw angle when turning
r Length and beam of the ship
r Ship rudder angle
r Location and spacing of aids to navigation in the turn
r Local current and other environmental conditions

If the turning is in a given channel configuration, the channel turn radius,

the deflection angle of turn, and the channel width and variability will also
have an impact. Generally, channels with turns and bends are more difficult
to navigate compared with straight reaches because of the reduction in
sight distance, the reduced effectiveness of aids to navigation, the changing
channel cross-sectional area, and the greater effect from varying current
and bank suction forces.
70 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

TABLE 8-4. Additional Widths for Straight Channel Sections

(PIANC, 1997, page 21).

Outer Channel
Width Vessel Exposed to Inner Channel
WI Speed Open Water Protected Water

(a) Vessel speed (knots)

- fast > 12 0.1 B 0.1 B
- moderate > 8–12 0.0 0.0
- slow 5–8 0.0 0.0
(b) Prevailing cross-wind (knots)
- mild ≤ 15 (≤Beaufort 4) all 0.0 0.0
- moderate > 15–33 fast 0.3 B —
(>Beaufort 4–Beaufort 7) moderate 0.4 B 0.4 B
slow 0.5 B 0.5 B
- severe > 33–48 fast 0.6 B —
(>Beaufort 7–Beaufort 9) moderate 0.8 B 0.8 B
slow 1.0 B 1.0 B
(c) Prevailing cross-current (knots)
- negligible < 0.2 all 0.0 0.0
- low 0.2–
0.5 fast 0.1 B —
moderate 0.2 B 0.1 B
slow 0.3 B 0.2 B
- moderate > 0.5–1.5 fast 0.5 B —
moderate 0.7 B 0.5 B
slow 1.0 B 0.8 B
- strong > 3 fast 0.7 B —
moderate 1.0 B —
slow 1.3 B —
(d) Prevailing longitudinal current (knots)
- low ≤ 1.5 all 0.0 0.0
- moderate > 1.5–3 fast 0.0 —
moderate 0.1 B 0.1 B
slow 0.2 B 0.2 B
- strong > 3 fast 0.1 B —
moderate 0.2 B 0.2 B
slow 0.4 B 0.4 B
 CHANNEL WIDTHS 71

TABLE 8-4. (Continued)

Outer Channel
Width Vessel Exposed to Inner Channel
WI Speed Open Water Protected Water

(e) Significant wave height Hs and length λ(m)

- Hs ≤ 1 and λ ≤ L all 0.0 0.0
- 3 > Hs > 1 and λ = L fast ≈ 2.0 B
moderate ≈ 1.0 B
slow ≈ 0.5 B
- Hs > 3 and λ > L fast ≈ 3.0 B
moderate ≈ 2.2 B
slow ≈ 1.5 B
(f) Aids to Navigation
- excellent with shore 0.0 0.0
traffic control
- good 0.1 B 0.1 B
- moderate with infrequent 0.2 B 0.2 B
poor visibility
- moderate with frequent ≥0.5 B ≥0.5 B
poor visibility
(g) Bottom surface
- if depth ≥ 1.5T 0.0 0.0
- if depth < 1.5T then
- smooth and soft 0.1 B 0.1 B
- smooth or sloping
and hard 0.1 B 0.1 B
- rough and hard 0.2 B 0.2 B
(h) Depth of waterway
- ≥1.5T 0.0 ≥1.5T 0.0
- 1.5T–
1.25T 0.1 B <1.5T–
1.15T 0.2 B
- <1.25T 0.2 B <1.15T 0.4 B
(i) Cargo hazard level
- low 0.0 0.0
- medium ≈ 0.5 B ≈ 0.4 B
- high ≈ 1.0 B ≈ 0.8 B
72 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

TABLE 8-5. Additional Width for Passing Distance in Two-Way Traffic

(PIANC, 1997, page 22).

Outer Channel Inner Channel

Width for Passing Distance, Wp Exposed to Open Water Protected Water

Vessel speed (knots)

- fast > 12 2.0 B —
- moderate > 8–
12 1.6 B 1.4 B
- slow 5–8 1.2 B 1.0 B
Encounter traffic density
- light 0.0 0.0
- moderate 0.2 B 0.2 B
- heavy 0.5 B 0.4 B

TABLE 8-6. Additional Width for Bank Clearance

(PIANC, 1997, page 22).

Outer Channel Inner Channel

Width for Bank Clearance Vessel Exposed to Protected
(WBr or WBg ) Speed Open Water Water

Sloping channel edges Fast 0.7 B —

and shoals: Moderate 0.5 B 0.5 B
Slow 0.3 B 0.3 B
Steep and hard Fast 1.3 B —
embankments, structures: Moderate 1.0 B 1.0 B
Slow 0.5 B 0.5 B
Note: B = Beam, L = Length, T = Draught, for Tables 8-4, 8-5, and 8-6.

TABLE 8-7. Comparison of Corps 83, Corps 02, PIANC 97 Methods.

Channel
Maneuvering Ship Maneuvering Total
Method Traffic Bank Lane Clear Lane Bank Width

Corps One way 0.6 B 1.6 B 0.6 B 2.8 B

1983 Two way 0.6 B 1.6 B 0.8 B 1.6 B 0.6 B 5.2 B
Corps One way 3.0 B
2002 Two way 5.0 B
PIANC One way 0.5 B 1.5 B 0.5 B 2.5 B
1997 Two way 0.5 B 1.5 B 1.4 B 1.5 B 0.5 B 5.4 B
 CHANNEL WIDTHS 73

FIGURE 8-5. Channel Width Increase in Turns (EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).
74 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

8.7.2 Channel Width in Turns

Because the swept path of a ship making a turn is wider than its path in
a straight channel reach, a greater channel width is required in turns and
bends. The swept path of a turning ship depends mainly on the channel
turn radius and the ship length. Figure 8-5 presents a definition sketch of
the relevant variables and a plot giving required channel width increase in
turns. The deflection angle of the channel turn also may be a factor. Because
pilots often use the bank effects to assist in a turn, the bank conditions also
are very important to the design of the turn. However, the recommended
turn design does not include bank effects. The graph shown in Figure 8-5
can be used to relate the required channel width increase in a turn for design
purposes. Channel turns should not be designed for turn radius-to-ship
length ratios less than 3, because ships cannot maneuver hydrodynamically
around a sharper turn.

8.7.3 Turn Design

The increase in channel turn width shown in Table 8-8 can be designed
in several ways. Recommendations for specific turn types varying from
a straightforward (unwidened) angle to connecting circular arcs also are
presented in Table 8-8 as a function of the turn deflection angle. The deflec-
tion angle in deep-draft channels is defined as the angle of the turn, not the
angle between the vessel and the channel. In general, the greater the de-
flection angle, the longer the channel turn or curve for a given turn radius.
A common method to provide the additional channel width is the apex
or cutoff method, which provides the turn width increase on the inside of
the turn using a single straight line. These configurations are shown on
Figure 8-6. Alternatively, multiple straight lines can be used to replace the
single line on the inside of the turn. In some cases, the outer point also can
be cut off, because ships would not use the outer turn apex. The apex turn

TABLE 8-8. Recommended Channel Turn Configurations

(EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).

Deflection Ratio of Turn Radius Turn Width Increase

Angle, Deg Ship Length (Factor × Ship Beam) Turn Type

0–10 0 0 Angle
10–25 3–5 2.0–1.0 Cutoff
25–35 5–7 1.0–0.7 Apex
35–50 7–10 0.7–0.5 Curved
>50 >10 0.5 Circle
 STRAIGHT SEGMENTS CURVED SEGMENTS
S = 25° − 35°
S ≤ 10°
W
+W
∆W
S = 10° − 25° W
W
W
ANGLE TURN R
wW W+∆W ∆W = WIDTH INCREASE
∆W+W R−
2
W+∆W
R+
W ∆W = WIDTH INCREASE 2

R CURVED TURN
S = 25° − 35° S > 50°
75

W
∆W + W CUTOFF TURN
W
∆W = WIDTH INCREASE ∆W + W
w
W
L
L

∆W = WIDTH INCREASE
R R

W + ∆W > W

APEX TURN

CIRCLE TURN

FIGURE 8-6. Recommended Channel Turn Configurations (EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).
76 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

may produce adverse current patterns, especially in canals or high current

situations, which would be detrimental to ship navigation. An alterna-
tive turn may be designed, using circular arcs with parallel or nonparallel
banks. The width increase is provided through the turn with transitions
to the straight channel segments on each end of the turn. Transitions assist
pilots in maintaining control as the ship is steered out of the turn.

8.7.4 Successive Turns

Successive turns or double bends can be reverse turns (S-bends) or con-
secutive (U-type) turns. An important variable is the length of straight
segment between turns that should be provided to allow the ship pilot
to regain control prior to starting the maneuvers for the second turn. A
straight segment of at least five times the design ship length should be
allowed between successive turns. In some cases, the physical constraints
will dictate tighter turns, perhaps with little, if any, straight segments be-
tween turns.

8.8 CHANNEL WIDTH FINAL DESIGN

Selection of the channel widths (both straight and bend segments)

should utilize site specific vessel simulator studies. An example of sim-
ulation studies for final design is the Houston ship channel enlargement
project. These studies were run with the help of local ship pilots to assure
accuracy and credibility.
Three scenarios were tested:

1. Existing conditions: 400 ft wide × 40 ft deep for model validation

2. Phase I: 530 ft wide × 45 ft deep channel (design ships 156 and 140 ft
beams)
3. Phase II: 600 ft wide × 50 ft deep channel (design ships 173 and 140 ft
beams)

Preliminary channel width guidance given in Table 8-7 for the Corps
1983 method indicates minimum channel width of 5.2B for two-way traf-
fic with ideal conditions. This would result in the following preliminary
channel design width:
156 + 140
Phase I Average Beam Width = 148 ft
2
Preliminary Channel Width 148 × 5.2 = 769.6 ft
173 + 140
Phase II Average Beam Width = 157 ft
2
Preliminary Channel Width 157 × 5.2 = 816.4 ft
 CHANNEL WIDTHS 77

The simulations show that the Phase I 530-ft wide and Phase II 600-ft
wide channels were adequate for safe two-way vessel traffic. Therefore,
considerable channel excavation was saved; however, this was only after
numerous ship simulation runs using local pilots. Additional information
on ship simulation studies and the Houston ship channel enlargement
studies is presented in Chapter 15.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 9
SEDIMENTATION

It is crucial to accurately predict sedimentation in a proposed navigation

channel in order to determine the economics of the project (maintenance
dredging cost) and reliability and duration of project depths.

9.1 NATIVE SOILS

Native soils must be considered, first, from the standpoint of channel

construction. Problem soils encountered in channel construction include
consolidated clays, cemented sands, or outcroppings of bedrock. These ma-
terials may require special dredging equipment, techniques, and disposal,
and, thus, will have an impact on construction costs. Channel location and
alignment may be determined by the existence of hard-to-remove mate-
rials along alternate channel routes. Native soils also must be considered
from the standpoint of maintenance dredging following project construc-
tion. The presence of fine sands, silts, or easily erodible clays along the
route of the project may indicate large dredging requirements to maintain
the project channel in future years. For example, wind or ship waves in
shallow areas adjacent to the navigation channel may resuspend signifi-
cant quantities of unconsolidated fine sediments that might eventually be
transported toward and deposited in the navigation channel. Surface sedi-
ment sampling should be conducted throughout the project area, and core
borings or subsurface acoustic measurements should be made along the
most attractive channel routes to fully assess the composition and charac-
teristics of native soils or the presence of rock.

9.2 RIVERINE SEDIMENTS

Sediments transported to the project by riverine flows in estuaries or

embayments usually consist of coarse to medium sands carried primar-
ily as bed load, medium to fine sands carried as bed or suspended load,
79
80 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

and silts and clays carried as suspended load. When the project channel in-
cludes the zone in which rivers enter embayments, the coarse and medium
sands and even some of the fine sands and silts may deposit as flow veloc-
ities are reduced below the velocity necessary to maintain motion of the
sediment particles. These deposits of sand and silt are often in the form of
delta-shaped shoals that recur annually, and are the reason why mainte-
nance dredging for control is required. The finer sands and silts usually
will be deposited in the lower reaches of the navigation project, but the
deposition usually will be distributed over a fairly long reach of the chan-
nel. High stage-discharge events may alter the pattern of deposition from
time to time and distribute the coarser particles over a longer reach of the
channel. Deposition of clay particles depends on the hydrodynamics and
water characteristics of the lower reaches of the navigation project. If the
project is in an estuarine setting in which salty water from the ocean can
mix with the sediment-carrying riverine waters (e.g., Savannah Harbor)
a phenomenon known as flocculation occurs, whereby clay particles ag-
gregate into larger and heavier flocs that are likely to deposit. In some
instances, very heavy concentrations of flocs remain in suspension in a
layer near the bottom. This is referred to as fluff or fluid mud. Before per-
manent deposition of clay sediments, which is a time-dependent process,
the tidal hydrodynamics of an estuarine system tend to concentrate the
location of the flocs. If the estuarine system is of the stratified type (i.e.,
there is a well-defined saltwater layer underlying the freshwater layer) the
bulk of the clay-particle shoals will be concentrated in a zone mapping the
upstream intrusion of the saltwater layer. If the saltwater-freshwater inter-
face is less defined, the clay-particle shoals will be distributed more widely
through the middle and lower reaches of the project. In nonsaltwater set-
tings, such as the Great Lakes, the clay particles may remain in suspension
and be introduced into the lake region as suspended load. Maintenance
dredging is almost always required to maintain channel depths and widths
throughout the areas of clay particle deposition.

9.3 RIVER REACHES

In cases in which the deep-draft project extends well upriver (above the
zone of flow reversal), such as the Columbia River or the lower Mississippi
River, deposition of medium to coarse sands occurs in the river crossings,
with most of the fine sand and silt moved downstream to estuarine or
coastal zones. Not all river crossings along a navigation project require
maintenance dredging. In many cases, the minimum crossing depth that
occurs naturally over a water year is greater than the project depth. For
example, of the several river crossings that exist on the lower Mississippi
River from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, downstream to the Head of Passes,
 SEDIMENTATION 81

a distance of about 225 river miles, only about 7 of the 225 miles require
annual maintenance dredging. Of course, if the project were deepened, the
number of crossings requiring maintenance dredging would most likely
increase.

9.4 LITTORAL SEDIMENTS

Sediments are introduced into the navigation project from the littoral
systems that exist in all lakes and oceans. Near shore, currents driven by
waves, wind, or tides cause sediment particles (usually medium to fine
sands but occasionally clays and silts) to be moved along the shore. As
the sand-size sediments reach the deeper waters of the navigation project,
deposition occurs in and near the entrance channel. Clays entering from
the lower end may be transported upstream by estuarine circulation. Struc-
tures such as jetties are used to trap the sands and keep shoals from forming
in the navigation project. A sand-bypassing arrangement may be necessary
to maintain the trapping capability of the jetty structures and to minimize
damage to adjacent beaches that interruption of the littoral process usually
causes. The planner/designer is required to study and develop predictions
of erosion and accretion for a distance of 10 miles on either side of an en-
trance channel improvement project.

9.5 PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUES

Four basic approaches are available to study sedimentation processes

in deep-draft navigation channel projects: field studies, physical hydraulic
model studies, numerical model studies, and combinations of these study
techniques. Field studies include the collection of prototype data, such that
future behavior can be extrapolated or developed into general design prin-
ciples and trial-and-error remedial measures in which proposed remedial
schemes are constructed without the benefit of corroborating studies. The
collection of prototype data is always recommended for deep-draft navi-
gation projects; trial-and-error remedial schemes must be highly justified
prior to installation because of the high risk of failure involved. Physical
models have been used for many years to study sedimentation problems
associated with deep-draft navigation projects. However, it is not possible
to accurately predict deposition volumes. Numerical modeling of sedi-
mentation phenomena has become a relatively well-developed technique,
which employs special computational methods such as finite difference or
finite element approximations to solve mathematical expressions that do
not have closed-form solutions. In some situations, numerical models can
provide a reasonable prediction of deposition volumes. Physical and nu-
merical models are discussed in more detail in EM 1110-2-1607. It should
82 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

be stressed that both physical and numerical models rely heavily on proto-
type observations; therefore, if model studies are anticipated, the lead time
and resources must be provided to collect the quality and quantity of data
necessary to support these studies. In some cases, combinations of the
various techniques that involve the application of physical and numerical
models may be used, as well as prototype data and analytical procedures
to take advantage of the strong points of each technique.

9.6 CHANNEL SHOALING

Sediment budget and shoaling studies are needed for before- and
after-construction conditions. These studies provide the basis for estimat-
ing maintenance dredging requirements, disposal area locations, training
structures, and entrance sand-bypass assessment. Shoaling rates are also
needed for river expansions caused by port facilities and turning basins.

9.7 BEACH EROSION

Many navigation channels connect the ocean to an estuary or bay

through sandy beaches. When jetties are built to prevent littoral drift from
entering the channel, the volume of sand reaching the downdrift beach is
reduced. This reduced littoral drift usually results in erosion of the down-
drift beach. If the erosion is unacceptable from an economic or environmen-
tal standpoint, mitigation measures will be required. Traditional methods
of erosion control are shoreline protection with revetments, breakwaters,
groins, and nourishment by bypassing sand from one side of the inlet to
the other. Some bypassing methods involve the use of weirs with sand
traps, detached breakwaters, and various methods of dredging and sand
pumping, including jet pumps.

9.8 SOURCE

This information was taken from EM1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft.

 Chapter 10
DREDGING AND DISPOSAL

10.1 DREDGES

Dredges used for ship-channel dredging fall into two categories: hy-
draulic and mechanical.
Hydraulic dredges use pumps and pipes to pull channel-bottom sed-
iment up to the dredge, where it is held for later disposal or pumped
through a pipeline to a disposal site. Self-propelled hopper dredges and
cutter-head pipeline dredges are the most common hydraulic dredges.
Mechanical dredges, such as clamshell and dipper dredges, lift bottom
sediment using a bucket/crane arrangement.

10.2 HOPPER DREDGES

Hopper dredges are self-propelled seagoing ships of from 180 to 550 ft

long, with the hulls and lines of ocean vessels (Figure 10-1, a and b).
They are equipped with propulsion machinery, sediment containers
(hoppers), dredge pumps, and other special equipment required to per-
form the essential function of removing material from a channel bottom
or ocean bed. Hopper dredges have propulsion power that is adequate
for required free-running speed and dredging against strong currents and
excellent maneuverability for safe and effective work in rough, open seas.
Dredged material is raised by dredge pumps through drag arms connected
to drags in contact with the channel bottom and is discharged into hop-
pers built in the vessel. Hopper dredges are classified according to hop-
per capacity. Large-class dredges have hopper capacities of 6,000 cu yd
or greater, medium-class hopper dredges have hopper capacities of 2,000
to 6,000 cu yd, and small-class hopper dredges have hopper capacities of
from less than 2,000 to 500 cu yd. During dredging operations, hopper
dredges travel at a ground speed of from 2 to 3 mph and can dredge in
depths of about 10 to over 80 ft. They are equipped with twin propellers

83
84 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

a.

b.
FIGURE 10-1. Self-propelled Seagoing Hopper Dredge (COE Portland District,
Dredge Biddel).

and twin rudders which provide the required maneuverability. Table 10-1
gives available specifications for vessels in the Corps hopper dredge fleet
at the time of writing (2004). Nongovernment hopper dredges generally
are larger, with capacities of up to 32,000 cu yd.
Operation of a seagoing hopper dredge involves greater effort than
that required for an ordinary ocean cargo vessel, not only because of the
needs of navigation of a self-propelled vessel but also because the needs
 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL 85

TABLE 10-1. Characteristics of Corps of Engineers Hopper Dredges.

Hopper Dredging Vertical

Capacity Draft Depth Clearance Special
Name Cu Yd Loaded Max Required Capability

Essayons 6000 27
80
— Direct Pumpout

Wheeler 8400 29
5

80
— Direct Pumpout
Yaquina 825 12
45
— Direct Pumpout
Macfarland 3140 22
0

55
90
Direct Pumpout/
Sidecasting

associated with its dredging purposes must be satisfied. Dredging is ac-

complished by progressive traverses over the area to be dredged. Hopper
dredges are equipped with large centrifugal pumps similar to those em-
ployed by other hydraulic dredges. Suction pipes (drag arms) are hinged
on each side of the vessel with the intake (drag) extending downward
toward the stern of the vessel. The drag is moved along the channel bot-
tom as the vessel moves forward at speeds up to 3 mph. The dredged
material is sucked up the pipe and deposited and stored in the hoppers
of the vessel. Once fully loaded, hopper dredges move to the disposal
site to unload before resuming dredging. Unloading is accomplished ei-
ther by opening doors in the bottoms of the hoppers and allowing the
dredged material to sink to the open-water disposal site or by pumping
the dredged material to upland disposal sites. Because of the limitations
on open-water disposal, most hopper dredges have direct pumpout capa-
bility for disposal in upland, confined sites. Before environmental restric-
tions were in place, the primary objective for operating hopper dredges
was to obtain the maximum economic load; that is, to remove the maxi-
mum quantity of material from the channel prism in the shortest pumping
time.
An example of disposal at designated sites at sea is shown in Figure
10-2.
Hopper dredge disposal also can be at a dispersive site in or near a
naturally deep portion of the ship channel. Dredged material deposited at
these sites will be carried out to sea on the ebb current. Figure 10-3 shows
these sites at the Grays Harbor project.
Another disposal option for a hopper dredge is the overflow method.
The dredged material from the channel bottom is pumped, then allowed to
overflow back into the water column. This method is effective where strong
river currents transport sediment seaward, such as in the Mississippi River
channel.
86 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 10-2. Hopper Dredge Splits Its Hull in Gulf of Mexico near Galveston,
Texas (COE, Digital Visual Library).

10.3 HYDRAULIC PIPELINE DREDGE

The hydraulic pipeline cutterhead suction dredge is the most commonly

used dredging vessel and is generally the most efficient and versatile
(Figure 10-4). It performs the major portion of the dredging workload in
the United States. Because it is equipped with a rotating cutter apparatus
surrounding the intake end of the suction pipe, it can efficiently dig and
pump all types of alluvial materials and compacted deposits, such as clay
and hardpan. This dredge can pump dredged material long distances to
upland disposal areas.
The cutterhead dredge is generally equipped with two stern spuds used
to hold the dredge in working position and to advance the dredge into the
cut or excavating area. During operation, the cutterhead dredge swings
from side to side alternately using the port and starboard spuds as a
pivot. Cables attached to anchors on each side of the dredge control lat-
eral movement. Forward movement is achieved by lowering the starboard
spud after the port swing is made and then raising the port spud. The
dredge is then swung back to the starboard side of the cut centerline. The
port spud is lowered and the starboard spud lifted to advance the dredge.
The excavated material may be disposed of in open water or in confined
 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL 87

NORTH
BAY
DAMON W E S T P ORT
PT. PT. CHEHALIS
DISPOSAL HALF
SITE MOON
BAY
GRAYS
HARBOR
S. JETTY
DISPOSAL SITE

OC E A N SOUTH
JETTY
SH O R E S
NORTH
JETTY

FEDERAL
CHANNEL

PAC I F I C PHOTO: SEP 1999

N OCEAN

FIGURE 10-3. Dredged Material Disposal Sites, Grays Harbor, Washington

(COE, Seattle District).

FIGURE 10-4. Hydraulic Pipeline Cutterhead Dredge Components

(EM 1110-2-5025, 1983).
88 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 10-5. Dredging Sacramento Ship Channel (COE, Digital

Visual Library).

disposal areas located upland or in the water. In open-water disposal, only

a floating discharge pipeline, made up of sections of pipe mounted on
pontoons and held in place by anchors, is required. Additional sections
of shore pipeline are required when upland disposal is used. In addition,
the excavated materials may be placed in hopper barges for disposal in
open water or in confined areas that are remote from the dredging area.
In cutterhead dredging, the pipeline transport distances usually range up
to about 3 miles. For commercial land reclamation or fill operations, trans-
port distances are generally longer, with pipeline lengths reaching as far
as 15 miles, for which the use of multiple booster pumps is necessary.
Figure 10-5 shows a hydraulic pipeline cutterhead dredge in action.

10.4 DUSTPAN AND SIDECASTING DREDGES

Dustpan and sidecasting dredges are specialized versions of the

hydraulic-type dredge. They can only discharge into open water adjacent
to the navigation channel. Details of these and the hopper and pipeline
dredges are presented in EM 1110-2-5025, “Dredging and Dredged Mate-
rial Disposal,” March 25, 1983.
 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL 89

FIGURE 10-6. Dipper Dredge (EM 1110-2-5025, 1983).

10.5 MECHANICAL DREDGES

The two major types of mechanical dredges are the dipper and bucket
dredges. The dipper dredge is basically a barge-mounted power shovel.
It is equipped with a power-driven ladder structure and operated from
a barge-type hull. A schematic drawing of the dipper dredge is shown
in Figure 10-6. A bucket is firmly attached to the ladder structure and is
forcibly thrust into the material to be removed. To increase digging power,
the dredge barge is moored on powered spuds that transfer the weight of
the forward section of the dredge to the bottom. Dipper dredges can work
in depths of up to 50 ft. Although there is a great variability in production
rates, dipper dredges routinely achieve 30 to 60 cycles per hour.
The best use of the dipper dredge is for excavating hard, compacted
materials, rock, or other solid materials after blasting. Although it can be
used to remove most bottom sediments, the violent action of this type of
equipment may cause considerable sediment disturbance and resuspen-
sion during maintenance digging of fine-grained material. There will be a
significant loss of the fine-grained material during the hoisting process. The
dipper dredge is most effective around bridges, docks, wharves, pipelines,
piers, or breakwater structures because it does not require much area to
maneuver; there is little danger of damaging the structures as the dredg-
ing process can be controlled accurately. No provision is made for dredged
material containment or transport, so the dipper dredge must work along-
side the disposal area or be accompanied by disposal barges during the
dredging operation.
The bucket type of dredge is so named because it utilizes a bucket to
excavate the material to be dredged (Figure 10-7). Different types of buckets
can perform various types of dredging. The types of buckets used include
the clamshell, orangepeel, and dragline, and can be quickly changed to suit
operational requirements. The vessel can be positioned and moved within a
limited area using only anchors; however, in most cases, anchors and spuds
90 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 10-7. Bucket Dredge (EM 1110-2-5025, 1983).

are used to position and move bucket dredges. The material excavated is
placed in scows or hopper barges that are towed to the disposal areas. The
crane is mounted on a flat-bottomed barge, on fixed-shore installations, or
on crawler mounts. Twenty to thirty cycles per hour is typical, but large
variations exist in production rates because of the variability in depths and
materials being excavated. The effective working depth is limited to about
100 ft. Figure 10-8 shows a clamshell dredge in New York Harbor.

FIGURE 10-8. Clamshell Dredge (COE, Digital Visual Library).

 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL 91

10.6 DISPOSAL

Disposal options for dredged material include in-water or diked con-

tainment. The in-water methods include the following:

r Open ocean
r In-channel at a dispersal location
r Uncontained site in the estuary
r Returned to water column by agitation or overflow method

Diked containment option can be used for contaminated dredged ma-

terial and as a way to insure the sediment will not return to the channel.
The development of habitat is one of the beneficial uses of dredged
material. The four general categories of habitat options are:

r marsh
r upland
r island
r aquatic

The corps of engineers manual EM 1110-2-5025, “Dredging and Dredged

Material Disposal,” March 25, 1983, provides detailed coverage of disposal
alternatives.

10.7 SOURCE

Most of the information for this chapter was taken from EM 1110-2-5025.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 11
JETTIES

11.1 LAYOUT

In order to reduce channel waves and control sediment movement, en-

trance channel alignment must be carefully oriented. In most cases, two
jetties (one on each side) will be needed to keep littoral drift from entering
the channel. Jetties are normally aligned parallel to the selected channel
alignment. However, this alignment can be curved to establish a stable
deep channel on the outside of the bend. These curved jetties act like a
river training system; however, strong tidal or river currents are needed
for proper performance. Converging alignments (arrowhead type) often
produce an unsatisfactory layout for the following reasons:

1. They are more costly because of their greater length.

2. They allow more wave action in the channel than parallel jetties.
3. They allow channel meandering or poor alignment because they lack
the channel-training ability of parallel jetties.

The channel and jetty layout considerations to be taken in to account

follow:

1. Natural entrance channels in noncohesive granular material nor-

mally are unstable.
2. Parallel aligned twin jetties are generally preferred over arrowhead
or single jetties when tidal currents are strong.
3. In certain situations, curved alignment should be considered if there
is a significant ebb flow discharge or river discharge. This alignment
takes advantage of river hydraulics to discharge and maintain navi-
gation depths on the outside of the bend. Caution should be exercised
with such a design, as the channel could undermine the jetty.
4. Straight jetty alignments required closer spacing than a curved
alignment to maintain channel depths. Hydraulic model tests are
generally advisable for jetty layout to optimize alignment, lengths,
and stability of jetty armor.
93
94 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

11.2 SPACING

It is important to consider navigation difficulties that could be encoun-

tered because of wave action and poor visibility when planning spacing
between jetties. The distance between the inner toes of the jetties should be
at least 50% greater than the length of the design vessel and not less than
400 ft. It might not be possible to hold the original alignment following
construction, because most tidal entrance channels tend to migrate to an
alignment adjacent to one of the jetties. It is usually uneconomical to main-
tain a channel in a different location from its natural migration tendency;
however, if the channel gets too close to the jetty, the structural integrity of
the jetty could be threatened, and additional toe protection will be needed.
Jetty spacing also should be wide enough to allow safe vessel transit for
the design wind, wave, and current conditions.

11.3 LENGTH

As a general rule, jetties should be long enough to extend beyond the

littoral drift zone so that sediments and breaking waves do not impact
entrance channel navigation. It is also desirable to end the jetty at the
bottom contour equal to the entrance channel depth. This is not always

FIGURE 11-1. Coos Bay Jetties, Oregon Coast (COE, Digital Visual Library).
 JETTIES 95

possible when the channel is dredged in a gentle, sloping continental, such

as the Gulf of Mexico. A typical jetty configuration is shown in Figure 11-1.

11.4 TYPES

The most common type of jetty is rubble-mound (stone). Cross-sections

for this type are shown in Figure 11-2.
Rubble mound structures are usually cost-effective if a suitable rock
quarry is accessible. For high wave environments, adequate armor rock
might be 20 tons or more. Figure 11-3 shows the size of armor rock needed
for repair work on the Oregon Coast.

FIGURE 11-2. Typical Rubble-Mound Cross-Sections for Nonbreaking and

Breaking Waves (EM 1110-2-2904, 1986).
96 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 11-3. Armor Rock for Yaquina Jetty Repair Work (COE, Portland
District).

FIGURE 11-4. Examples of Concrete Armor Units (EM 1110-2-1100, Part VI,
awaiting publication).
 JETTIES 97

The advantages of rubble-mound jetties include its mass for absorbing

wave impacts; its ability to adjust to changes in the sand foundation; and
the lack of catastrophic failure, only slow degradation.
In areas where suitable armor rock is not available, precast concrete
armor units can be a cost-effective solution. Examples of these types of
armor units are shown in Figure 11-4.
The most common concrete unit to be used at the present time is the
Dolos. Figure 11-5 shows Dolos units being cast in Tacoma, Washington,
for use in a jetty repair in Hawaii. It was more cost-effective to cast these
units in the mainland United States and transport them to Hawaii than to
ship all the materials to Hawaii and cast them on site.
The latest addition to the concrete armor unit family is the Core Loc
(see Figure 11-4). This unit combines the best elements of the Accropod
and Dolos. The additional bulk of the Core Loc mitigates the breakage
problems with Dolos units.
Another common type of jetty is the cellular type, shown in Figure 11-6.
This type has been used in the Great Lakes and Gulf Coast where there are
seasons of relatively mild or no wave action. This allows a calm season for
construction. This type of jetty can be cost-effective because the cells are
filled with sand or gravel.
Composite jetties with a rubble base and concrete or timber crib top
have been used in the Great Lakes. Figure 11-7 shows this type of jetty at
the entrance to the Port of Duluth.

FIGURE 11-5. Dolos Armor Units Cast in Tacoma, Washington (COE, North
Pacific Division).
 FIGURE 11-6. Cellular Jetty (EM 1110-2-2904, 1986).

FIGURE 11-7. Concrete Composite Jetty at Duluth Harbor (COE, Digital

Visual Library).
 JETTIES 99

11.5 SOURCE

Design details and additional information is presented in EM 1110-2-

2904, Design of Breakwaters and Jetties, 8 August 1986 and EM 1110-2-1100,
Coastal Engineering Manual, Part VI, Chapter 2, “Types and Functions of
Coastal Structures,” awaiting publication.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 12
SHIP LOCKS

Locks often are an integral part of a ship channel. Locks can (1) provide
flat pools for waterways with elevation changes; (2) prevent flooding from
high water on connecting rivers, storm surges, or high tides; and (3) prevent
salinity intrusion. Locks are used in the following situations:

1. To handle waterway elevation changes: the Saint Lawrence Seaway, Wei-

land Canal, and locks at Sault Saint Marie, Michigan, provide navi-
gation from the Atlantic Ocean to Lake Superior, with an elevation
increase of 600 ft. The Poe Lock at Sault Saint Marie, Michigan, is
shown in Figure 12-1.
2. To prevent flooding: the Inner Harbor Locks in New Orleans prevent
high Mississippi river stages from flooding a low land area and still
provide ship transit from the Gulf of Mexico into the Mississippi
River navigation channel. River stages can be as high as 18 ft above
the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal water level (Figure 12-2).
3. To prevent salinity intrusion and stabilize upstream water levels: the Hi-
ram M. Chittenden Locks in Seattle provide a stable lake level for Lake
Union and Lake Washington and a salinity barrier to the salt sea-
water of Puget Sound. This lock also has special provision to mini-
mize salt water migration into the lakes during lockage (Figure 12-3).
Rotterdam and Inchon, Korea, are examples of locks in tidal zones
that provide a stable water level upstream from the locks.

Table 12-1 lists the ship locks presently operating in the United States.
Some planned changes to these locks include a replacement of the Davis
and Sabine Locks with a single lock that has the same dimensions as the
Poe Lock. Also, the Inner Harbor Lock in New Orleans is scheduled to
be replaced with a 1,200-ft-long and 110-ft-wide lock at the same site. The
Inner Harbor lock planned construction is unique in that lock modules will
be fabricated off-site and floated in by barges. The estimated construction
start date for this project is October 2006. A photo of the existing site is
shown in Figure 12-2.
101
102 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 12-1. Soo Locks at Sault St. Marie, Michigan; Ship Departing from
Poe Lock (COE, Digital Visual Library).

FIGURE 12-2. Inner Harbor Canal Lock (COE, Digital Visual Library).
 TABLE 12-1. Ship Locks in the United States.

Minimum
Name/ Width Length Depth on Sill Normal Lift
Year Opened Waterway Location in Feet in Feet in Feet in Feet

Hiram M. Chittenden Lake Washington 80 760 29 26

(2 locks) Ship Canal 28 123 16 26
1916 Seattle
Inner Harbor Gulf Intercoastal
Navigation Canal Water Way 75 640 32 9
1923 New Orleans
MacArthur Connection between
1943 Lake Huron and Lake 80 800 31 22
103

Superior
St. Marys River, Mich.
Poe Connection between
1968 Lake Huron and Lake 110 1200 32 22
Superior
St. Marys River, Mich.
Davis Connection between
1914 Lake Huron and Lake 80 1350 23 22
Superior
St. Marys River, Mich.
Sabine Connection between
1919 Lake Huron and Lake 80 1350 23 22
Superior
St. Marys River, Mich.
104 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 12-3. Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, Seattle, Washington; Large Lock

for Ships, Small Lock for Pleasure Craft (COE Seattle District).

The St. Lawrence Seaway/Great Lakes is the most extensive ship chan-
nel and lock system in North America. This navigation system is 2,038 nau-
tical miles long and extends from the Atlantic Ocean to Duluth, Minnesota.
There are 14 locks at 6 different locations for a total lift of 600 ft. The 15
locks between Lake Erie and the Atlantic are 766 ft long, 80 ft wide, and 30
ft of clearance over the gate sill. The maximum size of vessels using these
locks is 740 ft long, 78-ft beam, and 26-ft, 3-in draft.

TABLE 12-2. Ship Lock Comparison.

Lock Size, Ft Depth Over Maximum Ship Size, Length, Ft
Location Length Width Sill, Ft Length Beam Loaded Draft

St. Lawrence 766 80 30 740 78 26.25

Seaway
Poe Locks at Sault 1,200 110 32
St. Marie, MI
Panama Canal 1,000 110 41 950 105.75 39.5*
*Draft in fresh water, less in the dry season
 SHIP LOCKS 105

The four parallel locks at Sault St. Marie, Michigan, are of various sizes;
the largest is the Poe Lock, which is 1,200 ft long, 110 ft wide, and 32 ft
minimum depth over the sill.
In contrast, the Panama Canal locks are 1,000 ft long and 110 ft wide.
The maximum size of ships that use this system is 950 ft long, 105.75-ft
beam, and 39.5-ft draft in fresh water (smaller in the dry season).
Table 12-2 compares these two systems.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 13
OTHER PROJECT FEATURES

13.1 GENERAL

This chapter covers ship channel features that are found in some but not
all projects. These features include the following:

1. Turning basins
2. Anchorage areas
3. Salinity barriers
4. Diversion works
5. Bridges
6. Hurricane barriers
7. Sediment traps
8. Training dikes and revetments
9. Port berthing and maneuvering areas

13.2 TURNING BASINS

In normal operations, turning basins are used by pilots in conjunction

with two or more tugs to bring a ship about. Pilots also take full advantage
of the prevailing currents and wind conditions to help maneuver the ship.
The pilot strategy may be different on flood or ebb tide current and may
change with wind direction. If the ship is equipped with thrusters (bow or
stern, or sometimes both), these will be used to the fullest. The ship engine
and rudder, which will provide additional control, are usually manipu-
lated. Care is taken to keep the ship stern away from shoals, rocks, banks,
and docks to minimize possible damage to propellers and rudders. Pilot
strategy may change, however, depending on the location of the bridge
on the ship. When the bridge is located at or near the stem of the ship,
turning will be accomplished using the stern and another visible reference
to control and monitor ship position.

107
108 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Navigation-channel project improvements should provide for a turning

basin to enable the ship to reverse direction and to allow an outbound
sailing transit. The basin is usually located at the head of navigation near the
upstream end of the channel project, upstream of a group of terminals and
docks on a long channel, or at the entrance to a side channel with berthing
facilities. The turning basin should be designed to provide sufficient area
to allow the design ship to turn around using its bow and stern thrusters
(if available), and the assistance of the local port tug. Preference in turning
basin location should be given to a site with the lowest current effects,
which has a major impact on the turning ship, and the size of the turning
basin. Figure 13-1 shows recommended shape and size of turning basins
in low and high current locations.

TURNING BASIN

TU
GS 1.2L
TO
1.5L
IP
SH

CURRENT
CHANNEL WIDTH

LOW CURRENT LAYOUT

CURRENT SPEED TURNING BASIN

KNOTS SIZE MULTIPLIER (*L)
0 < 1/2 1.2
1/2 < 1 1/2 1.5
> 1 1/2 SIMULATOR DESIGN

TURNING BASIN

FUNCTION OF CURRENT
DISTANCE

CURRENT DRAFT
1.5 L + +

CURRENT CHANNEL WIDTH

TUGS

HIGH CURRENT CONFIGURATION

(DESIGNED WITH SIMULATOR)

FIGURE 13-1. Turning Basin Alternative Designs (EM 1110-2-1613,

2002 Draft).
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 109

13.2.1 Size
The size of the turning basin should provide a minimum turning
diameter of at least 1.2 times the length of the design ship, where prevailing
currents are 0.5 knot or less. Recent simulator studies have shown that
turning basins should provide minimum turning diameters of 1.5 times the
length of the design setup, where tidal currents are less than 1.5 knots. The
turning basin should be elongated along the prevailing current direction
when currents are greater than 1.5 knots and designed according to tests
conducted on a ship simulator (Figure 13-1). Turning operations involving
empty ships or ships with high sail areas and wind speeds of greater than
25 knots should also be designed using a ship simulator.
Where traffic conditions permit, the turning basin should use the
navigation channel as part of the basin area. The shape of the basin is usu-
ally trapezoidal or elongated trapezoidal, with the long side coincident
with the prevailing current direction and the channel edge. The short side
should be at least equal to the design multiple (1.2 or 1.5, depending on the
current) times the ship length. The ends should make angles of 45◦ or less
with the adjacent edge of the channel, depending on local shoaling tend-
encies. Modifications of this shape are acceptable to permit better sediment
flushing characteristics or accommodate local operational considerations.

13.2.2 Depth
Normally, the depth of a turning basin should be equal to the chan-
nel depth leading to or adjacent to the basin proper to prevent confusion,
which could cause grounding accidents. The normal dredging tolerance
and advance maintenance allowance are included in the depth of the turn-
ing basin.

13.2.3 Shoaling
A turning basin will tend to increase shoaling rates above normal chan-
nel rates because of the increase of the channel cross-sectional area, which
modifies current patterns. Increased shoaling in the basin could cause mod-
ifications in shoaling patterns farther downstream or upstream.

13.3 ANCHORAGES

Anchorages are provided near the entrance to some ports for vessels
waiting for berthing space, undergoing repairs, receiving supplies and
crews, waiting for inspection, and lightering off cargo. In cases when a
ship must transit a long navigation channel and encounter heavy traffic
110 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-2. Alternative Anchorage Designs (EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).

to get to the port area, additional anchorage also may be provided. As

shown in Figure 13-2, the design of the required anchorage area depends
on the method of ship mooring, the size and number of the ships in the
anchorage, and the environmental forces (wind, currents, and waves) act-
ing on the anchored ships. Normally, anchorage areas provide space to
allow for free-swinging bow anchoring, as some ships are not equipped
with stern anchors. Free-swinging moorings require a circular area with a
radius equal to the length of the ship plus the length of the anchor chain
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 111

(the scope of the anchor). The U.S. Navy (1981) calculated a set of tables
giving these required dimensions, from which the following approxima-
tion can be developed for average 50-ft-depth conditions and design ship
lengths of 700 to 1,000 ft:

D/L = 3.0

where
D = diameter of anchor swing in feet
L = ship length in feet

This formula assumes that the length of the anchor-chain swing circle is six
times the depth and that 90 ft of anchor drag occurs. Large free-swinging
anchorages can be expensive to construct and maintain, as sedimentation
frequently becomes a problem. The designer should consider the use of
fixed mooring dolphins, which can substantially reduce the dredging area
costs. Figure 13-2 presents two design anchorage configurations for two
ships with free-swinging and fixed mooring situations.

13.4 SALINITY BARRIERS

13.4.1 Ship Locks

Salinity barriers may be required to control and mitigate the effect of
salinity intrusion. A navigation lock is often used as an effective barrier
against ocean salinity migrating into freshwater portions of estuaries and
canals. General guidelines for salinity barrier design are presented in EM
1110-2-1607. The navigation conditions for ship locks require careful de-
sign, especially with regard to lock approach conditions, which should
provide adequate distance without waves, turns, and cross-currents. An
additional concern is the density-driven salt water admitted into the lock
chamber and then into the upper pool during the lockage of vessels for
navigation. Several devices and strategies have been developed to deal
with this phenomenon including submerged gates on the lock floor, pneu-
matic barriers, and special design of lock-filling and emptying systems.
EM 1110-2-1611 and EM 1110-2-1604 discuss navigation and lock design
considerations, respectively.

13.4.2 Submerged Barriers

Barriers can be located at the deeper portions of the navigation channel
to reduce salinity intrusion by stopping the deeper, denser saline water’s
movement upstream. Permanent sills have been considered for installation
112 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-3. Saltwater Barrier (ASCE Manual No. 80).

in San Francisco Bay to reduce possible saltwater migration into the San
Joaquin Delta. A temporary erodible sill was implemented in the Lower
Mississippi River during the 1988 drought to help protect the freshwater
supply of New Orleans. The barrier made from dredged material was
successful (Figure 13-3). For maximum efficiency, the barriers should be
impervious. Rubble-mound structures with an impermeable core and a
curtain of impermeable fabric have been suggested and model-tested for
submerged salinity barriers, but none has been built to date. The barrier
must be submerged low enough to permit safe navigation in the channel;
however, its crest can be higher outside the project limits. Inflatable or
movable barriers can be lowered to permit passage of shipping, then raised
to reduce or eliminate salinity intrusion. Air bubble screens or water jets
also may be used in certain situations to minimize the effects of channel
deepening on saltwater intrusion.

13.5 DIVERSION WORKS

Diversion works are constructed to separate navigation channels from

upland streams and to divert upstream flows. The purpose of the diversion
may be to prevent sediment in the stream from shoaling the navigation
channel, to limit salinity intrusion into the natural stream channel, or to
return upstream flows back to estuarine areas for environmental purposes.
Diversion works consist of a dam to close off normal discharges, as well as
a canal to convey diverted waters to a neighboring stream, bay, or sea. The
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 113

environmental and navigational consequences of proposed flow diversion

schemes will require intensive study because potentially major changes in
water quality and degradation of navigation conditions from crosscurrents
and current increases can result.

13.6 BRIDGES

Ship-channel enlargement projects often need to accommodate wider

beam ships. Consequently, bridges may need modification, replacement,
or removal. The clear horizontal and vertical spacing available for navi-
gation at overhead bridges should be sufficient to permit the safe transit
of the design ship that is expected to use the navigation channel under
normal operational conditions. The 1972 Waterways Safety Act placed the
responsibility for establishing bridge clearances with the U.S. Coast Guard.
Therefore, initial project design planning of navigation projects involving
new or existing bridge crossings should be coordinated with the local Coast
Guard District Office; final design will require Coast Guard approval. The
following general guidance also applies to hurricane barriers, power line
towers, and other structures that may obstruct navigation in a waterway.

13.6.1 Horizontal Clearance

In general, the horizontal clearance between bridge piers, including
bridge fenders, should be equal to or greater than the local channel width.
The location of bridge piers should be planned so that a ship will ground
rather than collide with piers or obstructions when it fails to stay within
the channel. Some projects with older bridges, which were built when
ships were much smaller, may have very difficult navigation conditions,
including having very small ship clearances. The project planner/designer
should study the possibility of upgrading such bridges or other struc-
tures to reduce possible navigation hazards. In some cases, shorter-than-
desirable distances between bridge piers may be dependent on local con-
ditions. Each design should consider the following factors:

1. Navigation traffic density and pattern (one- or two-way)

2. Alignment and speed of water current
3. Risk of collision
4. Potential damage from collision, loss of life, hazardous cargo spillage,
bridge and ship damage, and interruption to waterway and bridge
traffic
5. Cost of bridge pier fendering to protect bridge and vessels
6. Possible addition of islands around bridge piers
7. Span, alignment, and clearance of other bridges on the waterway
8. Tug assist
114 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

13.6.2 Vertical Clearance

Ship superstructure, including radar and radio masts, may well be a
limiting factor in ship navigation under railroad and highway bridges or
other overhead obstructions above waterways and channels. The vertical
clearance under a bridge is the vertical height between the water level
during normal ship transits and the lowest member of the bridge struc-
ture over the channel width. In tidal waterways, the specified water level
usually corresponds to a high tide level, such as mean high tide or mean
higher high tide. In rivers, some small percentage of the occurrence of wa-
ter level has been used to specify the water level. A study of the variation of
water surface about higher elevations should be undertaken for important
waterway projects to establish vertical bridge clearance.

13.6.3 Bridge Approaches

The navigation approach to overhead bridges should preferably be
straight and normal or nearly normal to the bridge alignment. Cross-
current alignment and magnitude have a significant effect on navigation
conditions and may require an increase in channel width as well as possi-
ble channel or bridge realignment. The length of the straight reach of the
approach channel on each side of the bridge should be a minimum of five
times the design ship length.

13.6.4 Examples
The Golden Gate Bridge, shown in Figure 13-4, is an excellent example
of generous vertical and horizontal clearance for ships. Figure 13-5 shows
a more restricted vertical clearance in the Charleston Harbor, Charleston,
South Carolina. Figure 13-6 shows a restricted horizontal clearance at Coos
Bay, Oregon. The railroad bridge in the background has a center mounted
swing span.

13.7 HURRICANE BARRIERS

Storm and hurricane surges historically have caused major floods and
damage in Europe. In the United States, structural barriers located near and
across the entrance to rivers, bays, and coastal regions have been proposed,
designed, and, in some cases, built in a number of developed areas. The
following discussion presents important navigational impacts that should
be considered in barrier planning and design.
Hurricane and storm surge barriers are normally located as close to the
ocean as possible to increase the area of protection inside the river or bay.
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 115

FIGURE 13-4. Golden Gate Bridge Provides Generous Clearance For Ships
[USS Enterprise (Navy Web, chinfo.navy.mil)].

FIGURE 13-5. Restricted Bridge Clearance, Charleston Harbor (COE, Digital

Visual Library).
116 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-6. Inbound Ship in Coos Bay Ship Channel After Passing Through
Railroad Bridge (COE, Portland District).

In most cases, a navigation gap or lock will be required as a part of the

barrier. The approaches to the navigation gap or lock should allow for
a straight sailing course for a distance equal to five times the design ship
length. The design should reduce or prevent crosscurrents and wave action
in the gap approach to maintain safe navigation. The width and depth of
the navigation gap should be designed to allow adequate clearance by
normal size ships with due regard for safety of ship transits inside the
barrier. To reduce upstream surge transmission, the gap width and depth
should be kept as small as possible. Thus, there is a need to plan and design
in order to optimize and balance the flood-reduction benefits of a project
with the requirements of navigation.
Because current velocities through the navigation gap will be greater
than the normal or preproject currents in the waterway, the design should
consider whether the user ships can navigate safely through the hurricane
barrier. A satisfactory design of the navigation gap and adjacent control
gates usually will require the development and use of appropriate nu-
merical and physical models, as well as a ship simulator study. From these
studies, an optimum arrangement and barrier location can be developed to
provide for adequate surge protection and safe ship navigation conditions.
Model studies also can provide assistance during project construction to
reduce any adverse navigation conditions.
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 117

13.8 SEDIMENT TRAPS

Sediment traps or deposition basins are areas in the waterway that are
excavated in or near the navigation channel to reduce shoaling in the project
navigation channel and manage the sedimentation processes so that the
project maintenance dredging is conducted in the most cost-effective man-
ner. Navigation projects in both estuarine and littoral environments pro-
vide for sediment traps. The effects of the sediment trap on navigation
should be considered in the design, and trap location should consider the
range of conditions and proposed dredging operations at the sediment
trap. For example, the location of a sediment trap on the outside edge of a
turn may eliminate the bank cushion effect normally used by pilots to as-
sist in turning the ship. The investigation procedures, which use physical
and numerical models of sediment traps for estuarine areas, are outlined
in EM 1110-2-1607.

13.9 TRAINING DIKES AND REVETMENTS

13.9.1 Dikes
In rivers and waterways with high sediment transport subject to shoal-
ing, training structures frequently are required to help maintain deep-draft
navigable channel depths during low-water season. Several different types
of training dikes have been developed to control navigation channel align-
ments and maintain adequate channel depths, including spur dikes, vane
dikes, longitudinal dikes, and L-head dikes. Training structures usually
are designed to constrict flow at low-water seasons, thus increasing water
currents to help flush sediment from the navigation channel. Longitudinal
dikes extending along the waterway often are used to help guide or direct
currents to reduce shoaling and improve navigation conditions. Dikes are
usually constructed of timber pile clusters, stone, or piling with stone fill.
Refer to EM 1110-2-1611, Layout and Design of Shallow-Draft Waterways for
a more thorough discussion of this topic.

13.9.2 Revetments
Bank erosion caused by currents or wave wash from navigation is
frequently a problem in natural streams and waterways with erodible
banks. Protection from bank erosion with the use of revetments should
be considered during project design. Rock riprap and articulated concrete
mattress have both been used as revetments to control bank erosion. In
most ship channel projects, wind waves and river or tide currents exceed
the erosion power of ship waves. This is because the ship is usually moving
118 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

at a moderate speed (4 to 10 knots) and the ship channel is a considerable

distance from shore.
The height of waves generated by a moving vessel is dependent on the
following factors:

1. Vessel speed
2. Vessel draft and hull shape
3. Water depth
4. Blockage ratio of ship to channel cross-section

The effects of waves will depend on the height of the wave generated
and the distance between the ship and the smaller boats or shoreline.
Figure 13-7 shows a schematic of the ship wave form.
Figure 13-8 shows a ship-generated wave in the Columbia River channel.
If ship waves will be higher than those occurring naturally from wind
or ocean swell or those created by fast-moving pleasure craft, mitigation
measures may be required. The two most common mitigation measures
are reduced speeds and shore protection. In some cases, it may be practi-
cal to place the navigation channel at a sufficient distance from the shore
so that the waves reaching the shore will not be destructive. Reducing
speed could affect the efficiency of the project and have some effect on the
maneuverability of the vessel. Physical model studies using the vessels
expected to use the channel could provide a more accurate indication of

FIGURE 13-7. Schematic of Ship Wave System (EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft).
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 119

FIGURE 13-8. Ship Wake in the Columbia River Channel

(COE, Portland District).

the wave heights that will be developed under different conditions and
the most effective means of reducing their effects. For example, a reach
of the Sacramento River Deep Water Channel has experienced repetitive
failure of riprap along its levees. A model study indicated that riprap fail-
ure occurred with ship speeds of 7.8 and 8.1 miph, with waterway to ship
cross-sectional area ratios of 4.3 and 6.1, respectively. This indicated that
riprap failure in the Sacramento channel was caused by the stern wave
or bore and subsequent rapid drawdown generated by vessel speeds in
excess of 6.8 miph. It was determined that the average vessel speed in the
channel was 8.4 miph, which induced a stern wave with a 4 ft drawdown
in one minute that could remove filter or embankment material and cause
subsequent failure of the riprap. Restricting the vessel speed to a maxi-
mum of 6.8 miph reduces the stern wave and rapid drawdown and was
considered more practical than enlarging the channel to a value equal to
or greater than seven times the typical vessel cross-sectional area.
Another example of ship wave mitigation is the Lake Washington ship
canal, Seattle, Washington. This confined canal is used by pleasure craft,
commercial fishing vessels, and NOAA ships (over 300 ft long), which are
based in the fresh water of Lake Union. A speed limit of 7 knots is in place
to control ship wave heights. The speed limit is enforced by the Seattle
Police Department.
120 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-9. Houston Ship Channel (COE, Digital Visual Library).

13.10 PORT BERTHING AND MANEUVERING AREAS

Many commercial harbors have docks parallel to the shore so the

berthing area is a project element between the dock and the navigation
channel. The berth width should accommodate the beam of the longest
size vessel expected to be tied up at the dock. Additional width may be
desirable for movement of service vessels without encroaching into the
navigation channel. These service vessels could be tugs or fuel barges.
Examples of shore parallel docks are the Houston ship channel (Figure
13-9) and the Port of Portland, Oregon (Figure 13-10).
The second type of dock has a configuration that is perpendicular to
shore. The water space between docks is called a slip. The Seattle, Wash-
ington, waterfront is an example of this configuration (Figure 13-11).
The advantage of the shore perpendicular layout is that it can accom-
modate many more piers than the shore parallel. This pier configuration
is often used for ferries and allows for rapid docking and undocking. Fig-
ure 13-12 shows a ferry dock orientation in Puget Sound, Washington.
The U.S. Navy uses both types of dock configurations in their many
home ports around the world. Figure 13-13 shows the USS Lexington un-
docking from a shore parallel wharf in Pensacola, Florida. Design guidance
for Navy slip length and width is shown in Figure 13-14.
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 121

FIGURE 13-10. Port of Portland, Oregon.

122 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-11. Seattle, Washington, Waterfront (NOAA Photo Library).

PIANC (1997) recommends the berths should be aligned within about

30◦ of the prevailing winds, whereas currents aligned with the berth
should be no more than 3 knots and perpendicular to the berth, no
more than 0.75 knots. PIANC (1997) further recommends the use of ves-
sel simulator studies to optimize the size of berthing and maneuvering
areas.
For successful docking and undocking operations, maneuvering areas
may be needed, in addition to the channel width and berthing areas.
The Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station (WES) Research
Ship Simulator was used to evaluate the design of Phase II of the John F.
Baldwin Ship Channel, San Francisco Bay, California (TL-85-4, June 1985),
to study the impact of the deepened channel on the navigability of large
tankers inbound to the Long Wharf docking facility near Richmond Harbor.
The present channel and maneuvering area is 35 ft deep and is inadequate
for the larger tankers bringing crude oil from the Alaskan North Slope. The
San Francisco District has proposed to deepen the channel to 45 ft deep. The
authorized 35-ft-deep channel was simulated to verify the ship simulator
setup as well as establish the base maneuvering strategies and the proposed
45-ft-deep channel was simulated to study the proposed conditions. In
addition to the tankers, container ships navigating into Richmond Harbor
entrance channel also were simulated to investigate the impact of channel
deepening on other ships using the maneuvering area.
The proposed project will allow fully laden 87,000-dwt and partially
laden 150,000-dwt tankers to unload at the Long Wharf. Present tanker
FIGURE 13-12. Ferry Boat Docks in Puget Sound, Washington
(NOAA Photo Library).

FIGURE 13-13. USS Lexington (COE, Digital Visual Library).

123
124 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-14. Length and Width of Slips (Piers and Wharves, Military
Handbook 1025/1, October 1987).

operations require all but the smallest tankers to anchor in the main bay
and off-load a substantial part of the cargo into shallower draft tankers that
can be accommodated with the 35-ft-deep channel. The proposed channel
will reduce transportation costs as well as reduce the possibility of oil spills
in San Francisco Bay.
Tests for the base and proposed channel conditions were conducted us-
ing 87,000-dwt partially laden (30-ft draft) and 150,000-dwt partially laden
 OTHER PROJECT FEATURES 125

FIGURE 13-15. Alternative Designs, Maneuvering Area (TR HL-85-4).

(40-ft draft) tankers, respectively. Both flood and ebb current conditions
were simulated. In addition to ship track plots, several other critical pa-
rameters were plotted and studied, such as ship speed and docking posture
as it approaches the Long Wharf. The main container ship used to simulate
future size ships calling at Richmond Harbor was 810 ft long and 106-ft
beam loaded to a 32-ft draft. A smaller container ship with 638-ft length
and 100-ft beam also was used to simulate present-day ship sizes. All sim-
ulations were run with a 20-knot wind blowing from the southwest.
Test results indicate that it is very important to reduce tanker speed in
Southampton Channel for inbound transits to about 5 knots before starting
the large right turn into the maneuvering area. Acceptable docking pos-
tures can be achieved for both existing and proposed channel conditions
under both ebb and flood tide so as to allow safe tanker docking into the
Long Wharf. The container ship tests indicate that it is reasonably safe
to maneuver around the point and line up with the Richmond Harbor
entrance channel on flood tide. Ebb tide conditions require very careful
126 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 13-16. Typical Simulation Run for 150,000-dwt, 815-ft Long

Container Ship (TR HL-85-4).

control of ship speed and position to execute a safe turn in the maneuver-
ing area when piloting the 8l0-ft container ship. The 638-ft container ship
was much easier to maneuver around the point.
Figure 13-15 shows various configurations of the maneuvering areas.
Figure 13-16 shows typical simulation runs.
 Chapter 14
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

14.1 GENERAL

This chapter will explore the environmental impact of ship channels in

estuaries that are connected to oceans. The majority of ship channels are
within this environment. Some notable exceptions include the Great Lakes
and upper reaches of the Columbia River channel and the Mississippi
River channel, from the Gulf to Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Ship channel
construction in salt water and mixed salt- and freshwater estuaries can have
environmental impacts in three main categories: (1) altered circulation,
(2) dredging and disposal activities, and (3) jetty construction.

14.2 ALTERED CIRCULATION

Circulation may be altered as a result of modifications to an estuary,

its tributaries, or its sea connection. Changes in circulation may result in
changes in the spatial distribution of water quality constituents, in the
flushing rates of contaminants, in the pattern of scour and deposition of
sediments, and alteration of fish migratory and larval transport paths.
Environmental assessment of the effects of changes in circulation should
initially emphasize the physical parameters such as salinity, temperature,
and velocity, and their impact on plant and animal communities. Changes
in vertical stratification should be considered when channel deepening is
proposed. Increased density stratification inhibits vertical mixing, which
may result in depletion of dissolved oxygen (DO) in bottom waters. If
minimal changes occur in these parameters, then it can be generally as-
sumed that the chemical characteristics of the system will not change signif-
icantly. This approach is based on a methodology that permits assessment
without requiring extensive data and knowledge of the processes affecting
the water quality constituent of direct interest. However, this approach is
invalid if preliminary water quality surveys indicate the existence of toxic
constituents at concentrations potentially damaging to biotic populations.
127
128 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Prediction of change in circulation and its effect on the physical parame-

ters can be achieved through comparison with existing projects, physical
model studies, and numerical simulation. Changes in salinity may result
from the construction of estuarine control works or channel deepening.
Construction and operation of locks may cause salinity intrusion in up-
stream portions of estuaries normally used for freshwater supplies. Also,
diversion works may cause normally freshwater portions of an estuary to
become saline, or vice versa. If these freshwater supplies are used for mu-
nicipal, agricultural, or industrial purposes, then the prevention of salinity
intrusion can be a controlling factor in the design. Estuarine ecological
features also may be influenced by a reduction in salinity as a result of bar-
riers or diversion structures. The decrease in salinity may be detrimental
to a seafood industry, affecting such estuarine ecological features as oyster
beds or fish and shrimp nurseries. Consideration should be given to both
short- and long-term changes in salinity during all seasons of the year, as
these changes can have a drastic effect on sensitive ecological features.

14.3 DREDGING

The environmental effects commonly associated with dredging opera-

tions are increases in turbidity, resuspension of contaminated sediments,
and decreases in DO levels. However, research results indicate that the
traditional fears of water quality degradation resulting from the resus-
pension of dredged material during dredging and disposal operations are
for the most part unfounded. More detailed information on the impacts
of turbidity and the possible impact of depressed DO levels is given in
EM 1110-2-1202 and EM 1110-2-5025.
In some cases, the environmental impact associated with the dredging
of uncontaminated sediment may be insignificant. However, the impact
of fluid mud dispersal at open-water pipeline disposal operations appears
to be significant, at least for short time periods (i.e., months). Regardless
of the type of dredging or disposal operations, there are certain environ-
ments (e.g., spawning grounds, breeding areas, oyster and clam reefs, areas
with poor circulation) and organisms (e.g., coral, sea grasses, benthos) that
may be extremely sensitive to high levels of turbidity or burial by dredged
material. It is therefore necessary to evaluate the potential impact of each
proposed operation on a site-specific basis, taking into consideration the
character of the dredged material, the type and size of dredge and its mode
of operation, the mode of dredged material disposal, and the nature of the
dredging and disposal environment. The seasonal cycles of biological activ-
ity and the degree and extent of the potential short- and long-term impacts
relative to background conditions in the areas to be dredged also must be
evaluated. Although some of these impacts associated have not proved to
 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 129

be as severe as previously alleged, techniques to minimize environmental

impacts must be employed.

14.4 DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL

The three main methods of disposal are: (1) open water, (2) upland or
off channel, and (3) agitation.

14.4.1 Open Water Disposal

Prediction of physical effects of dredging and disposal is fairly straight-
forward. Physical effects include removal of organisms at dredging sites
and burial of organisms at disposal sites. Physical effects are restricted to
the immediate areas of dredging or disposal. In case studies, the recol-
onization of sites occurs in periods of months to 1 or 2 years. Disturbed
sites may be recolonized by opportunistic species that are not normally the
dominant species occurring at the site.
Many organisms are very resistant to the effects of sediment suspensions
in the water; aside from natural systems requiring clear water, such as coral
reefs and some aquatic plant beds, dredging or disposal-induced turbidity
is not of major ecological concern. The formation of fluid muds due to
disposal is not fully understood and is probably of some environmental
concern.
Release of sediment-associated heavy metals and chlorinated hydrocar-
bons to the water column by dredging and disposal has been found to be
the exception rather than the rule. Metals are rarely bioaccumulated from
sediments, and then only to low levels. Chlorinated hydrocarbons may be
bioaccumulated from sediments, but only very highly contaminated sed-
iments might result in tissue concentrations of potential concern. There is
little or no correlation between bulk analysis of sediments for contaminants
and their environmental impact.

14.4.2 Upland or off Channel

These disposal areas can be confined or unconfined and are often used
for habitat development, which is the establishment of relatively perma-
nent and biologically productive plant and animal habitats.
Four general habitats are suitable for establishment on dredged material:
marsh, upland, island, and aquatic. Within any habitat, several distinct
biological communities may occur. The determination of the feasibility of
habitat development will center on the nature of the surrounding biological
communities, the nature of the dredged material, and the site selection,
engineering design, cost of alternatives, environmental impacts, and public
130 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

approval. A decision regarding the type or types of habitats to be developed

must be made if this is the selected alternative. The decision will be largely
judgmental but, in general, site peculiarities will not present more than
one or two logical options.

14.4.3 Agitation Disposal Method

This method is usually applicable when there are strong river currents in
the ship channel. The dredge does not remove the sediment but resuspends
it to be carried downstream by the river current. Environmental impacts
are minimal as this method is usually used following major floods, when
the water column is usually very turbid.

14.5 JETTY CONSTRUCTION

A common characteristic of breakwaters and jetties is their location in

dynamic, high-energy environments. Physical features of the environment
where breakwaters and jetties are typically constructed reflect hydrody-
namic and sedimentological conditions that have attained a dynamic equi-
librium, a state of continuous change that remains balanced around some
average set of conditions. Environmental impacts will occur as the system
is initially imbalanced by the presence of the structure(s), and then returns
to a new set of dynamic equilibrium conditions. Potential environmental
impacts associated with these structures can be sorted into the following
categories, all of which are interrelated to some degree: water quality im-
pacts, biological impacts, and socioeconomic and cultural impacts. The
magnitude of severity of each type of impact can be expected to vary over
time. Each category of impact is briefly discussed here. Because break-
waters and jetties generate essentially similar impacts, they are treated
jointly.

14.5.1 Water Quality Impacts

Suspended sediment concentrations may be elevated in water immedi-
ately adjacent to the construction of a breakwater or jetty. In many in-
stances, however, construction will occur in naturally turbid estuarine
or coastal waters. Plants and animals residing in these environments are
generally adapted to, and very tolerant of, high suspended sediment
concentrations. However, when construction is to occur in a clear water
environment, such as in the vicinity of coral reefs or seagrass beds, precau-
tions should be taken to minimize the amounts of resuspended sediments.
Organisms in these environments generally are less tolerant to increased
PLATE 1. U.S. Aids to Navigation.
PLATE 2. Aids to Navigation Placement.
PLATE 3. Visual Buoyage Guide.
 B B
C
Lift
Open Spans Open
B
Closed Closed
A A D
(Main Channel)
A A
Fixed Bridge Double Leaf (Lift) Bascule Bridge

A A A D A

Vertical Lift Span Bridge (Open) Vertical Lift Span Bridge (Closed)

G F

F F
G

A A A

A A A
Double Opening Swing Bridge Double Opening Swing Bridge
(Open) (Closed)

PLATE 4. Combinations of Fixed Lights for Bridges and Structures Extending

Over Waterways (from U.S. Coast Guard Digital).
 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 131

siltation rates, reduced levels of available light, and other effects of elevated
suspended sediment concentrations.

14.5.2 Biological Impacts

Biological impacts are inherently difficult to quantify. Impacts, indicated
by changes in occurrences and abundances of organisms, may be masked
by background “noise’’ because of seasonal variations in populations, eco-
logical succession events, and natural perturbations (e.g., storms, harsh
winters, etc.). The types of biological impacts discussed here range from
well established to highly speculative.
Measurable amounts of bottom habitat are physically eradicated in the
path of breakwater or jetty construction. Given an example toe-to-toe width
of 125 ft, one linear mile of typical rubble structure replaces approximately
15.2 acres of preexisting bottom habitat. This loss of benthic (bottom) habi-
tat and associated benthos (bottom dwelling organisms) is more than offset
by the new habitat represented by the structure itself and by the reeflike
community that becomes established.
Water currents and turbulence along the base of the structure can pro-
duce a scouring action that prevents utilization by most benthic organisms
of the habitat area. This effect is largely confined to the bottom immedi-
ately adjacent to the structure and may occur along only a portion of the
perimeter, such as along the channel side of an inlet’s downdrift jetty.
One speculative source of biological concern related to altered hydro-
dynamic regimes at jettied coastal inlets involves transport of egg and lar-
val stages of fish and shellfish. Eggs and larvae of many important sport
and commercial species are almost entirely dependent on water currents
for transportation from offshore spawning areas through coastal inlets to
estuarine nursery areas. Jetties displace the entrance to an inlet forming
a potential barrier to eggs and larvae, particularly those carried by long
shore currents. Eddies or lee areas created in the vicinity of jetties may
act as sinks in which nonmobile stages become trapped or are delayed. In
view of the fact that numerous structures have been in place for quite a long
time with no apparent decline in estuarine-dependent species attributable
to their presence, a case can be made that such impacts, even if real, are
insignificant. Similar concerns have been voiced with regard to the move-
ments of juvenile and adult stages of various fish and shellfish. Because
these are generally highly mobile forms, the probability of negative impact
is even less significant.
Coastal rubble structures provide substratum for the establishment of
artificial reef communities. As such, breakwaters and jetties serve as a focal
point for aggregations of fish and shellfish that graze on sources of food or
find shelter there. Many species are attracted to the structures in numbers,
132 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

as evidenced by the popularity of breakwaters and jetties as sport fishing

locations.
Potential biological impacts can be summarized as follows:

1. The loss of benthic habitat and benthos in the area covered by the
structure(s)
2. The displacement of benthos as a result of scouring effects
3. The development of plant and animal communities on the substratum
provided by the structure(s)
4. The altered transport of egg and larval stages of fish and shellfish
through coastal inlets
5. The altered movement patterns of juvenile and adult stages of fish
and shellfish

14.6 RECENT EXPERIENCE

Following are two examples of environmental consideration for ship

channel deepening projects.

14.6.1 Houston Ship Channel

As part of this project, a 118-acre oyster reef was constructed near the
ship channel to mitigate for lost habitat when the channel was widened
and deepened. The reefs were built from limestone gravel (ranging in size
from 1/4 in to less than 3 in). The reef contract was completed in July 2000;
tests three months later showed the oysters had started to grow and were
about the size of a quarter.

14.6.2 Columbia River Ship Channel

This deepening project (40 ft to 43 ft) has not yet begun. The following
are environmental tests required by the state:
r Test for contaminants before dredging outside the 600-ft-wide navi-
gation channel
r Dredge outside the channel only when salmon migration is over
r Monitor to avoid damaging salmon, Dungeness crab, smelt, and stur-
geon during dredging

14.7 SOURCE

Information for this chapter came from EM 1110-2-1202, EM 1110-2-1607,

EM 1110-2-2904 and EM 1110-2-5025.
 Chapter 15
MODEL STUDIES

15.1 GENERAL

Development of deep-draft navigation projects affected by tides or river

currents often requires the use of model studies to determine the adequacy
of a proposed plan, as well as the need for modifications. Both physical
and numerical models can be used to analyze some of the factors that will
affect the safety and efficiency of the projects. However, because of the
complexity of currents and the effects of wind, waves, tides, and sediment
movement, the hybrid modeling approach (which uses both physical and
numerical models) is usually required to obtain an accurate evaluation
of the conditions that can be expected with each plan and modification
considered, particularly in estuarine areas.

15.2 PHYSICAL MODELS

Physical scale models are used to investigate flow patterns when com-
plicated three-dimensional (3-D) effects are necessary. Recent dramatic
advances in computer hardware and software have led to the use of
numerical models to replace and supplement physical model studies.
The following types of navigation investigations can be conducted with
physical models:

1. Shoaling and erosion characteristics

2. Salinity intrusion
3. Wave penetration and harbor response
4. Jetty design and armor stability
5. Ship response to waves
6. Channel width in critical navigation reaches
7. Tide heights and current patterns
8. Navigation conditions

133
134 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

ASCE Manual No. 97, Hydraulic Modeling Concepts and Practice (2000),
provides details of physical model design, operation, and application.

15.3 NUMERICAL MODELS

Numerical modeling is a rapidly developing discipline that can be at-

tributed to the general availability of fast, large-memory computers. A
numerical model basically consists of a numerical algorithm developed
from the differential equations governing the physical phenomena. All
numerical models require the study area to be distinguished by a grid or
mesh. Furthermore, testing the numerical results against a prototype data
set (verification) is necessary.
Numerical models may be used to replace or supplement physical mod-
els, and numerical models can do the following:

1. Provide general circulation patterns for deep- or shallow-draft ship

simulator studies
2. Determine shoaling and erosion characteristics
3. Address dredged material disposal issues and other water quality
measures
4. Investigate salinity intrusion
5. Study wave penetration and harbor response
6. Evaluate training structure designs

Numerous numerical models are available within the scientific commu-

nity. These models differ in several ways: formulation, governing equa-
tions, and user friendliness, to name a few. Some numerical models can
solve hydrodynamics and transport equations simultaneously, whereas
others are uncoupled.
The two basic numerical model formulations are finite difference and
finite element. Finite difference is the easiest to conceptualize. A finite dif-
ference model approximates the differential calculus operations over finite
distances, which gives an approximation of the governing equations at
discrete points. The finite element model inserts it into the exact form of
the governing equations. After boundary conditions are imposed, a set of
solvable simultaneous equations is created. The finite element solution is
continuous over the area of interest.
The governing equations describe the physical processes that are being
solved in the model. The dimensionality of the problem is dictated within
these equations. These equations describe the physics of the problem. For a
hydrodynamic model, these would include items such as friction, density,
gravity, rotation of the earth, wind, rain, inflows, and outflows.
 MODEL STUDIES 135

The term user-friendly is an all-encompassing issue dealing with ease

and efficiency of use. It addresses the process of creating a mesh, speci-
fying the parameters within the computational domain, analyzing the so-
lutions, and generating presentation- and report-quality graphics, online
documentation, and consultation support.
Enlargement of the Galveston-Houston Ship Channel was modeled with
the Corps’ TABS-MDS numerical modeling system in order to ensure that
deepening and widening the channel did not adversely alter salinity or cir-
culation patterns and damage fisheries in Galveston Bay. TABS-MDS uses
the finite element method to solve the governing equations for flow of wa-
ter and transport of salinity, temperature, and sediment. An interagency
panel advised the Corps on the validation of the model and found it to
reproduce observed tides, velocities, and salinity patterns in the bay sys-
tem. The panel then selected conditions under which the deepened channel
would be tested, including the effects of future planned water diversions
that were part of the Texas water development plan. The model showed
that enlarging the channel to 45 by 530 ft would not harm and in some
areas would enhance conditions for oyster production (Berger, 1995).

15.4 SHIP SIMULATOR MODELS

This model emerged in the 1980s as the best design tool to determine
safe channel widths and alignments. This model enables designers to study
the interactions of ships with the currents, wind, and banks as they are ma-
neuvered through navigation channels and waterways. Simulators allow
the use of both automatic controlled vessel navigation as well as navi-
gation with human pilots with realistic ship/tow controls in a simulated
ship-bridge environment. A test scenario is developed for channel design
dimension/alignment alternatives and conditions, such as flow rates, tidal
conditions, wind, visibility, and navigation marking. Test runs are con-
ducted through the simulated conditions, and can be conducted in real
time, simulating the prototype vessel transit speed or fast time (similar to
fast forward on a VCR), allowing for more runs. As the vessel is navigated
through the test areas, it is subjected to forces resulting from environmen-
tal factors and the vessel’s motion is determined one step at a time. As the
vessel progresses through the scene or changes its orientation, a computer-
generated view from the pilot’s window is displayed in color on a large
screen (Figure 15-1). This allows a pilot to observe the vessel in motion rel-
ative to physical objects as would occur in actual vessel transit. In addition,
the simulator generates a radar image of the vessel’s location. As the ves-
sel progresses through the channel, the scene is updated periodically. Key
navigation information also can be displayed on a precision navigation
136 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 15-1. Vessel Simulator (COE Waterway Experiment Station).

display. Data pertaining to the ship’s motion, location, and orientation in

the test area is recorded for later analysis. Tracking of the vessel through
the test area can be recorded during the simulation run for immediate
evaluation of the test results.
A recent example of vessel simulator use for a channel enlargement
project is the Houston, Texas, ship channel, which serves the nation’s
second largest port. The 400-ft-wide by 40-ft-deep channel was used by
5,400 ships and 50,000 barges in 1996. Ships with beams of 140 to 145 ft
used the channel; however, meeting/passing of two such ships was closely
monitored and controlled by pilots and not allowed except under certain
circumstances.
In some segments of the original ship channel (400 ft wide), the ship pi-
lots developed a risky maneuver called the “Texas Chicken,’’which allowed
the new generation of wide-beam ships to pass in the narrow channel. Both
ships sailed along the centerline of the channel. As the approach neared,
both ships briefly turned to starboard (right), then returned to the previous
course for a port-to-port passing. The hydrodynamic forces of the water
compressed between the two ships prevented contact. Following the pass-
ing, each vessel would return to the channel centerline. Figure 15-2 shows
the “Texas Chicken’’ maneuver.
The goal of the deepening and widening project was to allow safe transit
for these vessels (145 ft beam) and larger vessels.
 MODEL STUDIES 137

FIGURE 15-2, Top and Bottom: “Texas Chicken” Maneuver at Barbour’s Cut
on the Houston Ship Channel; approach and passing sequence. (U.S. Coast
Guard Digital). (Continued)
138 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 15-2. (Continued) “Texas Chicken” Maneuver at Barbour’s Cut

on the Houston Ship Channel; approach and passing sequence.
(U.S. Coast Guard Digital).

Ship simulators tested two phases of proposed channel enlargement:

Phase I 530 ft wide by 45 ft deep

Phase II 600 ft wide by 50 ft deep

Ships tested for these channel enlargements were:

Phase I 990 × 156 × 44 & 971 × 140 × 44

Phase II 1,013 × 173 × 49 & 971 × 140 × 44

Tests were conducted in the upper reach where the channel has several
bends, as shown in Figure 15-3.
Figure 15-4 shows a typical simulation run for the Phase II condition.
The simulation results confirmed the adequacy of Phase I (530 ft wide)
and Phase II (600 ft wide), and recommended some relatively minor mod-
ifications on the bends.
Construction started in 1999 on this 1/2-billion-dollar channel dredging
project.
Details of the Houston Ship Channel simulation study can be found in
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WES Technical Report HL-94-3, Ship
Navigation Simulation Study, Houston–Galveston Navigation Channels,
Texas, Report 2, Houston Ship Channel, Bayou Segment, April 1994.
 SAN JACINTO RIVER

CARPENTER BAYOU
SAN JACINTO
STATE PARK

GO
AT
IS
LA
ILL

ND
RG

S
CA PEGGY’S LAKE

H EM
Y -C
OX EXXON TERMINAL

JOGGY BAYOU
139

ALEXANDER ISLAND

BAYTOWN BRIDGE

SPILM
ANS IS HO
LAND G
IS
LA
ND

CUT
OURS
BARB

AT
KI
NS
PHASE I CHANNEL

ON
EXISTING CHANNEL MORGANS POINT
POWER LINE TOWERS

IS
LA
SCALE IN FEET

ND
0 5000 10,000

FIGURE 15-3. Houston Ship Channel, Bayou Section Project Map (TR HL-94-3).
 R
VE
RI
O
NT
CI
JA
N
SA
PAS
SING LYNCHBURG
ARE
A
140

MIN CLEARANCE AT PASSING

EL
NN

101-F
HA

T CL
EAR
IC

ANC
E
EI

SAN JACINTO
AS

LS
STATE PARK ESSE
EN V
PH

WE
T BET
444 F
E
ANC
EAR
T CL
202-F

SHIP TRACK PLOTS, PILOT 1

SAN JACINTO REACH, PHASE II CONDITIONS
SCALE IN FEET
0 500 1000 PILOTED OUTBOUND, 971-FT × 140-FT BULK CARRIER
TRAFFIC INBOUND, 1013-FT × 173-FT TANKER

FIGURE 15-4. Simulation of Phase II Passing Conditions (TR HL-94-3).

 MODEL STUDIES 141

15.5 VESSEL TRAFFIC FLOW SIMULATION

A traffic flow model (SHIPRISK) has been developed by the Delft Uni-
versity of Technology and Marine Safety Port of Rotterdam to assess the
comparative safety of port channel configuration and traffic management
scenarios.
This model is particularly applicable to existing ports with vessel track-
ing systems (VTS).
Two models are used for this simulation:

1. The traffic flow model HARBORISM simulates vessel traffic in the

ports and the approaches to the ports taking into account vessel traffic
rules (traffic rules in the channels, turning basins, mooring areas, etc.).
The output of this model provides the sail schedules of all vessels
calling at the port (entrance time, dwell time at the berth, departing
time, etc.), and is used as the input file for the SHIPRISK model.
2. The SHIPRISK model is used to estimate the numbers of potential
encounters (accidents), to devise alternative scenarios for channel
alignment, to plan port facility locations, to check traffic rules, and to
plan for weather conditions.

Additional discussion of this vessel traffic flow simulation model and

its application to the ports of Rotterdam, The Netherlands, and Puerto
America, Venezuela, is presented in Groenveld (2003).
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 16
ICE MANAGEMENT

16.1 GENERAL

In regions where ice formation can be expected, ice-related ship naviga-

tion problems should be considered in project design. Generally, deep-draft
ice-prone areas in the United States include the Great Lakes, St. Lawrence
Seaway, and Alaska. Ice cover affects the maneuverability of ships, the
power required to sail, the operation of navigation locks, and the stabil-
ity of structures. Obviously, the effects of ice on navigation increase with
the thickness and extent of ice coverage. Some of the problems encoun-
tered with regard to ice include a larger ship-turning radius and greater
shippower, which can increase movement of bottom sediment; ice accu-
mulation on ship bottom, which increases effective ship draft; higher loads
on structures from moving ice; ice accumulation on lock walls, gates, and
operating mechanism; and, in some cases, increased vibration in homes
and structures near the navigation channel. Ice effects are treated in some
detail in EM 1110-2-1612 and EM 1110-8-1.

16.2 DESIGN OF CHANNELS WITH ICE

All vessels, but particularly long cargo ships with vertical sides and a
blunt bow, have difficulty turning in ice. Because very few prototype tests
have been made to determine turning radii in ice, no specific recommen-
dations can be made for channel widths in bends or turning basins. Local
conditions of ice thickness and extent of coverage will be necessary to de-
velop adequate channel designs. It is important to keep turning basins
clear to allow ship maneuvers and prevent damage to hulls. It should be
noted that conventional commercial ships not specifically designed for ice
operation usually are unable to leave the navigation channel through an
ice cover once it has been created. Furthermore, repeated transits through
the channel may lead to accumulation of brash ice and the formation of
underwater ice ridges along the edges of the channel.
143
144 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Line bubblers have been used with some success in the Great Lakes. Ad-
ditional depth might be required for the installation of a bubbler system
unless the channel is sufficiently wide to permit the placement of the bub-
bler line outside of the ship channel. Bubbler systems do not provide ice
clearing but do create a line of weakness which makes ice breaking easier.
Channels should be aligned so that navigation can rely on range lights and
markers rather than floating navigation aids, which can be covered by ice
or displaced by ice movements.
In addition to the navigation impact of ice formation on the surface of
the water, under certain conditions ice can accumulate on the bottom of
vessel hulls. As a vessel progresses at slow speed through brash ice, pieces
become submerged and can be entrained underneath the hull, and the
relative water speed is insufficient to flush the ice. This process is enhanced
when the vessel’s bow is sloped or raked, as for a barge on inland waters
or when an oceangoing ship is empty. Under extremely cold conditions,
the brash ice can adhere to the hull of an empty or near-empty vessel.
This is because of heat loss as the result of air contact through the sparsely
loaded hold. The result of this is increased draft and resistance causing
maneuvering difficulties.

16.3 LOCKS

Lock operation during icing conditions can be difficult and time-

consuming. Ice buildup on lock walls may reduce the width of the lock
chamber to such an extent that it would be too narrow for the ship. Coat-
ings to reduce ice adhesion to lock walls and methods of ice control and
removal are covered in EM 1110-2-1612 and in ASCE Manual No. 94, Inland
Navigation: Locks, Dams, and Channels.
Consideration should be given to heating devices in or ice-preventive
coating on lock walls in the design of new structures or rehabilitation
of existing locks. Ice can be prevented from collecting in the miter gate
recesses by large-volume air bubblers. Ice in the approach to the lock can be
minimized by the placement of an air screen at the upper end of the guide
or guard wall. Ice accumulating on the bottom of ships increases their
draft, which can present problems in clearing the lock gate sills. The depths
over the sill should be increased along loading docks in ice-prone areas.
When it is not possible to prevent large amounts of ice from entering the
lock in front of the ship, it may be necessary to provide a skimmer or water
flushing system to remove the ice from the lock before the ship can enter.

16.4 EROSION AND SEDIMENT MOVEMENT

Sufficient studies have been done on sediment movement under ice

cover in rivers and restricted channels and studies on the Great Lakes
 ICE MANAGEMENT 145

to indicate any change in the rate of shore erosion resulting from ice.
Ice formed on a shore or riverbank could isolate and protect the shore.
However, ice formation may cause damage to training and stabilization
structures or the shoreline by gouging, removing protective vegetation, or
entraining sediment within the ice. Ice cover tends to damp ship-induced
bow and stem waves, which have relatively short periods. However, ice
cover has little effect on relatively long water-level fluctuations, such as
those resulting from drawdown, which can be significant, particularly in
restricted channels. Greater power will be required to move a ship through
ice, and, occasionally, a ship will get stuck with its screws turning with max-
imum power. High power and propeller rotation will tend to increase scour
and bottom sediment movement; these should be considered, particularly
when the ship is above underwater cable and pipeline crossings.

16.5 VIBRATION

Reliable reports indicate that there is an increase in the vibration of

shore structures near ship channels in winter. The reason for this increase
is not known. Preliminary investigations indicate that the energy causing
the vibration is primarily from the propellers and not from ice breaking
or from pieces of ice hitting against each other. Based on some verbal
reports that conditions are worse during light snow years, it is probable
that the vibrations are transferred through frozen soil structure. Until more
observations and measurements are made, no definite recommendations
can be made to minimize this problem.

16.6 MITIGATION OF ICE PROBLEMS

Maintenance of navigation in ice-covered channels requires ice break-

ing, which is the responsibility of the U.S. Coast Guard. Usually this is done
with specially designed ice-breakers. In thin ice (up to 6 in), normal ships
break ice as they move through the channel; however, most commercial
ships do not have the hull strength and power to break ice with thickness
greater than 6 in. The maritime insurance companies have specifications
by which they will underwrite certain ships operating in varying ice con-
ditions. Small harbor tugs specifically built for ice breaking are required
for ice-prone ports. These should have the capability of breaking ice that
is at least half the maximum anticipated thickness during a normal winter
season. These tugs are expected to operate throughout the season, keeping
ice broken up in the channel and turning basin and along docks and assist-
ing ships in the channel and turning basin. The effects of ice can be reduced
by using waste heat from power plants and sewage disposal facilities and
146 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

prohibiting municipalities from disposing of snow in the channel or trib-

utaries. In tidal zones, air screens or ice booms should be considered for
intermittent use to prevent ice from entering the channel during rising tide.
The drawdown and the amplitude of the bow wave generated by a vessel
is a function of ship size, channel blockage, and speed. A surrounding ice
sheet will dampen the wave, but the ice may be broken by large draw-
down. Broken ice floes could then drift into the navigation channel, which
could cause additional difficulties, especially to smaller ships. The broken
ice can refreeze into thicker ice, depending on temperature, thus creating
more severe channel blockage. If ice breakage extends to the shores, move-
ments of ice floes by wave action and induced currents resulting from
subsequent vessel transits may lead to damage of unprotected banks or
environmentally sensitive areas. Because the drawdown and bow wave
amplitudes decrease rapidly with decreasing ship speed, a minor reduc-
tion in vessel speed could avoid or minimize ice breakup and resulting
potential ice damages. (The Coast Guard ice breaking mission is discussed
in Chapter 20.)

16.7 SOURCE

Most of this information came from EM 1110-2-1612, EM 1110-2-1613,

and EM 1110-8-1.
 Chapter 17
ECONOMIC OPTIMUM DESIGN

17.1 GENERAL

To achieve the optimum design of a deep-draft navigation project, stud-

ies must be made of estimated costs and benefits of various plans, as well
as of alternatives on safety, efficiency, and environmental impacts. These
studies are used to determine the most economical and functional channel
alignment and design with regard to construction, maintenance, and re-
placement costs for various design levels. The adaptability of each design to
future improvements in navigational capability also should be given con-
siderable weight. Economic optimization analysis should consider various
elements involved in development and maintenance of the project, includ-
ing dredging and disposal, structures such as jetties and salinity barriers,
and aids to navigation.

17.2 CHANNELS

Channel alignments and dimensions (width and depth) should be

studied to determine what is acceptable for safe and efficient naviga-
tion. Costs, including initial construction, replacement, and annual main-
tenance, should be analyzed using a suitable interest rate and should
be determined for each alternative. Vessel trip time and tonnage, delays
for tides, weather conditions, and effects of reduced depths in channels
that have rapid shoaling tendencies should be considered when weigh-
ing the benefits of each alternative. The optimum economic channel is
selected from a comparison of annual benefits and annual costs for ini-
tial construction, replacement, and maintenance for each channel size and
alignment. The economic life of a channel, for computing costs and ben-
efits, is usually 50 years. The true design life is as long as the channel is
maintained.

147
148 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

17.3 STRUCTURES

Optimization of structures, such as jetties, is accomplished by estimat-

ing average annual construction, replacement, and maintenance costs, and
average annual benefits for various design levels. The “design level” is re-
lated to a specific event with a recurrence interval. For example, a structure
could be designed for a 50-year event or a 100-year event. A 100-year event
design would usually have a larger and more expensive structure. The el-
ements that are to be considered in an economic optimum or life cycle
analysis for structures are:

Project economic life

Construction cost for various design levels
Maintenance cost for various design levels
Replacement cost for various design levels
Benefits for various design levels
Probability for exceedance of various design levels

The construction cost generally will increase as the design level in-
creases.
Maintenance cost generally decreases as design level increases. Replace-
ment cost is less frequent, and the average annual costs of replacement are
less as design levels increase. Benefits generally increase as design lev-
els increase because frequency of losses decreases. For example, a jetty
with a low crest may overtop occasionally and force closure of the channel
because of unsafe wave conditions. The severity or magnitude of design
events (such as wave heights, water levels, or ice thickness) has a statisti-
cal distribution that can be ordered into a probability of exceedance. The
exceedance probability is plotted against the design level (Figure 17-1).

FIGURE 17-1. Exceedance Probability versus Design Level

(ASCE Manual No. 80).
 ECONOMIC OPTIMUM DESIGN 149

FIGURE 17-2. Project Cost Curves (ASCE Manual No. 80).

A series of project designs and cost estimates are developed for various
design levels. For example, a jetty could be designed for wave heights of
14, 16, 18, and 20 ft. Each wave height (design level) would have an ex-
ceedance probability similar to that shown in Figure 17-1. In the absence of
prototype information, average annual maintenance is often estimated to
be 1% of the initial construction cost. However, this approach does not con-
sider exceedance probability of the design level. A more realistic approach
would be to estimate average annual maintenance cost by multiplying the
exceedance probability of the design level by the construction first cost.
This maintenance cost should be compared with maintenance of similar
existing projects to assure realistic values. Average annual replacement
costs are obtained by estimating the cost of replacement and the year re-
quired. The current value of the replacement cost is converted to average
annual cost by using an appropriate interest rate and economic project life.
The project cost curves generally are similar to those shown in Figure 17-2.

17.4 BENEFITS

Project benefits are compared with project costs to determine the eco-
nomic optimum design. Achievable project benefits are developed through
economic studies, assuming that no constraints exist because of the de-
sign level. Achievable benefits are reduced by the benefits lost because the
design level is exceeded. Lost benefits are computed by multiplying the
annual achievable benefits by the probability of navigation loss for each
design studied. The results are typically displayed as shown in Figure 17-3.
A comparison of total project cost, actual benefits, and design level is shown
in Figure 17-4. The optimum economic design level occurs when net ben-
efits are at the maximum point, as shown in Figure 17-4. Normally, the
150 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 17-3. Benefits versus Design Level (ASCE Manual No. 80).

design level associated with the maximum net benefits will be selected for
project design. However, if the net benefit level is not well defined, it may
be prudent to select a higher design level to increase the factor of safety.

17.5 TRANSPORTATION SAVINGS

Design benefits are determined by savings in transportation, taking into

account ship trip time, cargo capacity, delays for tides, weather conditions,
and transit interference from reduced depths in channels that have rapid

FIGURE 17-4. Cost and Benefits versus Design Level (ASCE Manual No. 80).
 ECONOMIC OPTIMUM DESIGN 151

shoaling tendencies. Deeper channels will permit the use of larger ships,
which are more economical to operate. Some ships with a deeper draft and
greater cargo loading could use the channel; this may eliminate or reduce
the need for offloading (lighterage) some of the cargo before proceeding
to the port. Benefits are evaluated by determining the transportation costs
per ton of commodity for each increment of channel depth. This evaluation
must consider trends in shipbuilding to anticipate future ship sizes and
type of ship fleet that will be using the channel. Transportation costs are
based on the annual operating costs for each type of ship, including fixed
costs and annual operating expenses.

17.6 EVALUATION PROCEDURE

The basic economic benefits from navigation projects include the reduc-
tion of costs required to transport commodities and the increase in the value
of output for goods and services. These benefits usually are based on costs
not included with the proposed project improvements. Project benefits also
may be “lost opportunity” costs because of unimproved or undeveloped
navigation channels. Specific transportation savings may result from the
following:

1. More efficient use of larger ships

2. More efficient use of present ships
3. Reduction in transit or delay times
4. Reduction of cargo handling costs
5. Reduction of tug assistance costs
6. Reduction of insurance, interest, and storage costs
7. Use of water rather than land transport mode
8. Reduction of accident rate and cost of damage

17.7 SOURCE

This information is taken from ASCE Manual 80 (1993 Edition) and

EM 1110-2-1613, 2002 Draft (awaiting publication).
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 18
CONSTRUCTION

18.1 GENERAL

Construction items for ship channels fall into three categories:

1. Dredging
2. Structures
3. Relocations

Dredging is usually scheduled during the spring, summer, and fall, to

avoid winter storms that can make dredging operations hazardous. In
some projects, such as the Mississippi River ship channel, the flood sea-
son can interrupt dredging operations. Fish migration periods are usually
avoided to reduce environmental impact.
Structures, such as jetties, are also scheduled for construction during
calm wave periods. Figure 18-1 shows jetty rehabilitation work on the
Yaquina Bay project. During winter storms, waves can wash over the top
of these jetties.
Many of the West Coast jetties were constructed in the late 1800s and
early 1900s. Railroad trestles were sunk through the surf and the jetty stone
was delivered by train, then placed by cranes mounted on railroad cars.
Figure 18-2 shows this type of construction at the Columbia River South
Jetty reconstruction in November 1933.
The contemporary method uses mobile cranes operating on a road bed
on top of the jetty. The road construction proceeds forward as the jetty
is extended into the ocean. Winter waves generally wash away the road
surface, so it is desirable to complete the jetty rehabilitation work in one
construction season.
Relocation can be a major part of the construction effort. This relocation
of underchannel pipelines must precede channel dredging. The Houston
ship channel enlargement project had 90 underchannel pipelines that did
not meet clearance requirements. The pipelines had to be removed at the
owner’s cost by authority of navigational servitude. Should the owners
153
154 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 18-1. Yaquina Bay Jetty Rehab (COE, Portland District).

FIGURE 18-2. Trestle Construction Method (COE, Portland District).

 CONSTRUCTION 155

wish to replace the pipelines, a new or modified permit from the Army
Corps of Engineers is required.
Another constraint on the construction schedule is availability of funds.
The Houston ship channel project had 12 separate contracts spread over
6 years. This helped spread the project fund requirement of $719,090,000
over 6 budget cycles.
Construction schedules and activities should always consider the exist-
ing channel traffic. Delays and hazards to navigation need to be minimized.

18.2 SOURCE

The Houston-Galveston Navigation Channel project information was

taken from the Galveston District Web site www.swg.usace.army.mil.
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 19
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

19.1 WEATHER AND CHANNEL CONDITIONS

The safe operation of a ship channel requires an extensive communi-

cations network to provide ship captains and pilots with the following
information:

Weather predictions
Water levels
Hazards to navigation
Ship movement
Ice conditions
Other relevant navigational information

NOAA provides weather and channel hydraulic (tide and current) predic-
tions. The Coast Guard disseminates information on aids to navigation,
hazards, and other maritime-related topics. This information is available
on the World Wide Web and on marine radio channels. More information
on these subjects can be found in Chapters 20 and 21.
Other channel condition systems are implemented at the port level. The
Port of Portland, Oregon, has in place a system called LOADMX, which
monitors and reports actual and forecasted river levels. The system allows
pilots and ship masters to optimize loaded draft by predicting river and
tide levels at various points during the 100-mile long voyage on the river
(Beeman, 1985; PIANC Bulletin No. 51).

19.2 SHIP MOVEMENTS

The Coast Guard provides Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) on eight water-
ways in the continental United States and Alaska. These systems monitor
ship movements and provide this information to other vessels in the sys-
tem. Operational VTS sites for ship channels can be found at the following
locations:
157
158 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Prince William Sound, Alaska

Puget Sound, Washington
San Francisco, California
Los Angeles/Long Beach, California
Houston/Galveston, Texas
Berwick Bay, Louisiana
New York, New York
Sault St. Marie, Michigan

More information on the VTS services can be found in Chapter 20.

19.3 PILOTAGE

Pilots are required in every major seaport in the world. They are re-
sponsible for navigating ships safely through the ocean entrance channel.
Pilots usually go through a lengthy apprentice period, during which they
become knowledgeable about local conditions, as well as proficient in ship-
handling.
Many ports have specialized pilots to direct the ship in different seg-
ments of the ship channel. The licensed Columbia River bar pilots board
an incoming ship in the ocean, and are responsible for navigating the
vessel across the 17-mile stretch of river mouth. The bar pilot can delay
the ship passage if weather conditions are too severe for a safe crossing.
After crossing the river mouth, the bar pilot transfers pilotage to a licensed
Columbia River pilot. River pilots are responsible for navigating vessels to
their final destination on the 100-mile shipping channel. River pilots also
determine the draft of ships that may safely navigate the river.
The pilots of the State of Maryland are examples of specialized pilots.
The Chesapeake Bay is the longest pilotage route in the U.S. East Coast; it
is nearly 200 miles long. Each ship engaged in foreign trade coming into
a Maryland port is required to take on a local ship-handling specialist to
navigate the vessel safely into port. There are both bay pilots and docking
pilots. Docking pilots are specialized pilots who are uniquely trained to
maneuver commercial vessels in close quarters during docking, undock-
ing, and shiftings (with tugboat assistance) within Maryland waters.
Pilots are a valuable resource in channel design. Because of their local
knowledge, they can identify problem areas, and are generally asked to
participate in ship simulation studies for navigation channel enlargement
projects.

19.4 NORMAL MAINTENANCE

Ship channel maintenance falls into two categories: structure repair and
channel dredging. Structural repairs are needed on a periodic basis because
 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 159

FIGURE 19-1. Yaquina Bay, Oregon Jetty Repair (COE, Portland District).

of the constant attack of waves, currents, debris, and ice. For example, in
the U.S. West Coast, wave attack is fairly uniform year-round. A typical
12-second-period swell can produce 7,200 wave impacts per day on a jetty.
After several years, this constant attack will degrade the jetty, and the outer
end wall will need periodic rebuilding. An example of jetty repair is shown
in Figure 19-1.
Other ship channel structures that need periodic repair are shoreline
revetment and river training structures that are meant to confine flow to
keep sediment moving. Floating debris and ice often cause damage to these
structures.
Dredging is usually the most costly normal maintenance item. The lo-
cation and volume of this work can often be predicted based on past expe-
rience. Usually, the same river-crossing shoal will require dredging at the
same rate, unless an extreme event occurs. Dredging equipment, practice,
and disposal alternatives are presented in Chapter 10.

19.5 MAINTENANCE AS A RESULT OF EXTREME EVENTS

Extreme events can lead to significantly greater maintenance efforts and,

in some cases, new construction. Extreme events include volcano erup-
tions, earthquakes, major floods, and hurricanes.
160 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 19-2. Mount St. Helens Erupting (COE, Digital Visual Library).

19.5.1 Volcanoes
The Mount St. Helens volcanic eruption on May 18, 1980 (Figure 19-2),
resulted in massive sediment and debris flows into the Toutle River, which
is a tributary of the Columbia River. This sediment clogged the Columbia
River ship channel and required extensive dredging before project depths
were reestablished.
A long-term problem remained, that is, increased sediment flow into
the ship channel from the massive sediment sources (i.e., Toutle River
and the slopes of Mt. St. Helens). The solution was twofold; dredge the
Toutle River to preeruption levels (to return the river to its original flood
level of protection) and construct a sediment retention structure in the
North Fork of the Toutle River. This roller-compacted embankment with
a multilevel outlet is working, and the high-level ungated spillway has
been successful in stopping large sediment movement to the lower Toutle
River and Columbia River ship channel. The sediment retention structure
is shown in Figure 19-3.

19.5.2 Earthquake
The 1964 earthquake in Alaska caused a shift in the ocean floor (both
upheaval and subsidence). The shift generated a tsunami and several land-
slides. This 9.2 magnitude quake was the second most powerful earthquake
 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 161

FIGURE 19-3. Mount St. Helens Sediment Retention Structure (COE, Digital
Visual Library).

ever recorded. The consequences in Alaska were 115 dead and $84 million
in damages in 1964 dollars. The damages would be equivalent to $2 billion
in 2004 dollars. The effects of the resulting tsunami was felt as far away as
San Francisco, California, and Hawaii. The tsunami caused a temporary
hazard to ship traffic, as shown in Figure 19-4. The fishing boat in the photo
was deposited by the tsunami from the Kodiak boat harbor to Third Street.
The Volkswagen near the bow gives an idea of the ship size. The majority of
the buildings on First, Second, and Third Streets were destroyed. A longer-
term navigation problem was caused by the ocean floor shift, which made
all the nautical charts in the region invalid. The fault line ran north and
south through Prince William Sound. East of the fault line, the bottom had
uplift with a maximum of about 30 ft near Montague Island. Figure 19-5
shows barnacles on the sea floor that had been below the lowest tide level
before the earthquake.
The Alaska town of Cordova in Prince William Sound experienced about
6 ft of uplift, as can be seen in Figure 19-6.
The immediate need for chart revisions was achieved by establishing
tide gauges near benchmarks that were used in previous hydrographic
surveys. Because the sea level had not changed, running a level line from
the gauge to the benchmark would determine a new elevation for the
benchmark. With this knowledge, charts could be revised for navigation
162 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 19-4. Fishing Boat in Downtown Kodiak, Alaska

(from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).

FIGURE 19-5. MacLeod Harbor Floor, Montague Island After 30 ft of Uplift

(1964) (from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).
 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 163

FIGURE 19-6. Cordova Waterfront After 6 ft of Uplift (1964)

(from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).

FIGURE 19-7. Typical Tide Gauge, Prince William Sound (1964)

(from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).
164 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

safety and to determine location and volume of dredging that is needed to

re-establish pre-earthquake channel depths.
Figure 19-7 shows a typical portable tide gauge. The drive was powered
by a spring with water levels recorded on a revolving drum mounted
graph that was wax-coated. The spring needed to be rewound and the
graph paper had to be changed about every 7 days.

19.5.3 Major Floods

Major floods can deposit large quantities of sediment in ship channels
when high water starts to lower and river current velocities decrease.
Dredging following a major flood may be 10 times higher than in normal
years. Figure 19-8 shows three hopper dredges working immediately above
Head of Passes in the Mississippi River during the March 1999 high water.

FIGURE 19-8. USACE Dredges Essayon, Wheeler, and MacFarland

in Mississippi River Ship Channel (COE, Digital Visual Library).
 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 165

FIGURE 19-9. Rescue of Grounded Ship (COE, Digital Visual Library).

19.5.4 Hurricanes
Some of the Gulf Coast channels extend several miles out to sea with
no protective jetties. These channels are vulnerable to heavy shoaling from
passing hurricanes. Large hurricane-generated waves and strong currents
can easily deposit sediment in deeper ship channels, a convenient sediment
trap.

19.6 ACCIDENTS

Accidents in ship channels are infrequent, but they do occur. These

events can be ship to ship, ship to obstruction (e.g., as a bridge or pier),
or groundings that are a result of excessive draft, a vessel outside channel
boundaries, or channel shoaling. Figure 19-9 shows the Chemtrans Belocean
166 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

set free. Six tug boats were used to free the vessel when it ran aground in
the Mississippi River near the Head of Passes.
The agency or agencies responsible for the operation of a ship channel
normally have an accident response plan in place, for rapid and appropriate
action. This action includes rescue, vessel removal to reopen the channel,
and pollution clean up.

19.7 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN (O&M)

A comprehensive plan of how the project will be operated and main-

tained after construction is desirable. The following elements are normally
included in the O&M plan:

1. Changes and costs: The predicted physical changes with time after
construction and the anticipated O&M costs.
2. Surveillance plan: This plan covers minimum monitoring of the
project performance to verify safety and efficiency. Included are the
type and frequency of surveys, data collection, and a periodic inspec-
tion schedule. Hydrographic surveys, beach profiles, tide and wave
records, and jetty stability data collection costs should be used to
determine operation costs.
3. Project performance assessment: An assessment of the project perfor-
mance is desirable. Inspections and analysis of comparative surveys
can be used to verify design information, such as rates of erosion,
shoaling, and jetty deterioration, as predicted during the design
effort.
4. Accident or Emergency Response plan. This plan would identify re-
sponsibilities, communication links, and actions to be taken in the
event of accidents, oil spills, or other problems that could compro-
mise the waterway operation.
 Chapter 20
COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT
SUPPORT NAVIGATION

20.1 GENERAL

The Coast Guard carries out numerous safety missions and tasks, in-
cluding port safety and security, waterways management, and commercial
vessel safety. It is responsible for providing a safe, efficient, and navigable
waterway system to support domestic commerce, international trade, and
military sealift requirements for national defense. The services the Coast
Guard provides include long- and short-range aids to navigation; charting;
tide/current/pilotage information through “Notices to Mariners’’; vessel
traffic services; domestic and international icebreaking and patrol services;
technical assistance and advice; vessel safety standards and inspection;
and bridge administration standards and inspection. These services can be
consolidated into five fundamental roles:

Maritime Mobility
Maritime Safety
Maritime Security
National Defense
Protection of Natural Resources

Many Coast Guard missions benefit more than one of its roles. For exam-
ple, whereas the aids to navigation mission primarily supports the service’s
maritime mobility role by facilitating the movement of people and goods,
the system of aids also supports the Coast Guard’s role of keeping maritime
safety and protecting natural resources by preventing accidents.

20.2 MARITIME MOBILITY

The U.S. marine transportation system facilitates America’s global reach

into foreign markets and engagement in world affairs, including protection
167
168 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

of U.S. national interests through a national and international regulatory

framework governing trade and commerce. This system includes the wa-
terways and ports through which more than 2 billion tons of America’s
foreign and domestic freight and 3.3 billion barrels of oil move each year, as
well as the intermodal links that support economic and military security.
It also includes international and domestic passenger services, commer-
cial and recreational fisheries, and recreational boating. The Coast Guard’s
primary missions for providing a safe and efficient marine transportation
system include:
Aids to Navigation
Icebreaking
Bridge Administration
Waterways Management/Vessel Traffic Service

20.2.1 Aids to Navigation

The waters of the United States and its territories are marked to assist
navigation by the U.S. Aids to Navigation System. This system employs a
simple arrangement of colors, shapes, numbers, and light characteristics to
mark navigable channels, waterways, and obstructions. Figure 20-1 shows
the types of aids used on the navigable waters of the United States.
The goal of the U.S. Aids to Navigation System is to promote safe nav-
igation on waterways. Aids to Navigation can provide a boater with the
same type of information drivers get from street signs, stop signals, road
barriers, detours, and traffic lights. These aids include lighted structures,
beacons, day markers, range lights, fog signals, and landmarks, as well as
floating buoys. Each aid has a purpose, and helps in determining location,
how to get from one place to another, or how to stay out of danger.
The U.S. Aids to Navigation System is intended for use with nautical
charts, one of the most important tools used by boaters for planning trips
and safely navigating waterways. Charts show the nature and shape of the
coast, buoys and beacons, depths of water, land features, directional in-
formation, marine hazards, and other pertinent information. This valuable
information cannot be obtained from other sources, such as a road map or
atlas. Figure 20-2 shows a sample nautical chart.
The primary components of the U.S. Aids to Navigation System are
beacons and buoys.
Beacons are aids to navigation structures that are permanently fixed
to the earth’s surface. They range from lighthouses to small single-pile
structures and may be located on land or in the water. Lighted beacons
are called lights; unlighted beacons are called daybeacons. Beacons exhibit
a daymark to make them readily visible and easily identifiable against
background conditions.
Buoys are floating aids that come in many shapes and sizes. They are
moored to the seabed by concrete sinkers with chain or synthetic rope
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 169

FIGURE 20-1. U.S. Aids to Navigation. (See also Plate 1, following page 130.)
170

FIGURE 20-2. Aids to Navigation Placement. (See also Plate 2, following page 130.)
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 171

moorings of various lengths. They are intended to convey information to

the boater by their shape or color, by the characteristics of a visible or
audible signal, or a combination of two or more such features.

20.2.2 Private Aids to Navigation

A Private Aid to Navigation is a buoy, light, or daybeacon owned and
maintained by any individual or organization other than the U.S. Coast
Guard. These aids are designed to allow individuals or organizations to
mark privately owned marine obstructions or other similar hazards to
navigation. For further information, contact your local Coast Guard District
Aids to Navigation Office.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the placement of mooring
buoys in all navigable U.S. waters. Those wishing to establish mooring
buoys must contact their local Army Corps of Engineers office.

20.2.3 Western Rivers Marking System

The Western Rivers Marking System was merged with the U.S. Aids
to Navigation System in 2003; and as of December 31, 2003, the Western
Rivers Marking System was discontinued. However, until the transition is
complete, both systems can still be found on the Western Rivers.
Western Rivers Marking System is a variation of the standard U.S. Aids
to Navigation System (ATONS) and is found on the Mississippi River and
tributaries above Baton Rouge, as well as on certain other rivers that flow
toward the Gulf of Mexico. Figure 20-3 shows the types of navigation aids
used on the Western Rivers and by states. Red daybeacons, lights, and
buoys mark the starboard banks and limits of channels as vessels “return
for sea’’ or proceed upstream. Green daybeacons, lights, and buoys mark
the port banks and limits of navigable channels when going upstream. The
Western Rivers Marking System varies from the standard U.S. system in
the following ways:

1. Buoys are not numbered.

2. Passing daybeacons are not numbered but normally have an attached
“Mile Marker’’ board that indicates the distance in statute miles from
a fixed point (normally the river mouth).
3. Diamond-shaped nonlateral dayboards checkered red-and-white or
green-and-white, similar to those used in the U.S. Aids to Navigation
System, are used as crossing daybeacons where the river channel
crosses from one bank to the other.
4. Lights on green buoys and on beacons with green daymarks show a
single flash, which may be green or white.
5. Lights on red buoys and on beacons with red daymarks show a dou-
ble flash [Group Flashing (2)], which may be red or white.
6. Isolated danger marks and safe water marks are not used.
172 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 20-3. Visual Buoyage Guide. (See also Plate 3, following page 130.)

20.2.3.1 River Bank Names. When travel is downstream, the banks are
named “right’’ and “left.’’ The right bank has green aids and the left bank
has red aids; thus, the west bank of the Mississippi is its right bank and
has green aids. To avoid confusion, commercial river traffic often calls the
right bank the right descending bank, and the left bank, the left descending
bank.
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 173

20.2.3.2 Mile Markers. These markers are some of the most useful aids
on a river. They are attached to daybeacons or displayed in other easily
seen places. Because the U.S. Corps of Engineers erects them, they show
distance in statute miles rather than in nautical miles. With the exception
of the Ohio River, mile markers indicate the distance upstream from the
mouth of a river. Ohio River markers start at its headwaters and indicate
the distance downstream. Mile Markers also help a vessel operator locate
his/her position on a river chart.

20.2.3.3 Crossing Daybeacons. Because the navigable channels of rivers

swing from bank to bank as the river bends, diamond-shaped crossing
daybeacons are used to assist river traffic by indicating where these chan-
nels change from one side of the river to the other. Crossing daybeacons are
always on the opposite side of the river. When a diamond-shaped crossing
daybeacon is sighted, the vessel operator should head for the “diamond,’’
and treat the color of the daybeacon as a channel mark (i.e., keep red mark
to the left bank when traveling downstream).

20.2.3.4 River Buoys. Changes in river channels caused by fluctuations in

water level, current speed, and shifting shoals make buoys maintenance
a continuous task for the Coast Guard. In wintertime when rivers freeze,
buoys can be lost or can move. Because of their somewhat temporary na-
ture, river buoys do not have letters or numbers and usually are not shown
on river charts.

20.2.4 Notice to Mariners

The Coast Guard has statutory and treaty obligations to make navigation
information available to the public. Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs) are
the primary means for communicating information pertaining to indi-
vidual Coast Guard Districts (Figure 20-4). LNMs, which are available
free of charge, provide important safety information that is not available
anywhere else. LNMs appear on the Coast Guard Navigation Center’s
Web site at http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/lnm/default.htm. Historically,
LNMs were printed and distributed to the public via a free subscrip-
tion service; however, a revision to the Coast Guard’s Aids to Naviga-
tion (ATON) Manual (COMDTINST M16500.7) authorized elimination of
printed LNMs. The last printed LNMs were distributed on April 1, 2004.

20.2.5 Ice Breaking

For decades, the U.S. Coast Guard has provided both domestic and
international icebreaking services. Section 2 of Title 14, of the U.S. Code,
requires the Coast Guard to operate icebreaking facilities on domestic and
international waters. In 1965, the Coast Guard and the Department of the
174 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

PACIFIC AREA ATLANTIC AREA

17th
13th 9th
1st

8th Western 5th

11th
Rivers

Gulf Coast 7th

14th

FIGURE 20-4. Coast Guard Districts (uscg.mil/units).

Navy signed a Memorandum of Agreement that requires the Coast Guard

to maintain and operate all U.S. icebreakers in wartime as well as undertake
seasonal deployments to the Arctic and Antarctic in support of national
interests. A typical ice breaker is shown in Figure 20-5.
Domestic ice-breaking operations are performed on U.S. navigable wa-
ters in support of national and international maritime transportation, com-
merce, and safety. Geographically, domestic ice breaking is conducted in
two regions, on the East Coast, from Maine to Virginia, and on the Great
Lakes. The Coast Guard’s fleet of ice capable ships includes both icebreak-
ing cutters and buoy tenders. In domestic waterways, the Coast Guard
conducts icebreaking operations to keep certain shipping routes and ports
open during the winter to meet the demands of commerce. The Coast
Guard responds to a vessel operator’s requests for assistance if they are
disabled or stranded in ice-covered waters.
The Coast Guard has a policy of noninterference with commercial ice-
breaking services. However, few commercial icebreaking services have
developed in areas where the Coast Guard has icebreaking vessels, be-
cause the Coast Guard promptly responds to all assistance requests and
provides its services free of charge.

20.2.5.1 East Coast Domestic Ice Breaking. The Coast Guard deploys
14 vessels that are designed primarily to perform icebreaking services
along East Coast waterways between Maine and Virginia. Two 140-foot
icebreaking tugs are stationed in New Jersey and another is stationed in
Rockland, Maine. These small cutters are specially configured for icebreak-
ing along U.S. coastal waters. These vessels incorporate an advanced hull
design and engineering plant, along with a “bubbler’’ hull air lubrication
175

FIGURE 20-5. Coast Guard Polar Icebreaker Polar Star (WAGB 10) (U.S. Coast Guard Digital Library).
176 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

system, for effective icebreaking and winter flood-relief operations. The

bubbler system pumps air through openings in the hull below the wa-
terline reducing ice friction, allowing the cutter to pass easily though ice
fields. Eleven 65-ft small harbor tugs, which are engaged in icebreaking
services during the winter, operate along the East Coast. One tug is sta-
tioned in Portsmouth, Virginia, to service the Chesapeake Bay; two are sta-
tioned in Pennsylvania; three in Bayonne, New Jersey; one in New Haven,
Connecticut; one in Boston, Massachusetts; and three in Maine. During se-
vere weather, the Coast Guard can move ice-capable vessels, mainly buoy
tenders (stationed in more southerly locations) to northern areas to assist
in ice-breaking activities.
Figure 20-6 shows CGC Sturgeon Bay, a 140-foot ice-breaking tug home-
ported in Bayonne, New Jersey, preparing to make tracks in the ice for a tug
and barge, and attempting to transit the Cape Cod Canal, about 65 miles
south of Boston. Nearly 70% of home heating oil bound for New England
arrives there via the Cape Cod Canal.

20.2.5.2 Great Lakes Ice Breaking. There are 10 icebreaking-capable ves-

sels assigned to the Great Lakes to maintain a 42-week shipping season.
Three 140-foot Bay Class tugs are stationed in Michigan; one is stationed
in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin; and one in Cleveland, Ohio. The Coast Guard
Cutter Mackinaw is the only heavy icebreaking vessel assigned to the Great
Lakes. This vessel is currently stationed in Cheboygan, Michigan, and is
scheduled for decommissioning in fiscal year 2006. Four other buoy ten-
ders stationed in Michigan and Minnesota also are used to keep Great
Lakes shipping lanes open during the winter.
On the Great Lakes, there are seven key waterways that must be kept
navigable during the winter, when ice formation restricts or prohibits ship
movements. In an average year, over 100 million metric t of domestic cargo
moves on the Great Lakes. During most winters, the Great Lakes icebreak-
ing program allows shipping to continue for an additional 6-8 weeks, en-
abling an additional 10-12 million t of cargo to be shipped over ice-covered
waters.
The Coast Guard Cutters Biscayne Bay (WTGB 104) and Katmai Bay
(WTGB 101) are shown on Figure 20-7, breaking ice in the Straits of
Mackinac (Figure 20-7).

20.2.6 Bridge Administration

In 1967, the Bridge Program was transferred from the Army Corps of
Engineers to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard is responsible for approval
of the location and plans of bridges and causeways constructed across
navigable waters of the United States. In addition, the Coast Guard is
responsible for approval of the location and plans of international bridges
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 177

FIGURE 20-6. CGC Sturgeon Bay USCG (U.S. Coast Guard Digital Library).

and the alteration of bridges found to be unreasonable obstructions to

navigation. Authority for these actions is found in the following statutes:
33 U.S.C 401, 491, 494, 511–524, 525, and 535a, 535b, 535c, 535e, 535f, 535g,
and 535h (Note: these are all separate sections, not subsections of 535).
Section 535 and following is popularly known as the International Bridge
178 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 20-7. Coast Guard Cutters Biscayne Bay (WTGB 104) and Katmai
Bay (WTGB 101) Break Ice in the Straits of Mackinac (U.S. Coast Guard
Digital Library).

Act of 1972. To implement these statutes, the Coast Guard has published
the following regulations in 33 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter J (Bridges):

1. Part 114—General;
2. Part 115—Bridge Locations and Clearances; Administrative Proce-
dures;
3. Part 116—Alteration of Obstructive Bridges;
4. Part 117—Drawbridge Operation Regulations; and
5. Part 118—Lighting of Bridges.

20.2.6.1 Bridge Lighting and Other Signals. In U.S. waters, the Coast
Guard prescribes certain combinations of fixed lights for bridges and struc-
tures extending over waterways (Figure 20-8). In general, red lights (A) are
used to mark piers and supports and green lights (B) mark the centerline of
the navigable channel through a fixed bridge. If there is more than one
channel through the bridge, the preferred route is marked by three white
lights (C) placed vertically. Red lights (D) also are used on some lift bridges
to indicate the lift is closed, and green lights (E) are used to indicate that
the lift is open to vessel traffic. Double-opening swing bridges are lighted
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 179

B B
C
Lift
Open Spans Open
B
Closed Closed
A A D
(Main Channel)
A A
Fixed Bridge Double Leaf (Lift) Bascule Bridge

A A A D A

Vertical Lift Span Bridge (Open) Vertical Lift Span Bridge (Closed)

G F

F F
G

A A A

A A A
Double Opening Swing Bridge Double Opening Swing Bridge
(Open) (Closed)

FIGURE 20-8. Combinations of Fixed Lights for Bridges and Structures

Extending over Waterways (uscgboating.org). (See also Plate 4,
following page 130.)

with three lanterns on top of the span structure; when viewed from an ap-
proaching vessel, the swing span when closed will display three red lights
(F) and when open for navigation will display two green lights (G).
Clearance gauges are extremely valuable to vessel operators because
they indicate the vertical distance (clearance) between the “low steel’’ of
the bridge channel span and the waterline. (They do not indicate the depth
of water under the bridge.) These gauges, located on the right side of the
channel facing approaching vessels, are permanently fixed to the bridge
pier or structure. Each gauge is marked by black numbers and foot marks
(lines) on a white background board.
Further information on drawbridge regulations and opening signals
for bridges over the Navigable Waterway can be found in the U.S. Coast
Pilot books.

20.2.7 Waterways Management/Vessel Traffic Service

The Coast Guard has a statutory responsibility under the Ports and
Waterways Safety Act of 1972 (PWSA), Title 33 USC §1221, to ensure the
180 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

VTS Puget Sound

VTS Sault Ste. Marie

VTS New York

VTS San Francisco VTS Louis Hille

VTIS LA/LB

VTS Lower Mississippi River

VTS Houston/Galveston

VTS Berwick Bay

VTS PrinceWilliam Sound

FIGURE 20-9. Coast Guard VTS Locations (navcen.uscg.gov).

safety and environmental protection of U.S. ports and waterways. The

PWSA authorizes the Coast Guard to “. . . establish, operate and main-
tain vessel traffic services in ports and waterways subject to congestion.”
It also authorizes the Coast Guard to require the carriage of electronic de-
vices necessary for participation in the VTS system. The purpose of the
act was to establish good order and predictability on U.S. waterways by
implementing fundamental waterways management practices.
The VTS system at each port has a Vessel Traffic Center that receives
vessel movement data from the Automatic Identification System (AIS),
surveillance sensors, other sources, or directly from vessels. Meteorologi-
cal and hydrographic data is also received at the vessel traffic center and
disseminated as needed. AIS technology relies on global navigational po-
sitioning systems (GPS), navigation sensors, and digital communication
equipment operating according to standardized protocols (AIS transpon-
ders) that permit the voiceless exchange of navigation information. AIS
transponders can broadcast vessel information such as name or call sign,
dimensions, type, GPS position, course, speed, and navigation status. This
information is continually updated and received by all AIS-equipped ves-
sels in the vicinity. An AIS-based VTS reduces the need for voice inter-
actions; enhances the ability to navigate; improves situational awareness;
and assists in the performance of duties, thus reducing the risk of collisions.
Figure 20-9 illustrates the location of current Coast Guard VTS areas.

20.2.7.0.1 VTS New York. The control center is located at Fort Wadsworth
in Staten Island, New York. In 1995, Coast Guard Activities, New York,
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 181

assumed operational control of the VTS, which has the responsibility of

coordinating vessel traffic movements in the busy ports of New York and
New Jersey. The VTS New York area includes the entrance to the harbor
via Ambrose and Sandy Hook Channels, through the Verrazano Narrows
Bridge to the Throgs Neck Bridge in the East River, to the Holland Tunnel
in the Hudson River, the Kill Van Kull including Newark Bay and all of
Arthur Kill, and Raritan Bay.

20.2.7.0.2 VTS San Francisco. The San Francisco Vessel Traffic Center is lo-
cated at Yerba Buena Island in San Francisco Bay. VTS San Francisco is
responsible for the safety of vessel movements along approximately 133
miles of waterway from offshore to the ports of Stockton and Sacramento.
On May 3, 1995, federal regulations established regulated navigation areas
within the San Francisco Bay Region. These regulations, developed with
input from the Harbor Safety Committee of the San Francisco Bay Region,
were designed to improve navigation safety by organizing traffic flow pat-
terns; reducing meeting, crossing, and overtaking situations in constricted
channels; and limiting vessels’ speeds. VTS San Francisco also operates
an Offshore Vessel Movement Reporting System (OVMRS), which is com-
pletely voluntary and operates using a broadcast system with information
provided by participants.

20.2.7.0.3 VTIS Los Angeles/Long Beach. Vessel Traffic Information Service

(VTIS) Los Angeles-Long Beach (LA/LB) is jointly operated by the Coast
Guard and Marine Exchange of LA/LB from the Vessel Traffic Center lo-
cated in San Pedro. The VTIS assists in the safe navigation of vessels ap-
proaching the ports of LA/LB in an area extending 25 miles out to sea
from Point Fermin (LAT 33 42.3
N LONG 118 17.6
W). The LA/LB VTIS
developed a unique partnership with the state of California, the Coast
Guard, the Ports of Los Angeles-Long Beach, the Marine Exchange, and
the local maritime community. With start-up funds provided by the ports
of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the VTIS operations are supported by fees
assessed against commercial vessels operating in the LA/LB area. VTIS
LA/LB came on line in March 1994.

20.2.7.0.4 VTS Puget Sound. The Vessel Traffic Center is located at Pier 36
in Seattle and monitors the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Rosario Strait, Admi-
ralty Inlet, and Puget Sound south as far as Olympia. Since 1979, the U.S.
Coast Guard has worked cooperatively with the Canadian Coast Guard in
managing vessel traffic in adjacent waters. Through the Cooperative Vessel
Traffic Service (CVTS), two Canadian Vessel Traffic Centers work hand in
hand with Puget Sound Vessel Traffic Service. Tofino Vessel Traffic Service
manages the area west of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. North of the Strait of
182 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Juan de Fuca, through Haro Strait, to Vancouver, British Columbia, is man-

aged by Vancouver Vessel Traffic Service. The three Vessel Traffic Centers
communicate via a computer link and dedicated telephone lines to advise
each other of vessels passing between their respective zones.

20.2.7.0.5 VTS Houston-Galveston. The Vessel Traffic Center is located in

the upper reaches of the Houston Ship Channel within the city of Houston.
The VTS operating area is the Houston Ship Channel from the sea buoy
to the turning basin at the upstream end of the channel (a distance of
53 miles) and the side channels to Galveston, Texas City, Bayport, and the
Intracoastal Waterway.

20.2.7.0.6 VTS Prince William Sound. The Prince William Sound Vessel
Traffic Center is located in Valdez. Geographically, the area is comprised
of deep open waterways surrounded by mountainous terrain. The Coast
Guard has installed a dependent surveillance system to improve its ability
to track tankers transiting Prince William Sound, and requires these ves-
sels to carry position and identification reporting equipment. The ability
to supplement radar with dependent surveillance bridges the gap in areas
in which conditions dictate some form of surveillance and radar coverage
is impractical. Once the dependent surveillance information is returned to
the vessel traffic center, it is integrated with radar data and presented to
the watchstander on an electronic chart display. VTS Prince William Sound
is required by the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act (Public Law
93-153), pursuant to authority contained in Title 1 of the Ports and Water-
ways Safety Act of 1972 (86 Stat. 424, Public Law 92-340). The southern
terminus of the pipeline is on the south shoreline of the Port of Valdez.
Port Valdez is at the north end of Prince William Sound.

20.2.7.0.7 VTS St. Mary’s River. The St. Mary’s River Vessel Traffic Center
is located at Coast Guard Group Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. In October
1994, it became a mandatory system operating year-round with an area of
responsibility along the entire length of the St. Mary’s River (approximately
80 miles). Within the VTS area the water level drops approximately 21 ft
from the level of Lake Superior to the level of the lower lakes. The Soo
Locks were constructed and are presently maintained by the Corps of
Engineers. In most areas of the river there is adequate room for vessels
to maneuver or anchor during periods of low visibility, or when other
problems hinder safe navigation. However, three areas are extremely
hazardous to transit or anchor in low visibility: West Neebish Channel
(downbound traffic only), Middle Neebish Channel (upbound traffic only),
and Little Rapids Cut (two-way traffic). During periods of low visibility, it
is customary to close the entire river.
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 183

20.2.7.0.8 VTS Berwick Bay. The Berwick Bay Vessel Traffic Center is lo-
cated at Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Morgan City, Louisiana. VTS
Berwick Bay manages vessel traffic on one of the most hazardous water-
ways in the United States due to strong currents and a series of bridges
that must be negotiated by inland tows traveling between Houston, Baton
Rouge, and New Orleans. The area of responsibility encompasses the junc-
tion of the Atchafalaya River (an outflow of the Mississippi River), the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, the Port Allen-Morgan City Alternate Route, and
several tributary bayous. Narrow bridge openings and a swift river cur-
rent require the VTS to maintain one-way traffic flow through the bridges.
During seasonal high-water periods, the VTS enforces towing regulations
requiring inland tows transiting the bridges to have a minimum amount of
horsepower based on the length of tow. VTS Berwick Bay is unique among
Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Services because it maintains direct control of
vessel traffic.

20.2.7.0.9 VTS Louisville. The Louisville Vessel Traffic Center is located at

Coast Guard Group Ohio Valley in Louisville, Kentucky. VTS Louisville is
a vessel movement reporting system designed to enable vessel operators
to better cope with problems encountered during high water on the Ohio
River between miles 592.0 and 606.0. The VTS has no active surveillance
equipment such as radar or cameras. It monitors traffic via VHF Channel 13
communications only. The VTS is activated when the upper river gauge at
the McAlpine Lock and Dam is approximately 13 ft and rising. It remains
in 24-hr operation until the upper river gauge falls below 13 ft. River condi-
tions vary widely, especially during springtime. A series of thunderstorms
can, at times, necessitate activation of the VTS in a matter of hours.

20.3 MARITIME SAFETY

One of the most basic responsibilities of the U.S. government is to protect

the lives and safety of Americans. In the maritime realm, the lead respon-
sibility falls to the Coast Guard. In partnership with other federal agencies,
state and local governments, marine industries, and individual mariners,
the Coast Guard preserves safety at sea through a focused program of
prevention, response, and investigation.

20.3.1 Prevention
Safety prevention activities include developing commercial and recre-
ational vessel standards, enforcing compliance with these standards, li-
censing commercial mariners, operating the International Ice Patrol to
protect ships transiting the North Atlantic shipping lanes, and educating
184 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

the public. The Coast Guard develops operating and construction criteria
for many types of vessels from commercial ships to recreational boats. The
Coast Guard is America’s voice in the International Maritime Organization
(IMO), which promulgates measures to improve shipping safety, pollution
prevention, mariner training, and certification standards. The Coast Guard
is the agency primarily responsible for developing domestic shipping and
navigation regulations.
Navigation and shipping regulations are published in Chapter I of Titles
33 and 46, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). These regulations provide
detailed guidance for the design and operation of inspected vessels, and
establish minimal requirements for uninspected vessels.
The Coast Guard ensures compliance with safety regulations in many
ways. Members of the Coast Guard inspect U.S. flag vessels and mobile
offshore drilling units and marine facilities; examine foreign-flag vessels
based on the potential safety and pollution risk they pose; review and
approve plans for vessel construction, repair, and alteration; and document
and admeasure U.S. flag vessels. The Port State Control program is aimed
at eliminating substandard foreign-flagged vessels from U.S. ports and
waterways. Port State Control is a key element in the safety enforcement
program because 95% of large passenger ships and 75% of cargo ships
operating in U.S. waters are foreign-flagged.

20.3.2 Response (Search and Rescue)

Mishaps will occur despite the best prevention efforts. As the lead
agency for maritime search and rescue (SAR) in U.S. waters, the Coast
Guard coordinates the SAR efforts of sea and airborne Coast Guard units,
as well as those of other federal, state, and local responders. In addition,
they also leverage the world’s merchant fleet to rescue mariners in dis-
tress around the globe through the Automated Mutual-Assistance Vessel
Rescue (AMVER) system.
The statutory authority for the U.S. Coast Guard to conduct SAR mis-
sions is contained in Title 14, Sections 2, 88, and 141 of the U.S. Code. The
code states that the Coast Guard shall develop, establish, maintain, and
operate SAR facilities, may render aid to distressed persons, and protect
and save property on and under the high seas and waters subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States. These waters generally include all navi-
gable waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States but also include
international waters stretching far into the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and
the Gulf of Mexico.
The mission and purpose of the Coast Guard’s SAR Program is to pre-
vent death or injury to persons and loss or damage to property in the
marine environment. SAR functions and the hierarchy of response can be
broken down into two parts:
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 185

1. Search: An operation normally coordinated by a rescue coordination

center (RCC), rescue subcenter (RSC), or group/activities operations
center, using available and appropriate personnel, facilities, and re-
sources to locate persons or property in distress.
2. Rescue: An operation with the primary purpose of retrieving per-
sons in distress and delivering them to a place of safety. This may
include providing for certain medical care or other critical needs.
Rescue operations also may be performed for the purpose of pre-
venting or mitigating property loss or damage. However, missions
shall not normally be performed for the purpose of salvage or recov-
ery of property when those actions are not essential to the saving of
life. Beneficial secondary consequences of a rescue operation may be
to prevent environmental damage or remove hazards to navigation,
but these are not considered part of the rescue operation’s objective.

The rescue of persons in distress is the highest priority SAR mission.

Missions solely for saving property or for other purposes such as preventing
environmental damage will always give way to saving a person’s life.
The Coast Guard does dangerous work in a perilous environment. Their
heritage is based in large part on the selfless acts of courageous men and
women who use their tools and their judgment under the most demanding
conditions to save the lives of others.

20.3.3 Casualty Investigations

An important purpose of marine casualty investigations is to obtain
information to prevent similar casualties, as far as is practicable. It is nec-
essary for the causes of casualties to be determined as precisely as possible
so that factual information will be available for program review and statis-
tical studies. It is not sufficient to know only how a casualty occurred; it also
must be clear why it happened. Based on this information, the Coast Guard
may develop appropriate corrective measures, regulations, and standards
of safety. In addition, legislation for marine safety may be recommended, if
needed. An equally important purpose of these investigations is the deter-
mination of whether there is any evidence of violation of law or regulation,
any basis for the institution of civil penalty action under any of the laws
administered by the Coast Guard, or suspension and revocation (S&R)
proceedings under 46 U.S.C. 7703.
The Coast Guard has the jurisdiction to investigate the following:

1. A marine casualty or other accident involving any vessel on the navi-

gable waters of the United States, or involving U.S. vessels wherever
they may be.
186 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

2. An incident involving the destruction of, or damage to, any bridge

or other structure on or in the navigable waters of the United States,
or any land structure or shore area immediately adjacent to those
waters.
3. An incident involving a major fire, an oil spill, or any injury occurring
as a result of operations conducted pursuant to the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), including allegations of unsafe working
conditions or violations of safety regulations.
4. Water pollution by oil or other hazardous substance or the threat
thereof to the “waters of the United States” (anywhere in the hydro-
logic chain).
5. Acts of misconduct, incompetence, negligence, unskillfulness, or
willful violation of law committed by any licensed, certificated, or
documented individual.
6. Boating accidents.
7. Casualties or accidents that occur to any component of a deep-water
port.

The primary purpose of an investigation is to ascertain the cause(s) of an

accident, casualty, or personnel misbehavior to determine if remedial mea-
sures should be taken; and to determine whether any violation of federal
law or regulation has occurred. It should be clearly understood that the
Coast Guard does not conduct investigations to determine civil liability in
disputes between private litigants. Rather, its investigations are a means to
promote safety of life and property and to protect the marine environment.

20.4 MARITIME SECURITY

Maritime law enforcement and border control are the oldest of the Coast
Guard’s numerous responsibilities, dating back as the Revenue Marine in
1790. Congress established the Revenue Marine specifically to patrol the
coasts and seaports to frustrate smuggling and enforce the customs laws of
the fledgling republic. The Coast Guard’s maritime law enforcement role
and the task of interdicting ships at sea provide the foundation on which
the much broader and complex present-day mission set has been built.
Maritime Security Missions include:

General Maritime Law Enforcement

Drug Interdiction
Alien Migrant Interdiction
EEZ and Living Marine Resource Law/Treaty
Enforcement
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 187

20.4.1 General Maritime Law Enforcement

As the nation’s primary maritime law enforcement service, the Coast
Guard enforces or assists in enforcing federal laws, treaties, and other
international agreements on the high seas and waters under U.S. juris-
diction. They possess the authority to board any vessel subject to U.S. ju-
risdiction to make inspections, searches, inquiries, and arrests. The Coast
Guard wields extraordinarily broad police power primarily to suppress
violations of drug, immigration, fisheries, and environmental laws. No
other U.S. armed service or federal agency possesses this combination of
law enforcement capabilities and responsibilities together with the legal
authorities to carry them out.
The Coast Guard’s ability to fulfill its roles (i.e., saving lives and property
at sea; protecting America’s maritime borders and suppressing violations
of the law; protecting the marine environment; providing a safe, efficient
marine transportation system; and defending the nation) makes the Coast
Guard truly a unique instrument of national security.

20.4.2 Drug Interdiction

As the designated lead agency for maritime drug interdiction under
the National Drug Control Strategy and the co-lead agency with the U.S.
Customs Service for air interdiction operations, the Coast Guard defends
America’s seaward frontier against a virtual torrent of illegal drugs. For
more than two decades, Coast Guard cutters and aircraft, forward de-
ployed off South America and in the transit zone, have intercepted many
t of cocaine, marijuana, and other illegal drugs that otherwise would have
found their way to American streets.

20.4.3 Alien Migrant Interdiction

Coast Guard alien migrant interdiction operations are also law enforce-
ment missions with a significant humanitarian dimension. Migrants typi-
cally take great risks and endure significant hardships in their attempts to
flee their countries and enter the United States. In many cases, migrant ves-
sels interdicted at sea are overloaded and unseaworthy, lack basic safety
equipment, and are operated by inexperienced mariners. The majorities of
alien migrant interdiction cases handled by the Coast Guard actually begin
as SAR cases, once again illustrating the interwoven nature of the Coast
Guard’s roles and missions. Between 1980 and 2000, the Coast Guard inter-
cepted 290,000 migrants, mostly from Cuba, Dominican Republic, People’s
Republic of China, and Haiti.
188 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

20.4.4 EEZ and Living Marine Resource Law/Treaty Enforcement

In 1976, Congress passed what is now known as the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. By creating an Exclusive Eco-
nomic Zone (EEZ), this act pushed out the U.S. maritime border to 200
nautical miles. In the years that followed, international fisheries agree-
ments went even further, extending U.S. jurisdiction to high seas areas
beyond the EEZ. Today, the Coast Guard patrols these areas, as well as
the EEZ—where they focus primarily on maritime boundary areas such
as the U.S./Russian Convention Line in the Bering Sea—to uphold U.S.
sovereignty and protect America’s precious resources.

20.5 NATIONAL DEFENSE

Throughout American history, the Coast Guard has served alongside the
U.S. Navy in critical national defense missions, beginning with the Quasi-
War with France in 1798, through the Civil War, World Wars I and II, to
the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf War. A 1995 agreement between the
Secretaries of Defense and Transportation assigned the Coast Guard five
specific national defense missions in support of the Unified Commanders-
in-Chief (CINCs) in addition to their general defense operations and polar
icebreaking duties. These missions (i.e., maritime interception operations;
military environmental response operations; port operations, security, and
defense; peacetime military engagement; and coastal sea control opera-
tions) require the Coast Guard to execute essential military functions and
tasks in support of joint and combined forces in peacetime, crisis, and war.

20.6 PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES

The Coast Guard’s protection of natural resources role dates to the 1820s,
when Congress required the Revenue Marine to protect federal stocks
of Florida live oak. As the exploitation of the nation’s valuable marine
resources—whales, fur-bearing animals, and fish—increased, the Coast
Guard was given the duty to protect these resources as well. Today, with
the U.S. EEZ supporting commercial and recreational fisheries worth more
than $30 billion annually, the Coast Guard serves as the primary agency
for at-sea fisheries enforcement. This role has expanded over the last few
decades to include enforcing laws intended to protect the environment as
a public good. As a result, the Coast Guard now actively protects sensitive
marine habitats, marine mammals, and endangered marine species, and
enforces laws protecting U.S. waters from the discharge of oil and other
hazardous substances.
 COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 189

The Coast Guard conducts a wide range of activities (e.g., education

and prevention, enforcement, response and containment, and recovery)
in support of its primary environmental protection mission areas: mari-
time pollution enforcement, offshore lightering zone enforcement, domes-
tic fisheries enforcement, and foreign vessel inspection. They are usually
the first responders to environmental disasters on the seas and are typi-
cally the lead agency for any ensuing response effort. Under the National
Contingency Plan, Coast Guard Captains of the Port (COTP) are the pre-
designated Federal On-Scene Coordinators (FOSC) for oil and hazardous
substance incidents in all coastal and some inland areas. The FOSC is, in
reality, the president’s designated on-scene representative. As such, the
FOSC is responsible for forging a well-coordinated and effective response
operation involving a diverse set of government and commercial entities
in many emotionally charged and potentially dangerous emergency situ-
ations.

20.6.1 Pollution Response

The Coast Guard’s concerns extend to pollution and threats of pollution
in the coastal zone. This zone includes U.S. waters subject to the tide, U.S.
waters of the Great Lakes, specified ports and harbors on inland rivers, and
the contiguous zone and waters on the high seas out to 200 miles. There
are four elements involved in assessing discharges and releases to ensure
appropriate response:

1. Preventing spills whenever possible

2. Ensuring that responsible parties clean up discharges of oil and re-
leases of hazardous substances
3. Mitigating the effects of spills that do occur
4. Reducing the potential for spills or operational discharges outside
U.S. waters from entering U.S. waters or fouling U.S. coastlines

These elements are considered in all cases of pollution or threatened pol-

lution that arise from deep-water ports or outer continental shelf activities.
To respond to major discharges, the Commandant has established the
National Strike Force (NSF). This consists of teams of highly trained per-
sonnel that are prepositioned on the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts to
assist on-scene coordinators (OSC’s) of federal response activities. Strike
Teams are at the following locations: GULF Strike Team, Mobile, Alabama;
NATIONAL Strike Force, Elizabeth City, North Carolina; PACIFIC Strike
Team, Novato, California; and ATLANTIC Strike Team, Fort Dix, New
Jersey. In addition, the NSF has assisted foreign governments on request
in major international pollution cases.
190 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

The Coast Guard operates the National Response Center (NRC) around
the clock to receive notification of pollution incidents and to ensure that
information is passed to the predesignated Coast Guard or EPA OSC for
response. The NRC provides a toll free number (800-424-8802) for making
pollution reports from anywhere in the United States.

20.6.2 Enforcement
The federal responsibility for the removal of discharged oil and haz-
ardous substances is shared by the Coast Guard and the EPA. The federal
agencies cannot require anyone to clean up an oil spill; however, if federal
funds are used for the clean up, the costs (up to certain limits) are passed to
the owner or operator of the discharging vessel or facility or, under certain
circumstances, to the person causing the discharge.

20.7 SOURCE

This chapter was authored by Eric P. Christensen, Commander, U.S.

Coast Guard.
 Chapter 21
NOAA ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT
NAVIGATION

21.1 NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE (NOS)

Marine navigation tools are necessary to ensure safe and efficient marine
transportation and commerce, offshore engineering projects, naval opera-
tions, and recreational activities. The Office of Coast Survey, which is part
of NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS), is responsible for providing
these tools, such as nautical charts and hydrographic surveys. These must
be kept accurate and up to date at all times.

21.2 AUTHORIZING MANDATE

The mandate to create nautical charts of the nation’s coasts dates back to
1807, when President Thomas Jefferson ordered a survey of the young na-
tion’s coast. The Organic Act of 1807 authorized the newly formed coastal
survey agency to construct and maintain the nation’s nautical charts. This
agency, the Office of Coast Survey (OCS), is the oldest scientific organiza-
tion in the United States. It has been a part of NOS since 1970, when the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was created.

21.3 NAUTICAL CHARTS

OCS remains the primary agency responsible for constructing and main-
taining the nation’s nautical charts. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
produces “navigational maps’’ for some inland rivers, primarily the
Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee, Columbia, and their tributaries. NOAA
charts are available from NOAA field offices and a network of local sales
agents. Corps of Engineers river charts are available from district offices.
Nautical charts contain information about the nature and form of the coast,
the depth of the water, and general character and configuration of the sea
191
192 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 21-1. NOAA Ship Surveyor (NOAA Photo Library).

bottom, locations of dangers to navigation, the rise and fall of the tides,
locations of navigational aids, and characteristics of the earth’s magnetism.
The charts are compiled by using a fleet of hydrographic vessels that op-
erate in the coastal waters of the continental United States and Alaska and
Hawaii. A typical NOAA ship is shown in Figure 21-1.
NOS collects marine hydrographic data (depth soundings) to construct
and maintain more than 1,000 nautical charts. In addition, NOS makes
available a historical map and chart collection—more than 20,000 maps and
charts dating from the late 1700s. The collection includes nautical charts,
hydrographic surveys, topographic surveys, geodetic surveys, city plans,
and Civil War battle maps.
NOAA’s National Geographic Data Center (NGDC) is the repository
of all NOAA (and many other organizations) hydrographic and bathy-
metric data. NGDC and the collocated World Data Center for Marine
Geology & Geophysics compile, maintain, archive, and distribute data
from extensive databases in both coastal and open ocean areas. Key data
types include bathymetry and gridded relief, trackline geophysics (grav-
ity, magnetics, seismic reflection), sediment thickness, data from ocean
drilling and seafloor sediment and rock samples, digital coastlines, and
data from the Great Lakes. In addition to operating the collocated World
Data Center for Marine Geology & Geophysics, part of the International
Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) World Data Center system, NGDC
 NOAA ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 193

FIGURE 21-2. Sextant and Three-Arm Protractors Used for Chart-Making

(NOAA Photo Library).

also operates the International Hydrographic Organization Data Center

for Digital Bathymetry (IHO-DCDB) on behalf of the Member Nations of
the International Hydrographic Organization. Additional information on
NGDC is available at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/mggd.
Coastal nautical charts initially were developed using two sextant an-
gles shooting three known landside objects to establish the sounding vessel
location. The depth was measured by a lead line. The lead line was replaced
by electronic depth measurement equipment (fathometer) in the mid-20th
century. A sextant is shown in Figure 21-2. The sextant method of posi-
tioning was still used until the 1970s and 1980s, when it was replaced by
electronic ground positioning equipment. The present-day hydrographic
surveys are completely automated from positioning, depth measurement,
and plotting of results.

21.4 TIDES AND CURRENTS

NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) has been monitoring sea level
variations for many years. For some U.S. locations, sea level records exist
for more than 100 years. Water level data is used for a variety of practical
purposes, including hydrography, nautical charting, maritime navigation,
coastal engineering, and tsunami and storm surge warnings. Mariners use
the information to time their approach to and exit from ports. Long-term
194 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

applications include marine boundary determinations, tidal predictions,

monitoring sea level trends, oceanographic research, and climate research.
Bridge, breakwater, and deep-water channel construction also are affected
by tidal and current changes.
Within NOS, the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and
Services (CO-OPS) is primarily responsible for predicting and measuring
water levels and currents, and disseminating this information. CO-OPS
collects, analyzes, and distributes such data to maintain safe maritime nav-
igation and waterborne commerce. This real-time information is provided
to shipmasters and pilots to help avoid groundings and collisions. The
information provided includes water levels, currents, and other oceano-
graphic and meteorological data from bays and harbors via telephone voice
response and the Internet.
CO-OPS also manages the nation’s National Water Level Observation
Program (NWLON). NWLON provides basic tidal information to deter-
mine U.S. coastal marine boundaries and to create nautical charts. It also
supports climate monitoring activities, tsunami and storm surge warning
systems, coastal processes, and tectonic research. It consists of 175 continu-
ously operating water level measurement stations along the U.S. coasts and
in the Great Lakes regions. Many of these stations have been operational
and transmitting data for 19 years.

FIGURE 21-3. Temporary Tide Gauge, Prince William Sound, Alaska

(from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).
 NOAA ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 195

Tide gauge stations are separated into two types: long-term, which are
usually located in major harbors, such as Seattle and San Francisco; and
temporary (operating for a few months), which support fieldwork, such as
hydrographic surveys or current surveys. An example of this temporary
tide gauge is shown in Figure 21-3.
The center also provides tidal and storm surge information online for
U.S. coastal areas and the Great Lakes region. The Web site is updated every
10 minutes to reflect changing conditions. In addition, the center provides
products that supply predictive information about tides and currents for
more than 3,000 tide stations.

21.5 CURRENTS

Water currents are more difficult to measure. In the past, observations of

currents were made for only a few days at a time at any particular location.
More recently, however, continuous current observations have been made
at several locations along the nation’s coasts. However, these observation
stations are subject to corrosion, marine fouling, and other damage, and
are expensive to maintain.
An example of survey equipment in the 1960s is shown in Figure 21-4.
The meter is suspended 15 ft below a surface buoy and records current

FIGURE 21-4. Current Survey Buoys on Board, USC&GS Hodson in Puget

Sound, Washington, 1964 (from Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney).
196 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

speeds and direction. Speed is measured by a rotating impeller at the

front of a torpedo-shaped instrument, and magnetic direction is also
recorded.
Current measurements are now usually taken by acoustic Doppler me-
ters, which emit an acoustic signal from either a boat- or bottom-mounted
transmitter. The signal is reflected from sediment or other particles trans-
ported by the flow and recorded. The reflected signal is analyzed to detect
the Doppler shift in frequency, yielding a measure of flow velocity in three
dimensions. The instruments can be constructed to measure velocity at a
point or to profile a waterway, with regard to depth or width.

21.6 GLOBAL POSITIONING

The Global Positioning System (GPS) includes a constellation of 24 satel-

lites, launched and operated by the U.S. Air Force, which transmits radio
signals. When used according to standardized procedures, GPS receivers
can determine positional coordinates to centimeter-level accuracy any-
where on the surface of the earth. The first GPS satellite was launched
in 1978, and the system was declared fully operational for civilian appli-
cations in December 1993.
Augmenting this space-based system is a network of Continuously
Operating GPS Reference Stations (CORS), which serve as the foundation
for the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS). NSRS is a coordinate
system that defines position (latitude and longitude), elevation, distance
and direction between points, strength of gravitational pull, and the way
in which these values change over time. This information is essential
for ensuring the reliability of transportation and communication systems,
boundary and property surveys, land record systems, mapping and chart-
ing, and many scientific and engineering applications. NSRS provides the
positional integrity that allows use of GPS for many modern positioning
applications.
The National Geodetic Survey (NGS), part of NOAA’s National Ocean
Service, coordinates a network of more than 400 CORS stations, which
receive GPS radio signals 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The GPS
data collected at these stations allow GPS users to determine more accu-
rate positions through computation after the data are collected. Numerous
federal, state, and local government agencies, as well as universities and
commercial organizations, operate CORS stations. They are established
and maintained according to rigorous standards developed by NGS to
provide the most accurate GPS information available. CORS standards
cover factors such as location and stability of the GPS-receiving antenna,
and transmitting and computing GPS data.
 NOAA ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NAVIGATION 197

21.7 COAST PILOT

The U.S. Coast Pilot consists of a series of nautical books that covers
information important to navigators of coastal and intracoastal waters and
the Great Lakes. Issued in nine volumes, these books contain supplemental
information that is difficult to portray on a nautical chart.
Topics in the Coast Pilot include channel descriptions, anchorages,
bridge and cable clearances, currents, tide and water levels, prominent fea-
tures, pilotage, towage, weather, ice conditions, wharf descriptions, dan-
gers, routes, traffic separation schemes, small-craft facilities, and federal
regulations applicable to navigation. Coast Pilot publications are available
through NOAA-authorized network nautical agents.

21.8 PORTS

The Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System (PORTS) is an informa-

tion acquisition and dissemination technology developed by the NOS in
cooperation with a number of ports throughout the United States. The first
permanent, fully integrated, operational PORTS was deployed in Tampa
Bay during 1990 and 1991. The system is managed, operated, and main-
tained under a cooperative agreement with NOS. PORTS includes the inte-
gration of real-time currents, water levels, winds, and water temperatures
at multiple locations with a data dissemination system that includes tele-
phone voice response as well as modem dial-up and dedicated modem
displays. PORTS consists of acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs)
with water temperature sensors, a “nowcast’’ of currents at other locations,
water level gauges with anemometers, packet radio transmission equip-
ment, a data acquisition system, and an information dissemination system
(IDS).
The traditional prediction tables that are updated annually by the
NOAA provide information about the astronomical tides, currents, river
flow, and other meteorological forces. Real-time measurements, enriched
by nowcasts, were identified as critical requirements for safe navigation.
PORTS is a public information system that provides real-time informa-
tion to the general public and provides essential information for safe and
cost-effective navigation, search-and-rescue, hazardous material and oil-
spill prevention and response, and scientific research. PORTS also provides
NOAA’s Global Ocean Observing System with coastal ocean measurement
and dissemination components. All data is continuously archived and is
available to the public. PORTS data is broadcast over NOAA Weather
Radio hourly by the National Weather Service and is available on a priority
basis for trajectory modeling in support of the U.S. Coast Guard.
198 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

PORTS systems are operational at the following locations:

San Francisco Bay

New York/New Jersey Harbor
Houston/ Galveston
Tampa Bay
Chesapeake Bay
Narragansett Bay
Soo Locks
Los Angeles/Long Beach
Delaware River and Bay
Port of Anchorage

21.9 MARINE AND COASTAL WEATHER SERVICES

The NOAA Weather Radio network provides voice broadcasts of lo-

cal and coastal marine forecasts on a continuous cycle. The forecasts are
produced by local National Weather Service forecast offices. Coastal sta-
tions also broadcast predicted tides and real-time observations from buoys
and coastal meteorological sensors operated by NOAA’s National Data
Buoy Center. Recorded voice broadcasts have been largely supplanted by
a computer-synthesized voice. Channel numbers (e.g., WX1, WX2) have no
special significance but often are so designated in consumer equipment.
Other channel numbering schemes also are prevalent. The NOAA Weather
Radio network provides near continuous coverage of the coastal United
States, the Great Lakes, Hawaii, and the populated Alaska coastline. Typ-
ical coverage is 25 nautical miles offshore, but it may extend much further
in certain areas.

21.10 SOURCE

NOAA Web pages provided most of this information; the 1964 photos
were taken by Lieutenant (jg) B. McCartney.
 Chapter 22
CASE HISTORIES

This chapter revisits and updates the 3 case histories presented in ASCE
Manual 80, 1993. These case histories are intended to show the applica-
tion of design principles presented in earlier chapters. The unique features
of these navigation projects are briefly summarized with more detail pro-
vided in the later part of the chapter.

22.1 CASE HISTORY 1—GRAYS HARBOR, WASHINGTON

This project involves the enlargement of an existing 26-mile-long chan-

nel. The channel starts in the Pacific Ocean and ends at the Port of Aberdeen,
Washington. The channel provides one-way traffic for ocean-going cargo
ships. The design included physical hydraulic models, ship simulation
models, sediment studies, mitigation for fish and crabs, and dredge mate-
rial disposal in confined estuary and ocean sites.

22.2 CASE HISTORY 2—NORFOLK HARBOR, VIRGINIA

This project involves the enlargement of an existing channel. The chan-

nel starts in the Atlantic Ocean and ends in the Elizabeth River. It provides
access to terminals at Newport News, Norfolk, and terminates along the
Elizabeth River. The new channel uses the “notched’’ concept with the
outbound lane deeper than the inbound lane. The design included phys-
ical hydraulic models, ship simulation models, and numerical sediment
models.

22.3 CASE HISTORY 3—SAVANNAH HARBOR, GEORGIA

This project involves the widening of a 5-mile section of an existing

channel along the Savannah waterfront. The project purpose is to provide
199
200 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE 22-1. Grays Harbor, Washington (ASCE Manual No. 80).

a safer passing zone along this congested river reach. The final design
consists of a ship simulation study to evaluate the safety benefits for the
wider channel.

22.4 CASE HISTORY 1—GRAYS HARBOR, WASHINGTON

22.4.1 Project Description

Grays Harbor (Figure 22-1) is on the west coast of Washington State. It
is 45 miles north of the Columbia River and 110 miles south of the Straits
of Juan de Fuca. The estuary is 15 miles long and 11 miles wide, with
a surface area that varies between 97 square miles at mean higher high
water (MHHW) to 33 square miles at mean lower low water (MLLW). Two
jetties protect the ocean entrance.
A 26-mile-long channel extends from the Pacific Ocean to the port facil-
ities at the cities of Hoquiam, Aberdeen, and Cosmopolis. The channel, in
1989, was 350 ft wide and 30 ft deep with some 200-ft-wide segments at the
upstream end. The desire to enlarge the channel came from the increasing
number of vessels that were lightloaded to use the channel. In 1975, fewer
than 40% of vessels had drafts exceeding the 30-ft depth.
By the mid-1980s, about 80% of the vessels had drafts exceeding 30 ft.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed a study in 1989 to evaluate
 CASE HISTORIES 201

the need for an enlarged channel to accommodate the deeper-draft ves-

sels. This study included the following: channel design; physical hydraulic
model ship simulations; dredging and disposal; economic and environ-
mental impacts; mitigation; sedimentation; and relocations.

22.4.2 Proposed Channel Improvements

The before and after channel dimensions follow:

Channel Reach Original Project, in Feet Enlarged Project, in Feet

Ocean bar 30 × 600 (not dredged) 46 × 1000

Entrance 30 × 600 (not dredged) 46-38 × 1000-600
Outer harbor 30 × 350 36 × 350
Inner harbor 30 × 200 36 × 300-250

22.4.3 Hydrodynamic and Wind Conditions

The channel traffic is exposed to three different hydraulic conditions.
The ocean bar and entrance experience large waves, tidal currents, and
strong winds. The estuary reach has mild waves, currents, and winds, and
the river reach has river currents and a confined channel with some sharp
bends. The tide range for this project follows.

Elevation in Feet Referred to MLLW

Data Plane Pt. Chehalis Aberdeen

Highest tide (estimated) 14.00 14.90

Mean higher high water 9.00 10.10
Mean sea level 4.60 5.38
Mean lower low water 0.00 0.00
Lowest tide (estimated) −3.50 −2.90

The strongest winds are from the west, southwest, and south. These winds
can reach 70 miles per hour from April to September.
Significant wave heights of 20 to 30 ft can be expected each year off Grays
Harbor. Swells generally approach the coast southwest to northwest. The
majority of the swell periods are 12 to 18 s. Sea conditions often have a
more southerly approach in winter and north-northwest approach in the
summer. Wind-generated waves in the estuary can reach 5 ft, although
1- to 3-ft-high waves are more common.
202 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

22.4.4 Design Vessel

There were two design vessels selected for this enlargement study. The
design vessel for the lower harbor has a loaded draft of 37 ft, a length of
625 ft, and a beam of 100 ft. The upper harbor design vessel is 600 ft long,
with a l00-ft beam and a draft of 37 ft.

22.4.5 Channel Depth Design

The channel depths were designed to consider the factors outlined in EM
1110-2-1613 (1983). The vessel operation scenario assumes only outbound
transits are loaded; outbound transits are normally made during floodtide;
and maximum allowable wave height of 8 ft for outbound transit.
Information on wave effects for the Grays Harbor ocean entrance was
taken from a study of 53 vessel transits over the Columbia River bar con-
ducted between May 1978 and April 1980. The data showed the maximum
excursion of the ship’s bow will be less than 14 ft, 95% of the time, for the
limiting 8-ft wave height. The 8-ft wave constraint is for pilot safety when
boarding an incoming ship. Table 22-1 shows the channel depths selected
for the various channel reaches.
TABLE 22-1. Summary of Channel Depths for Design Vessel (ft).

Above Inner Outer∗ Entrance∗ Outer∗

Bridges harbor harbor channel bar
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Design ship 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0

draft
Minimum safe 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.0
clearance
Freshwater 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
sinkage
Trim 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
Squat 1.0 1.0 0.5 0 0
Snip motion 0 0 2.0 4−14 14.0
due to waves
Tide −6.0 −6.0 −6 to −7 −7 to −8 −9.0
Totals – channel 35.5 35.5 36.5−35.5 38–46 46.0
depths
Recommended 36.0 36 36 38-46 46
depths
∗
For severe wave design conditions, vessels are assumed to be evenly trimmed
(bow excursion is critical) and pilots will reduce vessel speed and/or time transits
for near high tide.
 CASE HISTORIES 203

In addition to these depths, an allowance of 2 ft for dredging tolerance

and 2 ft for advanced maintenance were included in initial and future
maintenance dredging work.

22.4.6 Channel Width and Alignment Design

Guidance from EM 1110-2-1613 (1983) was used for preliminary design
on this project. During the detailed design of this project, ship simulation
studies were used to determine channel alignment and widths, including
bend widening.
With the relatively small number of vessels arriving and leaving Grays
Harbor, design for two-way traffic is not warranted. Certain portions of
the estuary, such as north of Point Chehalis and Moon Island Reach, have
adequate room for passing of vessels. Under most passing conditions, light-
loaded inbound vessels can find adequate water depths either at the chan-
nel bend widenings or in naturally deep areas along the channel. Pilots
are equipped with ship-to-ship radio and passing situations are discussed
between pilots.
The deeper-draft channel alignment is generally along the existing chan-
nel with minor modifications to take advantage of naturally deep parts of
the estuary. The channel follows the thalweg of the Chehalis River and
is generally aligned with existing current patterns in the estuary, mini-
mizing annual maintenance dredging and maximizing safe navigation for
ships. Ship sizes and speeds were considered in the degree of turns in
the alignment, but alignments are generally governed by the existence of
deep water. The entrance channel is aligned through deep water off Point
Chehalis and along the south jetty. The outer bar channel is aligned along a
southwest azimuth because of pilot preference and to minimize initial and
maintenance dredge quantities. Outgoing ships will quarter or be abeam
to most swell along this alignment. Discussions with pilots at Grays Har-
bor indicate that they are more concerned about being set by the currents
and wind and by vessel pitch than roll of the vessel. Present bar transits
are usually made in a southwest direction. Incoming vessels are empty
or light-loaded and can usually navigate safely with quartering or stern
seas, and because of relatively deep water over other parts of the outer
bar do necessarily follow the designated outer bar channel into the har-
bor. Ship simulation studies (Hewlett, Eagles, Huval, and Daggett, 1991)
were conducted at the U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station (WES)
Hydraulic Laboratory, and simulation runs were made by all four Grays
Harbor pilots.
The simulator was developed from bathymetric condition surveys. Cur-
rent data obtained from the Grays Harbor estuary model were supple-
mented by field measurements of currents, photographs, pilot discus-
sions, and from an outbound transit experience made by WES and district
204 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

personnel. Two reaches of channel were tested, 8.5 miles of the outer chan-
nel from Moon Island through the south reach and about 4 miles of the
inner channel reaches Aberdeen and South Aberdeen. Vessels tested were
a 535-ft-long by 34-ft design draft ship for existing channel conditions and
a 625-ft-long by 36.5-ft design draft ship for improved channel conditions.
All outbound simulations were run with fully loaded vessels. Inbound
simulations were made with light-loaded vessels transiting through the
bridges and turning at Elliott Slough. Summary of the test results follows.

22.4.7 Outer Harbor Simulations

The crossover and south reach channels were authorized at 400 ft and
as a study alternative to this width were simulated at 350 ft width. The
simulation showed pilots could ”safely” navigate a 350-ft-wide channel
with the 625-ft-long vessel except for major turns in the channel reaches.
After exiting Moon Island Reach, pilots all tended to drift to the outside
of the channel. An outside widening of 100 ft to a 450-ft channel width is
recommended for the first 3,000 ft of crossover with an additional 1,800 ft
of taper back to the 350-ft-wide channel.
Similarly, after the exit of crossover, pilots would drift to the outside of
upper South Reach. Outside widening of 100 ft is also recommended for
the upper south reach. Length of this widening is 2,500 ft with a taper back
to 350 ft of an additional 1,000 ft. These bend-widening areas are generally
in locations of naturally deep waters and require little dredging.

22.4.8 Inner Harbor

The Aberdeen and South Aberdeen reaches were authorized at 250 ft
wide along with the replacement of an existing railroad bridge, which
would increase the horizontal clearance through the railroad bridge and
adjacent upstream highway bridge from 125 to 195 ft. The maximum-size
vessel considered for economic analysis during feasibility studies was a
600-ft-long by 90-ft beam vessel with a draft of 34 ft. In an investigation
to determine if larger vessels commonly used by carriers could transit
this reach, the 625-ft by l00-ft beam with loaded draft of 36.5 ft was tested.
Simulation results showed this transit could be made ”safely” if the channel
from Elliott Slough to the bridges was 300 ft wide and if minor widening
allowances just upstream of the highway bridge were made, including
removal of two old bridge piers.

22.4.9 Hydrodynamic and Sediment Studies

The following hydrodynamic and sediment studies were made for this
project.
 CASE HISTORIES 205

1. Physical hydraulic model to assess changes in salinity, circulation,

flushing rates, and currents. This information was used to estimate
changes in water quality for the environmental-impact assessment.
2. Field studies of near-bottom currents using drogue observations. This
information was used in sediment-movement analysis and selection
of disposal sites.
3. Analysis of past dredging records and disposal site performance. This
information was used to estimate future dredging requirements and
select disposal locations.

22.4.10 Dredge Material Disposal

There are three categories of disposal sites: ocean, entrance channel, and
confined upland. There are two ocean sites: one beyond the 90-ft contour
about 3 miles southwest of the south jetty and the other in about 150 ft of
water 8 miles west of the south jetty.
The entrance channel disposal sites are in two dispersive locations off
Point Chehalis, which have been used in the past for dredge disposal. Two
upland sites are near the Port of Grays Harbor facility in Aberdeen.

22.4.11 Mitigation
The channel enlargement causes an impact on crabs and fish habitat.
Several crab mitigation sites were selected in North and South Bays. The
mitigation consisted of placing oyster shells in the site to allow cover and
reduced predation on young crabs. The fish mitigation consisted of creating
additional habitat in the river above the navigation channel.

22.4.12 Relocations
The relocations for this project consist of moving utility lines crossing
under the channel and replacing a railroad bridge. The existing railroad
bridge has a 125-ft horizontal clearance between piers. The options were
to replace the bridge with a longer span or remove the bridge. Bridge
removal was selected. With removal of the railroad bridge, the highway
bridge would become the width constraint with its 195 ft of horizontal
clearance.

22.4.13 Project Status

The dredging of the bar, entrance, and outer harbor channels took place
between April 1990 and February 1991. The railroad bridge was removed
in 1997.
206 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

22.5 CASE HISTORY 2—NORFOLK HARBOR AND

CHANNELS, VIRGINIA

22.5.1 Project Description

Norfolk Harbor (Figure 22-2) is on the east coast of Virginia on the
southern parts of Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay is over 200 miles
long and is the largest estuary in the United States. The navigation channels
start in the Atlantic Ocean and serve both Norfolk and Newport News
harbors. A channel enlargement was desired to accommodate large bulk
carriers, up to 150,000 deadweight t.

22.5.2 Proposed Channel Improvements

The before-and-after channel dimensions and other features are listed
in Table 22-2.
TABLE 22-2. Before-and-After Channel Dimensions.

Original Project, Final Enlarged

Channel Reach in Feet Project, in Feet∗

Atlantic Ocean None 60 × 1300

Thimble Shoal 45 × 1000 55 × 1000
Norfolk Harbor 45 × 800 to 1500 55 × 800 to 1500
Newport News 45 × 800 55 × 800
North Segment 40 × 375 to 750 45 × 375 to 750
Elizabeth River
South Segment 35 × 250 to 500 40 × 250 to 500
Elizabeth River
End of South Segment None 40 × 800 turning basin
Elizabeth River
Varied None 3 new fixed mooring and
anchoring facilities
∗
Project will be built in stages with outbound lanes deepened first.

22.5.3 Hydrodynamic and Wind Conditions

The tidal cycle in the project area is semidiurnal, with two high tides
and two low tides occurring in a 24-hr period. The mean tidal range varies
between 2.5 ft at Norfolk Harbor and 3.5 ft at the Atlantic Channel. The
combined effect of tide and wind has produced water levels between −0.3
and +10.0, referred to as mean low water.
The prevailing wind direction is north and northeasterly during Febru-
ary, March, September, and October, and south or southwest for the
remainder of the year. The speed of the fastest wind occurring in every
 CASE HISTORIES 207

FIGURE 22-2. Norfolk Harbor, Virginia (ASCE Manual No. 80).

month of the year has been over 50 miph, with a maximum speed on
record of 80 miph.
Wave climate throughout the project region is generally mild, except
during abnormal weather conditions. Under normal conditions, wave ac-
tion causes few navigation problems throughout the project area. The
mildest wave conditions prevail throughout Norfolk Harbor and Hamp-
ton Roads, where the surrounding topography minimizes development
of substantial waves. The representative wave climate of Hampton Roads
and vicinity follows.
Wave Climate of Hampton Roads and Vicinity

Wave Height Percentage of Time

(1) (2)

Less than 2 ft 78%

3 to 4 ft 16%
5 to 9 ft 5%
Greater than 10 ft 1%

The wave climate of lower Chesapeake Bay is characterized by con-

ditions more inclement than that of Hampton Roads. Wave information
typical of lower Chesapeake Bay is shown below.
208 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Wave Climate of Lower Chesapeake Bay.

Wave Height (2) Percentage of Time (2)

Less than 2 ft 75%

3 to 4 ft 18%
5 to 9 ft 6%
Greater than 10 ft 1%

The largest waves in the project area occur in the vicinity of the Atlantic
Ocean Channel. At this location, severe wave heights, often associated
with northeasters and hurricanes, can cause navigational problems. Nor-
mally, this wave action comes from the northeast. A study of 20 years
of wave data offshore of Cape Henry was used to develop the following
information.

Wave Climate of Atlantic Ocean Channel and

Vicinity.

Wave Height (1) Percentage of Time (2)

Less than 2 ft 56%

3 to 4 ft 35%
5 to 9 ft 07%
Greater than 10 ft 02%

22.5.4 Design Vessels

The design vessels were selected on the basis of an engineering analysis
of the principal vessels comprising the vessel fleet, future trends in bulk
cargo vessels, and coordination with the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Maritime
Administration, and the Virginia Pilots Association. The primary design
vessel used for simulation studies and design computations had the fol-
lowing characteristics:

Vessel type Bulk Carrier (Collier)

Length overall 915 ft

Beam 145 ft
Draft-loaded 52 ft
Draft-ballasted 40 ft
(representative of a 150,000 deadweight t vessel)
 CASE HISTORIES 209

A secondary design vessel was used for simulation studies as a sen-

sitivity test for vessel size and maneuverability and had the following
characteristics:

Vessel type Wide Beam Bulk Carrier

Length overall 1,085 ft

Beam 178 ft
Draft-loaded 53 ft
Draft-ballasted 40 ft

22.5.5 Channel Design Simulation Studies

Computer-aided channel design simulation studies were made for the
Atlantic Ocean Channel, Thimble Shoal Channel, Norfolk Harbor Channel,
the Channel to Newport News, and the connecting waters between the
Norfolk Harbor Channel on the Thimble Shoal Channels.

22.5.6 Channel Depth Design

The feasibility study identified the Thimble Shoal Tunnel as a limiting
factor to practical channel depth for the Norfolk Harbor and Channels
deepening project. As a consequence, a project depth of 55 ft was estab-
lished for the Norfolk Harbor Channel, Channel to Newport News, Thim-
ble Shoal Channel, and the deep-draft anchorages. Ship hydrodynamic
investigations indicate that the design vessel is capable of operating with
a 52-ft draft under the maximum credible port condition of a 40-knot wind
and a current velocity of 0.5 knots. These conditions will permit the major-
ity of vessels to operate in an unrestricted manner. A small number of very
large bulk carriers will be unable to fully load with a 55-ft project depth;
however, the total project economics makes this unavoidable. The channel
depths are as follows:

Channel Interior Channels Atlantic Ocean

Vessel draft 52 ft 52 ft
Safety clearance 2 ft 2 ft
Heave, pitch, roll, squat, and trim 1 ft 6 ft
55 ft 60 ft

Dredging tolerance and advance maintenance allowances are in addi-

tion to these depths.
210 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

22.5.7 Channel Width Design

Selection of channel width for outbound (loaded) and inbound (bal-
lasted) vessels was made by a ship simulation study. The simulation
scenarios were developed jointly with the U.S. Coast Guard district and
the Virginia Pilots Association. More than 25 pilots participated in running
the ships from the various simulation transits. The resulting channel width
and depths for the four-phase construction plan are listed in Table 22-3.

TABLE 22-3. Phased Construction Plan.

Outbound Lane Inbound Lane

Width Depth Width Depth
Phase Channel Segment in Feet in Feet in Feet in Feet

1st Atlantic Ocean Natural (not dredged) Natural

(not dredged)
Thimble Shoal 650 50 350 45
Norfolk Harbor 650 50 350 45
Newport News 800 50 Constructed full width
2nd Atlantic Ocean 650 60 650 Natural
(not dredged)
Thimble Shoal 650 55 350 45
Norfolk Harbor 650 55 350 45
Newport News 800 55 Constructed full width
3rd Atlantic Ocean No change from second phase
Thimble Shoal 650 55 350 50
Norfolk Harbor 650 55 350 50
Newport News No change from second phase
4th Atlantic Ocean No change from second phase
(final) Thimble Shoal 650 55 350 55
Norfolk Harbor 650 55 350 55
Newport News No change from second phase

In addition to the depths shown here, an additional 2 ft was provided

for dredging tolerance and advanced maintenance.

22.5.8 Hydrodynamic and Sedimentation Studies

A physical hydraulic model was used to evaluate the impacts of the
proposed deepened channels. This model measured changes in current
velocities, water surface elevation, and salinity.
 CASE HISTORIES 211

Sedimentation evaluation consisted of an extensive bottom sampling

program and a sedimentation investigation (Berger et al., 1985). This sed-
imentation study estimated a total increase in annual shoaling of 23% for
the Norfolk Harbor Channel and little change in the Newport News Chan-
nel, a 20% increase for the Thimble Shoal Channel and 200,000 cu yd
annually of maintenance dredging for the Atlantic Ocean Channel. As of
1992, the actual sedimentation has been much less than predicted by the
sedimentation study.

22.5.9 Dredge Material Disposal

Two disposal sites were selected for this project: an ocean location south
of the Atlantic Ocean Channel, and an existing confined disposal area lo-
cated west of the Norfolk Channel segment.

22.5.10 Mitigation
Extensive environmental-impact studies determined that there were no
mitigation requirements for this project. These environmental studies in-
cluded the following:

Benthic invertebrates
Finfish
Plankton
Phytoplankton
Zooplankton
Sediment quality
Sediment movement in both the ocean and the estuary
Water quality

22.5.11 Relocations
Relocations investigations identified water lines, tunnels, power lines,
and a ship-degaussing range for the Navy in the project area. The power
lines were a minimum of 75 ft below MLW in the Norfolk Channel so that
they were not affected by the deepening project.
The two water lines under the Norfolk Channel are at 52 ft and 60 ft
MLW and will need relocation. The Navy degaussing range in the Norfolk
Channel will need relocation.
The Thimble Shoal Channel tunnel (part of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge
Tunnel) has a top clearance of 63 ft below MLW. There is a minimum earth
cover of 10 ft over the top of the tunnel. This channel-deepening project will
put the new channel bottom at 57 ft below MLW (55 ft authorized depth,
212 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

2 ft of over-depth dredging); this will encroach on the cover over the tunnel
and risk damage to the tunnel structure. A protective rock blanket was
recommended for this channel segment over the tunnel. See Table 22-4 for
further details.

TABLE 22-4. Project Status (from Norfolk District, 2000).

Channel Project Status

Segment Original Project Current Project 2000

Atlantic Ocean Natural depths 57 ft × 1000 ft No dredging–

over 50 ft width channel
11.1 mi. Subsequently marked at
length recommended 1,300 ft wide
60 ft deep,
1,300 ft wide
Thimble Shoals 45 ft × 1,000 ft 55 ft deep, 1,000 Outbound
13.4 mi. ft wide element 50 ft
length deep, 650 ft
wide
Remaining
350 ft width
maintained
at 45 ft
Norfolk Harbor 45 ft × 800 ft 55 ft × 1,500 ft 50 ft depth,
2 mi. from width 1,000 ft
I-64 bridge Subsequently width
recommended
1,000 ft width
45 ft × 800 ft 55 ft × 1500 ft Outbound
4.3 mi. to width element 50 ft
Norfolk Subsequently depth, 650 ft
International recommend width
Terminal 1,000 ft width Remaining
350 ft width
maintained
at 45 ft
Newport News 45 ft × 800 ft 55 ft × 800 ft 50 ft × 800 ft
6 mi.
 CASE HISTORIES 213

FIGURE 22-3. Savanna Harbor, Georgia (ASCE Manual No. 80).

22.6 CASE HISTORY 3—SAVANNAH HARBOR WIDENING

PROJECT SAVANNAH, GEORGIA

22.6.1 Project Description

Savannah Harbor (Figure 22-3) comprises the lower 213 miles of the
Savannah river in Chatham County, Georgia. In general, the harbor chan-
nel is a narrow winding river subject to both freshwater inflow and tidal
action. Industrial development starts around mile 10 on the south bank
and extends to the end of the harbor. Major development includes the city
of Savannah, petroleum terminals, container terminals, chemical plants,
paper mills, a sugar refinery, cement plants, a shipyard, and many smaller
industrial activities. On the north bank there are more oil terminals, the
operations yard for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer District, Savannah, a
large pulp mill effluent aeration lagoon, and numerous dredged material
disposal sites. Despite this development, the major portion of the north
bank remains fairly open, consisting of brush lands and saltwater marsh.
Much of this north bank land is used for dredge disposal. Because of the
large amount of industrial activity in the harbor, the Port of Savannah re-
cently recorded a larger increase in total tonnage than most other harbors
in the United States.
214 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

22.6.2 Proposed Channel Improvements

The proposed widening is to involve the 5.6-mile section between the
upstream end of Fig Island Turning Basin and the downstream end of King
Island Turning Basin.
Currently, the channel is maintained at a depth of 38 ft and a width
of 400 ft. The Georgia Department of Transportation removed the north
pier of the “old Talmadge Bridge’’ in 1992. The replacement bridge is now
open to traffic. Removal of the old bridge pier allows a 500-ft channel
width for the entire length. The project depth will remain at 38 ft. Above
the bridge, the widening required removing small amounts of bank line
to maintain the channel’s side slope. Below the bridge, however, large
portions of developed land on the north bank required removal, including
the Savannah District staging yard and other old docking areas, as well as
some World War I–era slips. A summary of project pertinent data follows.

Project location:
distance above mouth of Savannah River: 13.1 to 18.5 mi
Channel dimensions widened section:
length: 28,340 ft
Bottom width: 500 ft
Side slopes: 1 on 3
Harbor line from edge of channel: 100 to 150 ft
Construction quantities:
material dredged from channel: 1,894,000 cu yd

22.6.3 Hydrodynamic Conditions

The Savannah River is one of the largest rivers in the southeastern United
States, with an average freshwater inflow calculated at the boundary of the
study area of 12,000 cu ft per s. The river is subject to mean tidal ranges on
the order of 6 to 9 ft that produce current speeds through the study area
of around 2.5 to 3.0 knots on the ebbing tide. The flooding tide usually
produces currents a little smaller than those in the ebbing tide. Previously,
the main controlling factor of the strong ebb tide was the tide gate structure
located on the north side of Hutchinson Island in the Back River. This
structure was constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to aid in
sediment flushing through the main shipping channel in the Front River.
The tide gate was removed and a closure structure was put in place in
February 1992. Removal of the gate was for fisheries enhancement.

22.6.4 Design Vessels

Originally, this investigation was to run simulations using a number of
vessels including three container ships, two LASH ships, two bulk carri-
ers, and a liquid tanker. Because of limited time, it was desirable to test
 CASE HISTORIES 215

only worst-case conditions; therefore, the scope of testing was restricted

to the United States Lines Inc. 950-ft New York class container ships. This
particular ship was determined to be the best design case for the following
reasons:

1. It is the largest ship in Savannah Harbor. According to comments

made by pilots, the 950s have better mechanical response than smaller
ships; however, the length of the ship causes greater control problems
in opposing currents.
2. Discussion with pilots confirmed that the 950s caused them the most
stress.
3. Actual simulator testing by pilots and simulator employees used a
few models of smaller ships. These ships were observed to cause no
greater difficulties than did the 950s.

22.6.5 Channel Design

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station
(WES) Hydraulics Laboratory conducted a ship simulation study concern-
ing the effect of proposed improvements on navigation. The objective of
the ship simulator investigation was to compare the existing and planned
(proposed) channels to determine any change in ship controllability and
operational safety.
Required data included channel geometry, bottom topography, currents
for both existing and planned channels, a numerical model of a ship, and
photographs of the scene along the river banks. A numerical hydrodynamic
model was used to generate the channel currents. Prototype data were
used for boundary conditions and verification of the model of the existing
channel.
Boundary conditions for the planned channel were obtained from the
laterally averaged numerical model which was generated for the sediment
and salinity intrusion studies. A reconnaissance trip was carried out to
observe an inbound and outbound transit through the study area to ob-
tain some familiarity with prototype conditions. Video recordings and still
photographs were taken during the transits to aid in generation of the
simulated visual scene.
In keeping with the objective of testing only the worst case, it also was
decided to run simulation in spring tide conditions and, in so doing, subject
the ship to extreme currents. The tidal range to generate these currents was
approximately 10.5 ft. Results of the Savannah Harbor ship simulation
study reveal these conclusions:

1. A slight but consistent improvement was noted in vessel controlla-

bility in the planned channel.
216 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

2. Passage through the immediate vicinity of the bridge appears to be

unaffected by the plan.
3. A significant improvement was evident in the mean south bank clear-
ance in the planned channel especially in the city-front area.
4. The area between Marsh Island Turning Basin and Kings Island Turn-
ing Basin is a potential area for an accident, exhibited by the high
incidence of groundings in the simulator runs.
5. In their comments and questionnaire ratings, the pilots consistently
judged the planned channel an improvement.
6. Pilots often commented that the planned channel would afford them
safer passing zones, especially in the straight reach between Tal-
madge Bridge and Marsh Island. This possible advantage of the
planned channel was not tested by the simulator.
7. The study also quantified another problem in the Marsh Island area;
that is, ships tied up at the Amoco Dock upstream of Union Camp
Corp. All the pilots voiced apprehension that the channel was too
close to this dock when tankers were moored.

22.6.6 Project Status

This channel-widening project was completed in February 1992.
 Appendix A
BIBLIOGRAPHY

ASCE. (1994). Planning and design guidelines for small craft harbors. ASCE Manuals
and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 50, ASCE, Reston, Va.
ASCE Task Committee on Hydraulic Modeling, Environmental and Water
Resources Institute. (2000). Hydraulic modeling: Concepts and practice. ASCE Man-
uals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 97, ASCE, Reston, Va.
ASCE Task Committee on Inland Navigation for the Committee on Waterways,
Waterways, Ports, and Ocean Division. (1998). Inland navigation: locks, dams, and
channels. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 94, ASCE,
Reston, Va.
ASCE Task Committee on Ship Channel Design for the Committee on Waterways,
Waterways, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Division. (1993). “Report on ship channel
design.’’ ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 80, ASCE,
Reston Va.
Beeman. (1985). “Channel optimization: The Columbia River deep draft channel
project.” PIANC Bulletin, No. 51.
Berger, R. C. Jr., et al. (1985). “Norfolk Harbor and channels deepening study: Rep. 2,
sediment investigation; Chesapeake Bay hydraulic model investigation.’’Techni-
cal Rep. HL-83-13,’’ U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Miss.
Berger, R. C., McAdory, R. T., Martin, W. D., and Schmidt, J. H. (1995). “Houston-
Galveston navigation channels, Texas project; Report 3, Three-dimensional hy-
drodynamic model verification,” Technical Report HL-92-7, U.S. Army Water-
ways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Committee on Tidal Hydraulics, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1965). Evaluation
of present state of knowledge of factors affecting tidal hydraulics and related phenomena,
U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Committee on Tidal Hydraulics. (1995). “Review of problems in the tidal water-
ways considered by the Committee on Tidal Hydraulics.’’ U.S. Army Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
d’Angremond, K., and Roode, F. C. (2001). Breakwaters and closure dams, Delft
University Press, The Netherlands.
Groenveld, R., Beimers, B., and Vis, F. C. (2003). “A simple method to assess nautical
risk.’’ Proc., COPEDEC VI Conference, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Hansen, D. V., and Rattray, M., Jr. (1966). “New dimensions in estuary classifica-
tion.” Liminol Oceanog, 11, 319–326.

217
218 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Hewlett, J. C., Eagles, K. E., Huval, C. J., and Daggett, L. L. (1991). “Ship simulation
study of Grays Harbor navigation project, Grays Harbor, Washington.’’ Technical
Rep. HL-91-18, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Huval, C. J., ed. (1993). Planning, design and maintenance of deep draft navigation chan-
nels, PROSPECT training course notes, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Miss.
Huval, C., Combs, B., and Garner, R. T. III. (1985). “Ship simulation study of John F.
Baldwin (Phase II) Navigation Channel, San Francisco Bay, California.’’ Technical
Rep. HL-85-4, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Ippen, A. T., ed. (1966). Estuary and coastline hydrodynamics, McGraw-Hill, New
York.
Ippen, A. T., and Harleman, D. R. F. (1961). “One dimensional analysis of salinity
intrusion in estuaries.” Technical Bulletin No. 5, Prepared for Committee on Tidal
Hydraulics, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
McCartney, B. L., Herrmann, F. A. Jr., and Simmons, H. B. (1991). “Estuary water-
way projects—Lessons learned.” Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean En-
gineering, Vol. 117, No. 4, ASCE, Reston, Va.
Norfolk District Corps of Engineers. (2000). Navigation management plan for the Port
of Hampton Roads, Virginia.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1980). “Layout and design of shallow-draft
waterways.” Engineer Manual 1110-2-1611, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1983). “Dredging and dredged material
disposal.’’ Engineer Manual 1110-2-5025, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1986). “Design of breakwaters and jetties.’’
Engineer Manual 1110-2-2904, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1987). “Environmental engineering for deep
draft navigation projects.” Engineer Manual 1110-2-1202, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1990). “Winter navigation on inland water-
ways.’’ Engineer Manual 1110-8-1, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1991). “Tidal hydraulics.’’ Engineer Manual
1110-2-1607, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (1995). “Hydraulic design of navigation
locks.’’ Engineer Manual 1110-2-1604, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (2002). “Ice engineering.’’ Engineer Manual
1110-2-1612, Washington, D.C.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. “Hydraulic design of deep draft naviga-
tion projects.’’ (2002 draft of 2nd Ed.). Engineer Manual 1110-2-1613, Washington,
D.C., awaiting publication.
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. (Forthcoming). “Coastal engineering manual,
Part VI.” Engineer Manual 1110-2-1100, Washington, D.C.
PIANC. (1997). “Approach channels—A guide for design.’’ Supplement to bulletin
no. 95, First Rep. of the Joint Working Group PIANC and IAPH, in cooperation with
IMPA and IALA, PIANC.
Pritchard, D. W. (1952a). “Estuaries hydrography.” Advances in Geophysics, 1, 243–
280.
 APPENDIX A: BIBLIOGRAPHY 219

Pritchard, D. W. (1952b). “Salinity distribution and circulation in the Chesapeake

Bay estuaries system.” Journal, Marine Research, 11, 106–123.
Pritchard, D. W. (1955). “Estuaries circulation patterns.” Proceedings, ASCE, 81 (717).
Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act, Section 5. (1915). (PL 291, 1915).
Simmons, H. B. (1955). “Some effects of upland discharges on estuarine hydraulics.”
Proceedings, ASCE, 81 (792).
U.S. Navy. (1981). “Harbors.’’ NA VFAC Design Manual 26.1, Department of the
Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, Va.
Wang and Noble, August, 1982. “Columbia River Entrance Channel Ship Motion
Study” ASCE Waterway Journal.
Webb, D. W., and Daggett, L. L. (1994). “Ship navigation simulation study, Houston-
Galveston navigation channels, Texas.’’ Technical Rep. HL-94-3, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
This page intentionally left blank
 Appendix B
DIMENSIONS OF SELECTED U.S.
DEEP-DRAFT NAVIGATION ENTRANCE
CHANNELS IN 1993

Harbor (1) Depth, Ft (2) Width, Ft (3)

East Coast
New York, N.Y. 45 2000
Baltimore, MD 50 1000
Wilmington, NC 40 500
Charleston, SC 35 1000
Port Everglades, FL 45 500
Miami, FL 38 500
Great Lakes
Milwaukee, WI 30 800
Green Bay, WI 26 500
Gulf Coast
Houston, TX 40 400
Galveston, TX 42 800
Mississippi River, LA 45 600–750
Mobile, AL 47 600
Panama City, FL 42 450
Tampa, FL 46 700
San Juan, P.R. 48 500
West Coast
Grays Harbor, WA 46 1,000
Mouth of Columbia River, WA 55 2,000
Coos Bay, OR 45 700
San Francisco, CA 45 2,000
Los Angeles, CA 40 1,000
San Diego, CA 42 800
Honolulu, HI 45 500

221
This page intentionally left blank
 Appendix C
ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS
LESSONS LEARNED

During the last 100 years, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built,
and continues to maintain, over 300 navigation projects in tidal waters.
These projects include deep-draft ship channels, small boat harbors, and
intracoastal waterways for barges. The majority of these projects func-
tion very well with minimal maintenance cost. However, a few experience
higher-than-expected shoaling rates and require considerable maintenance
dredging.
The Corps’ Committee on Tidal Hydraulics has studied these problem
projects since 1950 and has identified a list of dos and don’ts for estuary nav-
igation projects. These generic lessons involve two categories—entrance
channels and interior channels. These were identified during a detailed
review of 24 of the 109 projects in which the committee had provided ad-
vice. Case histories for each of the reviewed projects included an analysis
of the various lessons that were learned. The study was published by the
Committee on Tidal Hydraulics in 1995.
Some of the lessons are obvious and may seem too trivial to list. How-
ever, the experience of the committee is that such lessons tend to become
lost and must then be relearned by subsequent generations. Restating
those lessons in this manual will make relearning them somewhat more
likely.

C.1 ENTRANCE CHANNELS

1. Parallel jetties are less prone to shoaling because of their configura-

tion, which confines the ebb flow, raising ebb velocities and, thereby,
flushing sediment seaward (Figure C-1).
2. Although curved jetties also can be designed to produce nondeposi-
tional velocities (e.g., Umpqua River entrance), flow concentrations
on the outside of the curve can cause the undermining of the jetty
and make a channel alignment difficult to navigate (Figure C-1).

223
224 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-1. Straight Parallel, Curved Parallel, and Arrowhead Jetties.

3. Entrance channels with arrowhead jetties frequently shoal rapidly

because ebb flow is not confined enough to produce scouring ve-
locities inside the jetties (Figure C-1). This also can allow or cause
channel migration. Examples: Mouth of the Columbia River and
Galveston Bay entrance.
4. Jetties should be long enough to prevent littoral transport around
the jetty ends and into the navigation channel (Figure C-2). Model
studies of the Rogue River, Oregon, jetties have shown that an ex-
tension would substantially reduce channel shoaling.
5. Jetties should be sealed to prevent a significant portion of the lit-
toral drift from passing through the jetty (Figure C-3). Sealing and
rehabilitation of the Umpqua River, Oregon, jetties reduced channel
shoaling.

FIGURE C-2. Jetty Length.

 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 225

FIGURE C-3. Jetty Sealing.

6. The outer ends of jetties should be submerged at high tide, unless

their primary function is to protect from waves. This position will
reduce the capacity of flood tide to carry littoral materials into the
channel, and still train the ebb tide flow to flush sediments seaward
(Figure C-4). Example: Grays Harbor, Washington.
7. Separation of river flow from the harbor entrance can reduce naviga-
tion channel shoaling by isolating the channel shoaling (Figure C-5).
The separated entrance of Mission Bay, California, is an example.
8. Shoaling in an entrance channel that is confined by jetties can be
reduced by diminishing the jetty space (Figure C-6). Too narrow a
spacing, however, can cause a hazardous navigation condition or
scouring velocities, which can undermine adjacent jetties. Model
studies of the Tillamook Bay, Oregon, entrance were used to opti-
mize jetty spacing with regard to both channel shoaling and navi-
gation safety.
9. Channels will migrate toward the jetty on a single jetty entrance,
which can cause undermining of the jetty (Figure C-7). For example,

FIGURE C-4. Submerged Jetty Ends.

226 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-5. Mission Bay Separated Entrances.

FIGURE C-6. Reduced Jetty Spacing.

 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 227

FIGURE C-7. Single-Jetty Channel Migration.

before 1969, Tillamook Bay, Oregon, was a single-jetty system. The

north jetty was constructed in 1933 and the south jetty in 1969.
10. Some jetty systems may take many years, possibly a century or more,
to reach equilibrium (Figure C-8). Example: Galveston Bay entrance.
11. After construction of a new channel, adjustments (sloughing) of
side slopes can require several years. The sloughed material is a
source of material for channel shoaling (Figure C-9). This lesson
also applies to interior channels. Example: Mouth of the Columbia
River; Matagorda ship channel.
12. Agitation dredging and in-channel disposal can be effective, where
strong ebb-flow dominance exists over the entire water column
(Figure C-10). On the other hand, if the currents are weak, the agi-
tated material may immediately return to the channel, thus increas-
ing the volume to be dredged. Example: Mississippi River southwest
pass. This is a lesson that also applies to interior channels.

FIGURE C-8. Jetty System Adjustments.

228 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-9. Adjusting Channel Side Slopes.

13. Open-water disposal should be in a dispersive site (scour hole)

where sediment movement is out to sea (Figure C-11). Nondisper-
sive disposal sites accumulate sediments. Thus, they will have a
finite life if sediments are not removed periodically to make room
for additional dredged material. Example: San Francisco Bay, Alca-
traz disposal site.
14. Repairs to an undermined jetty should be made by first locating the
new jetty on the ocean side of the original jetty. The undermined jetty
then serves as the channel-side toe for the new jetty (Figure C-12).
Example: South jetty at Grays Harbor, Washington.

C.2 INTERIOR CHANNELS

1. Dredged channels or harbor facilities in naturally shallow water

usually require frequent maintenance dredging to maintain their
depths (Figure C-13). Examples are the U.S. Navy Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, Cape Fear River; Matagorda Bay ship chan-
nel; Mississippi River–gulf outlet. Where possible, they should be
located in naturally deep water.
2. Expansions of harbor width will reduce velocities that can induce
rapid shoaling (Figure C-14). Example: Brunswick Harbor, Delaware
River.

FIGURE C-10. Agitation Dredging in Ebb Flow Dominance.

 FIGURE C-11. Disposal in Scour Hole.

FIGURE C-12. Jetty Repair.

FIGURE C-13. Channel Dredging through Shoals.

FIGURE C-14. Rapid Shoaling in Harbor Expansion.

229
230 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-15. Side Channels, Basins, and Pier Slips as Sediment Traps.

3. Side channels, basins, and pier slips in estuaries can be effective

sediment traps (i.e., they will be subject to a higher rate of shoaling
than surrounding areas) (Figure C-15). Examples: New York Harbor;
U.S. Navy Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point, Cape Fear River.
4. Piers on pilings create eddies that increase the shoaling rates of sedi-
ments (Figure C-16). Example: New York Harbor and San Francisco
Bay.
5. Increased river discharge by diversion can increase sediment load
available for shoaling in the estuary (Figure C-17). The increased
sediment load can be introduced into the system with the increased
flow velocity that causes more bank and bed erosion. Example:
Santee-Cooper diversion project, Charleston Harbor.
6. Isolation of the channel from sediment inflow by structures can
reduce maintenance dredging requirements (Figure C-18). Exam-
ples: Gastineau Channel, Alaska; Colorado River, Texas; Mississippi
River–gulf outlet.
7. Access channels and harbor areas off the main navigation chan-
nel should be streamlined to reduce eddies and dead-water areas
where shoaling can occur (Figure C-19). Example: U.S. Navy Mili-
tary Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point, Cape Fear River. Where possible,
they should be open at both ends to permit through flow.
8. Sediment traps in connecting channels can be used to control the
location of dredging (Figure C-20). Such sediment traps can be

FIGURE C-16. Eddies Around Pilings.

APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 231

FIGURE C-17. Diversion Caused Shoaling.

FIGURE C-18. Isolated Sediment from Channel.

FIGURE C-19. Access Channel Streamlining.

FIGURE C-20. Sediment Trap Controls Dredging Location.

232 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-21. Dock in Deep Water.

particularly effective when they are combined with a tide gate, al-
lowing sediment-laden water into the trap and forcing cleaner water
(after deposition during slack tide) into the main channel to en-
hance flushing in a problem area. Example: Savanna Harbor. Such
a scheme can be used to relocate deposition areas closer to dredged
material disposal sites.
9. Docks should be located in naturally deep water, where possible
(Figure C-21). For example, the approach channel to a marginal
wharf at Anchorage Harbor is incised into a natural shoal that is
about half as deep as the channel. It experiences heavy shoaling.
10. Harbors should be located on the outside of river bends because
the inside of bends will shoal (Figure C-22). Example: Gold Beach
Harbor, Rogue River, Oregon.
11. Abandonment or relocation of harbor projects should be considered
when rapid shoaling prevents effective maintenance (Figure C-23).
Example: Gastineau Channel, Alaska.
12. Confined disposal—either in upland or diked in water sites—will
prevent the return of dredged materials to the channel, thereby re-
ducing future channel shoaling (Figure C-24). Example: Delaware
Bay.

FIGURE C-22. Site Harbors on Outside of River Bend.

 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 233

FIGURE C-23. Rapid Shoaling Forces Abandonment or Relocation.

13. Open-water (unconfined) disposal that is remote from the channel

or in areas of low bottom current will limit the return of dredged
material to the channel (Figure C-25). Example: Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal. Open-water disposal operations that are too close
to the channels in Matagorda Bay and the Mississippi River–gulf
outlet allow substantial return of the material to the channels.
14. Mounds formed by disposal of dredged material should have flat
side slopes to reduce the potential for erosion. This will, in turn,
reduce the return of materials to the active sediment system (Fig-
ure C-26). Example: Mississippi River–gulf outlet.
15. Controlled dredging (e.g., covered dredge head) and disposal (e.g.,
silt curtain or tremie disposal on bottom) practices can reduce the

FIGURE C-24. Confined Disposal Area.

234 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

FIGURE C-25. Remote Disposal Area.

volume of sediment placed back in suspension, thereby reducing

the rate of channel shoaling (Figure C-27).
16. Null zones will cause shoaling and should be avoided as harbor
sites. In a null zone, which is usually caused by salinity stratification,
no (tidal) net flow occurs at the bottom (Figure C-28). Example:
Mississippi River. The location of such null zones can be altered
through upstream flow regulation.
17. An increase in channel depth usually will allow greater penetra-
tion of the saltwater wedge, which will move the shoaling location
upstream (Figure C-29). Example: Savannah Harbor.
18. A decrease in freshwater inflow (e.g., due to upstream dam regula-
tion) can increase the length of salinity intrusion and change the lo-
cation of shoaling (Figure C-30). Controlled model tests of Delaware
Bay clearly demonstrated this phenomenon.
19. An increase in freshwater inflow (e.g., due to upstream flow diver-
sion) can cause salinity stratification and shoaling in a previously
well-mixed estuary (Figure C-31). Example: Charleston Harbor.
20. Suspended clay sediments will flocculate and enhance shoaling with
the proper combination of salinity, water temperature, and flow
conditions. Example: Savannah Harbor; Delaware Bay.

FIGURE C-26. Low, Flat Disposal Mound.

 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 235

FIGURE C-27. Controlled Dredging and Disposal.

FIGURE C-28. Null Zones Will Cause Shoaling.

FIGURE C-29. Saltwater Wedge and Shoaling Shifts Upstream with Deeper
Channel.

FIGURE C-30. Decreased Freshwater Inflow Moves Shoaling Location

Upstream.

FIGURE C-31. Shoaling Caused by Salinity Stratification.

236 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

21. Unconfined disposal of clean material usually has no adverse long-

term effects on the biological population. The dredged channel and
submerged disposal site will re-colonize in a short time; 1 or 2 years
is a normal period.

The following tabulation summarizes the most pertinent information

pertaining to lessons that were learned from the 23 case studies considered
by the CTH.

Project: Anchorage Harbor, Alaska

Problem: Shoaling in wharf area adjacent to interior channel.
Cause: Reduced currents in expansion off main channel.
Solution: a. Continue dredging.
b. Relocate wharves to deep water.
Remarks: a. Present practice is to continue dredging.
b. Relocating wharves not economical at the
present time.
Project: Brunswick Harbor, Georgia
Problem: Interior-channel shoaling after channel
enlargement.
Cause: Reduced currents in enlarged channel.
Solution: a. Continue dredging.
b. Construct closure dams at the head of side
channel to reduce sediment influx and shoaling
in harbor.
Remarks: a. Continue dredging.
b. Construction of first dam seemed to reduce
shoaling but second dam seemed to increase
shoaling.
Project: Cape Fear River, Sunny Point Terminal, North Carolina
Problem: Shoaling in harbor adjacent to interior channel.
Cause: Reduced currents in harbor off main channels.
Solution: Realign and streamline channels and eliminate
one of the channels leading to the wharves.
Remarks: Being considered by Army.
Project: Charleston Harbor, South Carolina
Problem: High shoaling rate in interior channel following
diversion of river into estuary.
Cause: a. Increased velocity eroded up-stream banks,
which deposited in channel.
b. Fresh river water created a stratified system with
the salinity wedge causing shoaling.
Solution: a. Redivert river out of estuary.
b. Redivert river out of estuary.
 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 237

Remarks: a. Rediversion plan is under way.

b. Rediversion plan is under way.
Project: Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, Delaware/Maryland
Problem: Evaluate overboard disposal for interior channel.
Cause: N/A
Solution: N/A
Remarks: A prototype study of overboard disposal showed
no long-term adverse effects on biota after 1 to 11/2
years.
Project: Colorado River, Texas
Problem: a. Feasibility of jettied entrance channel.
b. Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Substantial littoral drift.
b. Large sediment contribution during floods and
naturally shallow depths.
Solution: a. Jetties are required to prevent excessive shoaling.
b. Separate flood and navigation channels.
Remarks: a. Not yet constructed.
b. Not yet constructed.
Project: Columbia River, Oregon/Washington
1. Problem: Entrance channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Littoral drift, river sediment load, and upstream
bottom flow predominance.
b. Arrowhead jetty configuration.
c. Side slope adjustment (sloughing).
Solution: a. Dredging.
b. Construct spur jetty.
c. Dredging.
Remarks: a. Present practice.
b. Too expensive.
c. Present practice.
2. Problem: Interior channel shoaling.
Cause: River sediment load and adjustment of dredge-cut
slope.
Solution: a. Dredging.
b. Construction with dikes.
Remarks: a. Present practice.
b. Present practice.
3. Problem: Rehabilitation needs for entrance jetties.
Cause: Deterioration with time.
Solution: a. South jetty repair. Leave outer end submerged
to minimize channel shoaling.
b. North jetty repair and sealing.
238 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Remarks: a. Completed in 1964, except for outer 1.2 miles.

b. Not accomplished to date.
Project: Delaware Estuary, Pennsylvania/New Jersey/Delaware
Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Heavy sediment inflow and open-water disposal
near channel in shallow bay.
b. Substantial enlargement of cross section by
construction of an anchorage area significantly
reduced velocities.
c. Null point resulting from salinity stratification.
Solution: a. Eliminate agitation dredging and dispose in
confined area.
b. Dredging.
c. Dredging.
Remarks: a. Implemented with success.
b. Present practice.
c. Present practice.
Project: Duwamish River, Washington
Problem: Determine impact of each channel closing on
shoaling and circulation.
Cause: N/A
Solution: CTH recommended not closing each channel
because of probable reduced flushing.
Remarks: Closure not implemented at this time.
Project: Galveston Entrance Channel, Texas
Problem: Channel shift toward north jetty endangered
north jetty stability and complicated navigation
by making sharper bends.
Cause: Maintenance dredging followed channel
migration toward north jetty. Excessive jetty
spacing and arrowhead configuration contributed
to migration.
Solution: Change channel alignment to midpoint between
jetty and hold during future maintenance work.
Remarks: Implemented with success.
Project: Gastineau Channel, Alaska
Problem: Rapid shoaling in small boat half-tide channel.
Cause: Large sediment inflow in shallow bay.
Solution: a. Isolate sediment from channel by parallel dike.
b. Abandon project.
Remarks: a. Recommended by model study but too
expensive.
b. Project has not been maintained and is
effectively abandoned.
 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 239

Project: Georgetown Harbor, South Carolina

Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Deep channel through shallow bay with inflow
from two large sediment-bearing rivers.
b. Upstream bottom flow predominance.
Solution: a. Dredge or abandon.
b. Dredge.
c. Divert sediment-laden inflow.
Remarks: a. Presently maintained by dredging.
b. Present practice.
c. Not implemented.
Project: Grays Harbor, Washington
1. Problem: Extent of jetty rehabilitation needed.
Cause: Deterioration with time.
Solution: a. Rehabilitate south jetty above the water line;
leave outer 5,000 ft degraded.
b. Total length of north jetty to be rehabilitated.
Remarks: a. Was accomplished in 1966; has not worked very
well.
b. Recommended by model. Accomplished in 1975;
has worked very well.
2. Problem: Interior-channel shoaling and poor navigation
alignment.
Cause: Channel alignment through high shoaling area
with several turns.
Solution: Relocate channel.
Remarks: Accomplished in 1978. Reduced shoaling by
300,000 cu yd per year as predicted by
model.
3. Problem: Open-water disposal location.
Cause: Recirculation of disposal material by flood
currents into navigation channel.
Solution: Relocate disposal to deep scour hole between
jetties.
Remarks: Recommended by model studies and
implemented.
Project: Hudson River, New York Harbor, New York
Problem: a. Interior-channel shoaling.
b. High shoaling rates at pier slips.
Cause: a. Filling of deep scour hole with rock increased
bottom turbulence and changed flow
predominance.
b. Pier slips serve as sediment traps.
240 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Solution: a. Remove rock to re-establish natural

cross-sectional area.
b. Abandon high shoaling area slips.
Remarks: a. Recommended by model study. Not yet
implemented.
b. Slips have been abandoned.
Project: Jacksonville Harbor, Mill Cove, Florida
Problem: Interior small-boat-channel shoaling.
Cause: Natural flow in the area was reduced by dredged
material disposal islands.
Solution: Enlarge entrances to allow more flow through
flushing action.
Remarks: Proposed solution by District.
Project: Matagorda Ship Channel, Texas
1. Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: Adjustment of dredge cuts and erosion of
disposal mounds near the channel caused high
initial shoaling.
Solution: Dispose of dredged material in a site remote from
the channel.
Remarks: Present practice.
2. Problem: Cross currents have adverse impact on ships.
Cause: Ebb flow from Matagorda Bay crosses new deep
navigation channel.
Solution: Channel realighment or widening.
Remarks: Not proposed at this time.
3. Problem: Predicted bank erosion of new entrance channel.
Cause: High velocities.
Solution: Preplaced riprap in trenches at desired stable bank
locations.
Remarks: Successfully implemented.
Project: Mississippi River–Gulf Outlet, Louisiana
Problem: Entrance-channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Lateral currents and waves in shallow water
carry sediment into deep channel.
b. Return of dredged material placed adjacent to
the channel.
Solution: a. Dikes or land-connected jetties to prevent
sediment from reaching channel.
b. Dispose dredged material at a site remote from
channel.
Remarks: a. 50% of dike system is completed and is
presently being evaluated.
 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 241

b. Dredged material apparently is placed too

close to the channel.
Project: Mississippi River, Southwest Pass, Louisiana
1. Problem: Entrance channel shoaling.
Cause: Location of saltwater wedge during high
flows.
Solution: a. Agitation dredging, which releases materials in
areas of strong ebb flow dominance.
b. Entrance channel realignment.
Remarks: a. Present practice.
b. Constructed as recommended by model study;
works well.
2. Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: Heavy river-sediment load settles, in reach of
reduced velocities and salinity wedge interface.
Solution: a. Dredging.
b. Confinement of channel to maintain high
velocities.
Remarks: a. Present practice with agitation dredging and
in-channel disposal is effective.
b. Present practice with dike and groin system.
Project: Rogue River, Oregon
Problem: Entrance-channel shoaling that blocks small boat
harbor entrance.
Cause: a. Floods deposit large sediment load in entrance.
Winter waves return flood sediment and
littoral drift into channel.
b. Harbor located on inside of bend, where river
currents will not flush out sediment brought in
by waves.
Solution: a. Extend jetties to prevent littoral drift from
entering channel.
b. Separate harbor from river with separate ocean
entrances.
Remarks: a. Model tests showed partly effective but shoal
still migrated to boat harbor entrance.
b. Recommended by model studies.
Project: San Francisco Bay, California
Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: Large sediment inflow and recirculation of
unconfined, disposed dredged material.
Solution: Dispose at a dispersive site, which minimizes
return of material to channel.
242 SHIP CHANNEL DESIGN AND OPERATION

Remarks: Proven effective by District experience and field

tests.
Project: Savannah River, Georgia
Problem: Interior-channel shoaling.
Cause: a. Deepening of channel and regulation of upland
freshwater inflow by dams. This caused
shoaling to move upstream as a result of
salinity wedge advance and ideal sediment
flocculation conditions.
b. Open-water dredged material disposal and
dredging practice that created large quantities
of suspended sediment.
Solution: a. Create tide gate and sediment trap in a branch
channel. Tide gate forced ebb flow back to main
channel.
b. Use confined disposal areas. Change dredging
methods to reduce sediment resuspension.
Remarks: a. Built; working very well.
b. Implemented; working very well.
Project: Tillamook Bay, Oregon
Problem: Selection of jetty spacing for self-cleaning 18-ft
deep channels.
Cause: N/A
Solution: A 1,200-ft-wide spacing between jetties was
selected.
Remarks: Recommended by model studies and proven
suitable in the prototype.
Project: Umpqua River, Oregon
1. Problem: Rapid shoaling of entrance channel.
Cause: a. Arrowhead jetty did not confine ebb flow
enough to scour channel.
b. Movement of littoral drift through, over, and
around north jetty.
Solution: a. Build a training jetty parallel to north jetty.
b. Rehabilitate north jetty.
Remarks: a. Constructed in 1979–1980; works well.
b. Constructed in 1977; works well.
2. Problem: Difficult navigation between arrowhead jetties.
Cause: Cross currents in arrowhead section.
Solution: Realign channel and build training jetty.
Remarks: Constructed in 1979–1980; no complaints about
cross current now.
 APPENDIX C: ESTUARY WATERWAY PROJECTS LESSONS LEARNED 243

Project: Wells Harbor, Massachusetts

Problem: Rapid shoaling in entrance channel.
Cause: Arrowhead jetties did not confine ebb flow enough
to scour channel, and littoral drift came around
ends.
Solution: Extend jetties and make parallel.
Remarks: Jetty extension completed in 1967; works well.

C.3 SOURCE

This information was taken from McCartney, Hermann, and Simons (1991)
“Estuary waterway projects—lessons learned.’’Journal of Waterways, Part 3,
Coastal and Ocean Engineering, 117(4), July/August, and the Commit-
tee on Tidal Hydraulics, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1995) “Review
of Problems in Tidal Waterways considered by the Committee on Tidal
Hydraulics,’’ June.
This page intentionally left blank
 INDEX

Abandonment, 232, 233 Atlantic Ocean Channel

Access channel streamlining, 230, 231 dredge material disposal, 211
Accident or Emergency Response enlargement project, 206, 212
plan, 166 phased construction plan, 210
Accident records, 29–30 proposed improvements, 206
Accidents, 165–166 simulation studies, 209
casualty investigations, 185–186 tidal range, 206
Admiralty Inlet, 181 wave climate, 208
Advance maintenance, 53 ATLANTIC Strike Team, 190
Agitation disposal method, 130 ATONS (Aids to Navigation System),
Agitation dredging, 228 168–171
Aids to navigation, 168–171 Auto carriers, 25
Aids to Navigation System (ATONS), Automated Mutual-Assistance Vessel
168–171 Rescue (AMVER) system, 184
AIS (Automatic Identification Automatic Identification System
System), 180 (AIS), 180
Alcatraz disposal site, 228
Alien migrant interdiction, 187–188 Bank clearance, 65, 72
Alignment, 57–61 Bar-built structures, 34
case histories, 203–204 Barbour’s Cut (Houston Ship
Altered circulation, 127–128 Channel), 137–138
Ambrose Channel, 181 Baseline studies, 14–15
AMVER (Automated Mutual- Basins, 230
Assistance Vessel Rescue) Beach erosion, 82
system, 184 Beacons, 168
Anchorage Harbor, Alaska, 11, 232, Bends, 69–76
236 Benefits, 149–150
Anchorages, 109–111 Berwick Bay Vessel Traffic Service
Apparent sea level rise, 45 (VTS), 183
Armor rock, 95, 96 Breakbulk cargo, 16
Armor units, 96, 97 Bridge administration, 176–179
Arthur Kill, 181 Bridge approaches, 114
At-sea fisheries enforcement, 188 Bridge lighting, 178–179
Atchafalaya River, 183 Bridges, 113–114

245
246 INDEX

Brunswick Harbor, Georgia, 228, 236 Channel types, 65–66

Bucket dredges, 89–90 Channel width, 63–77
Bulk cargo, 16 additional, 70–71, 72
Buoys for bank clearance, 72
current survey buoys, 195 case histories, 203–204, 209
navigation aids, 168–169, 172 elements of, 64
river buoys, 172, 173 final design, 76–77
minimum values, 64
Canal-type channels, 68 minimum values with no wave
Cape Class ships, 26 effects, 67
Cape Fear River, North Carolina, 228, for passing distance in two-way
230, 236 traffic, 72
Cape Size ships, 19–20 for straight channel sections,
Captains of the Port (COTPs), 189 70–71
Cargo types, 16 in turns, 73, 74
Case histories, 199–216 Charleston Harbor, South Carolina
Casualty investigations, 185–186 bridge clearance, 114, 115
Cellular jetties, 97, 98 entrance channel, 221
Center for Operational Oceanographic interior channel, 230, 234
Products and Services (CO-OPS), lessons learned, 236–237
194, 195 Chemtrans Belocean, 165–166
CGC Biscayne Bay, 176, 178 Chesapeake and Delaware Canal,
CGC Katmai Bay, 176, 178 Delaware/Maryland, 233, 237
CGC Mackinaw, 176 Chesapeake Bay, 158, 176, 206, 208
CGC Polar Star, 175 Circulation, altered, 127–128
CGC Sturgeon Bay, 176, 177 Clamshell dredges, 90
Channel alignment, 57–61 Clarkson Research Studies, 17
case histories, 203–204 Clearance
PIANC assessment method, 59–61 bank, 65, 72
straight, 58 ship, 65
variable, 57, 58 Clearance gauges, 178–179
Channel bends, 69–76 Clearance lane, 65
Channel conditions, 157 CO-OPS (Center for Operational
Channel depth, 47–55 Oceanographic Products and
allowances, 50 Services), 194, 195
case histories, 202–203, 209 Coast Guard. See U.S. Coast Guard
determination of, 48 Coast Pilot, 197
estimation of, 47, 48–49 Coastal plain estuaries, 34
Channel migration, single-jetty, Coastal weather services, 198
225–227 Colorado River, Texas, 230, 237
Channel turns Columbia River, Oregon/Washington
channel width in, 74 entrance channel, 224, 227
channel width increase in, 73 jetty reconstruction, 154
consecutive (U-type), 76 lessons learned, 237–238
recommended configurations, 74, 75 maintenance, 160
reverse (S-bends), 76 pilotage, 158
successive turns, 76 ship motion in, 52
 INDEX 247

Columbia River Channel, 3, 119, 132 Delft University of Technology and

Communications network, 157 Marine Safety Port of Rotterdam,
Composite jetties, 97, 98 141
Concrete armor units, 96, 97 Depth, channel, 47–55
Concrete composite jetties, 98 case histories, 202–203, 209
Confined disposal areas, 232, 233 Depth, nautical, 54–55
Construction, 153–155 Design considerations, 13–14
jetty, 130–132 Design factors, 27–31
Construction items, 153 Design philosophy, 9–10
Container cargo, 16 Design process, 10
Container ships, 21–22 Design ship, 17
Containerisation International, 18 Design ship loaded draft, 49
Continuously Operating GPS Design vessels, 29
Reference Stations (CORS), 196 baseline studies, 14
Cooperative Vessel Traffic Service case histories, 202, 208–209,
(CVTS), 181 214–215
Coos Bay, Oregon Detailed design, 10
entrance channel, 221 Dikes, 117
horizontal clearance, 114 Dipper dredges, 89
jetties, 94 Disposal mounds, 233, 234
ship channel, 116 Disposal of dredged material, 91,
Cordova, Alaska, 161, 163 129–130
CORS (Continuously Operating GPS agitation method, 130
Reference Stations), 196 case histories, 205, 211
Cost curves, 149 confined, 232, 233
Costs, 166 habitat options, 91
Costs and benefits, 150 in-water methods, 91
COTPs (Captains of the Port), 189 open-water, 129, 228, 229, 233,
Crossing daybeacons, 173 234
Crude oil carriers, 22–23, 23 remote areas, 233, 234
Cruise ships, 26 in scour holes, 228, 229
Current survey buoys, 195 sites for, 87
Currents, 27–28 upland or off channel, 129–130
NOAA activities, 193–195, 195–196 Diurnal tides, 40
CVTS (Cooperative Vessel Traffic Diversion-caused shoaling, 230,
Service), 181 231
Diversion works, 112–113
Davis Lock, 101, 103 Docking pilots, 158
Daybeacons, crossing, 173 Docks
Deep-draft navigation entrance in deep water, 232
channels, 221 shore parallel, 120
Deep-draft vessels, 14 Dolos armor units, 97
Deep-water docks, 232 Double bends, 76
Delaware Bay, 232, 234 Dredged material disposal, 91,
Delaware Estuary, Pennsylvania/ 129–130
New Jersey/Delaware, 238 case histories, 205, 211
Delaware River, 228 confined, 232, 233
248 INDEX

open-water, 129, 228, 229, 233, 234 Environmental considerations,

remote areas, 233, 234 127–132
in scour holes, 228, 229 jetty construction impacts, 131–132
sites for, 87 protection of natural resources,
Dredges, 83 188–190
bucket-type, 89 recent experience, 132
clamshell, 90 Environmental Protection Agency
dipper, 89 (EPA), 190
dustpan, 88 Environmental sustainability, 30
hopper, 83–85, 86, 164 EPA (Environmental Protection
hydraulic, 83 Agency), 190
hydraulic pipeline dredges, Episodic events, 44
86–88 Erosion, 144–145
mechanical, 83, 89–90 beach, 82
sidecasting, 88 Essayon, 164
Dredging, 83–91, 128–129 Estuaries, 33–45
advance maintenance, 53 bar-built, 34
agitation, 228 classification of, 33–39
controlled, 233–234, 235 coastal plain, 34
after major floods, 164 definition of, 33
normal maintenance, 159 highly stratified, 35–37
sediment traps to control location lessons learned, 223–243
of, 230–232 partially mixed, 36, 37
through shoals, 228, 229 well-mixed or homogeneous, 36, 37
Dredging tolerance, 54 Evaluation procedure, 151
Drug interdiction, 187 Evergreen-Class ships, 5
Dry bulk ships, 18–21 Excedance probability, 148
Duluth Harbor, 98 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), 188
Dustpan dredges, 88
Duwamish River, Washington, 238 Factors influencing channel design,
27–31
Earthquakes, 160–164 Feasibility of design, 10
East Coast domestic ice breaking, Federal On-Scene Coordinators
174–176 (FOSC), 189
East River, 181 Feeders, 21
Economic benefits, 151 Ferry boat docks, 120, 123
Economic optimum design, 147–151 Final design, 10
Economic value, 4–6 Fisheries enforcement at-sea, 188
Eddies around pilings, 230 Fixed lights, 179
EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone), 188 Fjords, 34
Elizabeth River, 206 Flooding
Emergency Response plan, 166 major floods, 164–165
Engineering studies, typical, 15–16 prevention of, 101
Entrance channels, 11 Flow predominance, 38
adjusting side slopes, 227, 228 Fluid mud channel bottoms, 54–55
deep-draft, 221 FOSCs (Federal On-Scene
lessons learned, 223–228 Coordinators), 189
 INDEX 249

Fresh water effects, 49 ship channel, 57, 58

Freshwater sources, 43–44 wind conditions, 201
decrease in, 234, 235 Great Lakes, 143, 144–145, 176
increase in, 234, 235 Greenhouse effect, 44
Froude Depth Number (Fnh ), 48 Grounded ships, 165–166
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, 183
Galveston Entrance Channel, Texas, GULF Strike team, 189
221, 224, 227, 238
Galveston-Houston Ship Channel, Habitat development, 91
Texas Hampton Roads, Virginia, 207
enlargement project, 135, 153, 155 Handy size ships, 19, 20
simulation study, 138, 140 Handymax ships, 19, 20
Gastineau Channel, Alaska, 230, 232, Harbor expansion, 228, 229
238 Harbor sites, 232
Geared ships, 19, 21 HARBORISM (traffic flow model), 141
Gearless ships, 19, 21 Harbors, 12
General maritime law enforcement, Haro Strait, 182
187 Hiram M. Chittenden locks (Seattle,
Generic harbor, 12 Washington), 103, 104
Geomorphology, 45 Hopper dredges, 83–85, 86, 164
Georgetown Harbor, South Carolina, Hornsby, David, 18
239 Houston-Galveston Vessel Traffic
Global Ocean Observing System, 197 Service (VTS), 182
Global Positioning System (GPS), 196 Houston Ship Channel, Texas, 120
Gold Beach Harbor, Oregon, 232 Bayou Section, 139
Golden Gate Bridge, 114, 115 enlargement project, 76–77
GPS (Global Positioning System), 196 entrance channel, 221
Grays Harbor, Washington, 200 environmental considerations, 132
case history, 199, 200–205 fund requirements, 155
channel depth design, 202–203 model study, 135
channel improvements, 201 shore parallel docks, 120
channel migration, 57, 59 simulation study, 138, 140
channel width and alignment “Texas Chicken” maneuver, 137–138
design, 203–204 underchannel pipelines, 153
design vessel, 202 vessel simulator study, 136
dredged material disposal, 87, Hudson River, New York, 181, 239–240
205 Hurricane barriers, 114–116
enlargement project, 200–201, 205 Hurricanes, 165
entrance channel, 221, 225, 228 Hydraulic dredges, 83
hydrodynamic conditions, 201 Hydraulic pipeline dredges, 86–88
hydrodynamic studies, 204–205 Hydrodynamic conditions, 201,
inner harbor, 204 206–208, 214
lessons learned, 239 Hydrodynamic studies, 204–205,
mitigation, 205 209–210
outer harbor simulations, 204
relocations, 205 Ice, 143–144
sediment studies, 204–205 Ice breaking, 173–176, 178
250 INDEX

Ice management, 143–146 straight parallel, 223, 224

ICSU (International Council of submerged ends, 225
Scientific Unions) World Data system adjustments, 227
System, 192 types, 95–97
IHO-DCDB (International Jetty construction, 130–132, 154
Hydrographic Organization Data Jetty repair, 159, 228, 229
Center for Digital Bathymetry), John F. Baldwin Ship Channel, San
193 Francisco Bay, California, 122
IMO (International Marine
Organization), 184 Kill Van Kull, 181
Initiative, 10 Kodiak, Alaska, 161, 162
Inner Harbor Canal Lock (New
Orleans, Louisiana), 101, 102, 103 LA/LB (Los Angeles-Long Beach)
Inner harbors, 204 Vessel Traffic Information Service
Interior channels, 11 (VTIS), 181
lessons learned, 228–236 Lake Washington ship canal, Seattle,
International Bridge Act, 177–178 Washington, 119
International Bulk Shipping, 18 Lakers, 20
International Council of Scientific Law enforcement, 187
Unions (ICSU) World Data Layout, jetty, 93
System, 192 Lift-on/Lift-off (Lo/Lo) cargo, 16
International Hydrographic Lighterage, 16
Organization Data Center for Lights, bridge, 178–179
Digital Bathymetry (IHO-DCDB), Line bubblers, 144
193 Line Haul ships, 22
International Ice Patrol, 183 Lionsgate bulker ships, 20
International Marine Organization Liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers,
(IMO), 184 23
Liquid bulk ships, 22–23
Jacksonville Harbor, Florida, 240 Little Rapids Cut, 182
Janes Merchant Ships, 18 Littoral sediments, 81
Jefferson, Thomas, 191 Living marine resource law/treaty
Jetties, 11, 93–99 enforcement, 188
arrowhead, 224 Lloyds Registry, 18
cellular, 97, 98 LNG (liquefied natural gas) carriers,
composite, 97, 98 23
concrete armor units for, 96 LNMs (Local Notices to Mariners),
curved parallel, 223, 224 173
economic optimum design, 148–149 LOADMX (channel condition system),
layout, 93 157
length, 94–95, 224 Local coordination, 30–31
reduced spacing, 225, 226 Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), 173
rubble-mound, 95 Locks, 101–105, 144
sealing, 224, 225 Long Beach Harbor, 2
single-jetty channel migration, Long waves, 39–42
225–227 Long Wharf docking facility (near
spacing, 94 Richmond Harbor), 122, 124–125
 INDEX 251

Los Angeles-Long Beach (LA/LB) Mississippi River

Vessel Traffic Information Service bank names, 172
(VTIS), 181 entrance channel, 221
Louisville Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), interior channel, 228, 230, 233, 234
183 lessons learned, 240–241
Lower Chesapeake Bay, 208 maintenance, 164
Lower Mississippi River, 112 rescue of grounded ships, 165–166
salinity barrier, 112
MacArthur Lock (St. Marys River, Mitigation, 205, 211
Michigan), 103 Model studies, 133–141
MacFarland, 164 Montague Island, 161, 162
MacLeod Harbor, Montague Island, Moon effects, 41
162 Mooring buoys, 171
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Mount St. Helens, 160, 161
Conservation and Management
Act, 188 National Contingency Plan, 189
Mainline carriers, 21 National Data Buoy Center, 198
Maintenance, 157–166 National defense, 4, 188
normal, 158–159 National Drug Control Strategy, 187
Operation and Maintenance plan National Geodetic Survey (NGS), 196
(O&M plan), 166 National Geographic Data Center
as result of extreme events, (NGDC), 192–193
159–165 National Ocean Service (NOS), 191,
Maneuvering areas, 120–126 192, 193
alternative designs, 125 National Oceanographic and
simulation runs, 126 Atmospheric Administration
“Texas Chicken” maneuver, 136, (NOAA), 1, 6, 157
137–138 authorizing mandate, 191
Maneuvering lane, 63 navigation support activities,
basic width, 69 191–198
Maps, navigational, 191 Weather Radio, 197, 198
Marine weather services, 198 National Response Center (NRC), 190
Maritime law enforcement, general, National Spatial Reference System
187 (NSRS), 196
Maritime mobility, 167–183 NATIONAL Strike Force, 189
Maritime safety, 183–186 National Strike Force (NSF), 189, 190
Maritime security, 186–188 National Water Level Observation
Matagorda Ship Channel, Texas, 227, Program (NWLON), 194
228, 233, 240 National Weather Service, 198
McAlpine Lock and Dam, 183 Native soils, 79
Mechanical dredges, 83, 89–90 Natural resources protection,
Middle Neebish Channel, 182 188–190
Migration, single-jetty, 225–227 Nautical charts, 191–193
Mile markers, 173 Nautical depth, 54–55
Minimum channel width values, Navigation
64, 67 Coast Guard activities, 167–190
Mission Bay, California, 225 NOAA activities, 191–198
252 INDEX

Navigation aids, 168–171, 170, 171 Null point, 38

Navigational maps, 191 Null zones, 234, 235
Navy ships, 24 Numerical models, 134–135
Neap tides, 41 NWLON (National Water Level
New York Harbor, New York, 230 Observation Program), 194
New York Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), NY Journal of Commerce, 18
180–181
Newark Bay, 181 Ocean Ships (Hornsby), 18
Newport News Channel, Virginia Office of Coast Survey (OCS), 191
depth design, 209 Offshore Vessel Movement Reporting
enlargement project, 206, 212 System (OVMRS), 181
phased construction plan, 210 Ohio River, 173, 183
proposed improvements, 206 Oil spills, 189–190
sedimentation studies, 211 On-scene coordinators (OSCs), 189
simulation studies, 209 One-way traffic, 68
NGDC (National Geographic Data Open-water disposal, 129, 228, 229
Center), 192–193 remote areas, 233, 234
NGS (National Geodetic Survey), 196 Operation and Maintenance plan
Nimitz Class aircraft carriers, 4, 24 (O&M plan), 166
Norfolk Harbor, Virginia, 207 Operations, 157–166
case history, 199, 206–212 Organic Act, 191
design vessels, 208–209 OSCs (on-scene coordinators), 189
dredged material disposal, 211 Outer harbor simulations, 204
enlargement project, 206 OVMRS (Offshore Vessel Movement
hydrodynamic conditions, Reporting System), 181
206–208
hydrodynamic studies, 209–210 PACIFIC Strike Team, 189–190
mitigation, 211 Panama Canal, 104, 105
phased construction plan, 210 Panamax ships
relocations, 211–212 auto carriers, 25
sedimentation studies, 209–210 container ships, 21, 23
tidal range, 206 dry bulk ships, 19, 20
wave climate, 207 Passing distance, 72
wind conditions, 206–208 Performance assessment, 166
Norfolk Harbor Channel, Virginia Permanent International Association
depth design, 209 of Navigation Congressers
dredge material disposal, 211 (PIANC)
enlargement project, 206, 212 additional width for bank clearance,
proposed improvements, 206 72
relocations, 211 additional width for passing
simulation studies, 209 distance in two-way traffic, 72
NOS (National Ocean Service), 191, additional width for straight
192, 193 channel sections, 70–71
NRC (National Response Center), 190 channel alignment assessment
NSF (National Strike Force), 189, 190 method, 59–61
NSRS (National Spatial Reference channel depth estimation method,
System), 196 47, 48
 INDEX 253

fluid mud channel bottoms, 54–55 Rapid shoaling, 232, 233

preliminary design guidelines for Raritan Bay, 181
straight segments, 72 Relocations
Physical models, 133–134 case histories, 205, 211–212
Physical Oceanographic Real-Time forced by rapid shoaling, 232,
System (PORTS), 197–198 233
Pier slips, 230 Remote disposal areas, 233, 234
Pilings, 230 Rescue of grounded ships, 165–166
Pilot interviews, 30–31 Response (search and rescue), 184–185
Pilotage, 158 Revenue Marine, 186, 188
Poe Lock (Sault St. Marie, Michigan), Reverse turns (S-bends), 76
101, 102, 103, 104, 105 Revetments, 117–119
Pollution response, 189–190 Richmond Harbor, 122, 125
Port berthing, 120–126 River bank names, 172
Port of Portland, Oregon, 4 River buoys, 172, 173
LOADMX channel condition River charts, 191
system, 157 River reaches, 80–81
shore parallel docks, 120, 121 Riverine sediments, 79–80
Port of Vancouver, Washington, 4 Rogue River, Oregon, 224, 232,
Port State Control program, 184 241
PORTS (Physical Oceanographic Roll-on/Roll-off (Ro/Ro) cargo, 16
Real-Time System), 197–198 Rosario Strait, 181
Ports and Waterways Safety Act Rubble-mound jetties, 95, 97
(PWSA), 179
Post Panamax ships, 21, 22 S-bends (reverse turns), 76
auto carriers, 25–26 Sabine Lock, 101, 103
Preliminary design, 10 Sacramento River Deep Water
Preliminary design checklist, 11–13 channel, 119
Prevention, 183–184 Sacramento ship channel, 88
Prince William Sound, Alaska, 163, Safety, 183–184
164, 194 Safety clearance, 52–53
Prince William Sound Vessel Traffic Salinity
Service (VTS), 182 classification of estuaries by, 35–37
Private aids to navigation, 171 effects on shoaling, 39, 234, 235
Product carriers, 23 prevention of intrusion, 101
Project benefits, 151 vertical structures, 35
Project cost curves, 149 Salinity barriers, 111–112
Project features, 107–126 Saltwater barriers, 112
Project performance assessment, 166 Saltwater wedge, 234, 235
Protection of natural resources, San Francisco Bay, California
188–190 Alcatraz disposal site, 228
Puget Sound, Washington, 120, 123, entrance channel, 221
195 interior channel, 230
Puget Sound Vessel Traffic Service lessons learned, 241–242
(VTS), 181–182 San Francisco Vessel Traffic Service
PWSA (Ports and Waterways Safety (VTS), 181
Act), 179 Sandy Hook Channel, 181
254 INDEX

SAR (search and rescue), 184–185 final design, 10

Savannah Harbor, Georgia, 213 with ice, 143–144
case history, 199–200, 213–216 initiative, 10
channel design, 215–216 interior channels, 11, 228–236
channel-widening project, 213, 216 maintenance of, 157–166
design vessels, 214–215 operations, 157–166
hydrodynamic conditions, 214 preliminary design, 10, 11–13
interior channel, 230–232, 234 side channels, 230
proposed channel improvements, special features, 11
214 straight, 60
simulation studies, 215–216 types of, 65–66
Savannah River, Georgia, 214–215, 242 typical project elements, 11, 12
Savings, 150–151 width, 63–77
Scour holes, 228, 229 Ship characteristics, 17–26
Sea level rise, 44–45 Ship clearance, 65
Search and rescue (SAR), 184–185 Ship-generated waves, 119
Seattle, Washington waterfront, 120, Ship locks, 101–105
122 salinity barriers, 111
Sediment Ship motion, 49–52
isolated from channel, 230, 231 Ship movements, 157–158
littoral, 81 Ship simulator models, 135–138
movement of, 144–145 Ship wave systems, 118
riverine, 79–80 SHIPRISK (traffic flow model), 141
suspended clay, 234 Ships, 25–26
Sediment studies, 204–205 container ships, 21–22
Sediment traps, 117, 230–232 dry bulk ships, 18–21
Sedimentation, 29, 79–82 new types, 17
Sedimentation studies, 209–210 Shoaling, 82
Seiche, 43 abandonment or relocation forced
Seismic sea waves, 42 by, 232, 233
Semidiurnal tides, 41 diversion-caused, 230, 231
Setdown, 43 dredging through shoals, 228, 229
Setup, 43 rapid, 228, 229
Sextants, 193 salinity effects on, 39, 234, 235
Ship channels, 10 shifts upstream, 234, 235
alignment, 57–61 turning basin, 109
baseline studies, 15 Shore parallel docks, 120
bends, 69–76 Siboeva ships, 20
conditions, 157 Side channels, 230
construction of, 153–155 Sidecasting dredges, 88
depth, 47–55 Signals, bridge, 178–179
design considerations, 13–14 Simulation studies, 76–77
design factors, 27–31 case histories, 209
design philosophy, 9–10 Site harbors, 232
design process, 10 Slips, 124
entrance channels, 11, 223–228 Soils, native, 79
feasibility of, 10 Soo Locks, 182
 INDEX 255

Southampton Channel, 125–126 Tide-generating forces, 39–40

Spacing, jetty, 94 Tide-prediction tables, 42
Special features, 11 Tide predictions, 27
Spring tides, 41 Tide terms, 40
Squat calculations, 53 Tides, 39–42
Squat underway, 52 diurnal, 40
St. Clair River, Michigan, 65 influence of moon and sun on, 41
St. Lawrence Seaway, 104, 143 mixed, 41
St. Mary’s River, Michigan, 66 neap, 41
St. Mary’s River Vessel Traffic Service NOAA activities, 193–195
(VTS), 182 nonastronomical forces on, 42
Storm surge, 43 semidiurnal, 41
Storm tide, 43 spring, 41
Straight alignment, 58, 60 storm tide, 43
Straight sections types of, 40–41
additional widths for, 70–71 Tillamook Bay, Oregon, 225, 227, 242
preliminary design guidelines for, Titanic, 26
66–69 Tofino Vessel Traffic Service (VTS),
Strait of Juan de Fuca, 181 181
Straits of Mackinac, 178 Topographic classification of
Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin, 176 estuaries, 34
Submerged salinity barriers, 111–112 Toutle River, 160
Subsidence, 44–45 Traffic flow models, 141
Suez Channel, 65–66 Traffic studies, 14
SuezMax ships, 20, 23 Training dikes, 117
Sun effects, 41 Training revetments, 117–119
Surveillance plan, 166 Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization
Suspended clay sediments, 234 Act, 182
Swept path, 69 Transportation savings, 150–151
Trench-type channels, 68
TABS-MDS numerical modeling Tressel construction method, 153, 154
system, 135 Trim, 49
Tampa Bay, Florida, 197, 221 Tsunamis, 42
Tectonic activity, 45 Turn design, 74–76
Temporary tide gauges, 195 Turning basins, 11, 107–109
“Texas Chicken” maneuver, 136, Turns
137–138 channel width in, 74
Thimble Shoal Channel, Virginia channel width increase in, 73
depth design, 209 consecutive (U-type), 76
enlargement project, 212 recommended configurations,
phased construction plan, 210 74, 75
proposed improvements, 206 reverse (S-bends), 76
relocations, 211–212 successive, 76
simulation studies, 209 Two-way traffic
Ticonderoga Class cruisers, 24 additional width for passing
Tide gauges, 163, 164 distance in, 72
temporary, 194, 195 trench-type channels with, 68
256 INDEX

Typical engineering studies, 15–16 maritime mobility activities,

Typical project elements, 11, 12 167–183
maritime safety activities, 183–186
U-type turns, 76 Maritime Security Missions,
Ultra Large Crude Carriers (ULCCs), 186–187
23 national defense activities, 188
Umpqua River, Oregon, 224, 242 National Response Center (NRC),
Upland or off channel disposal of 190
dredged material, 129– natural resources protection, 188
130 Navigation Center Web site, 173
Upstream water levels, 101 navigation support activities,
U.S. Aids to Navigation System 167–190
(ATONS), 168–171 polar icebreakers, 175
U.S. Air Force, 196 pollution response, 189–190
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1, 6 primary missions for providing safe
bridge administration, 176 and efficient marine
channel depth estimation method, transportation system, 168
48–49 project design, 14
estuary waterway projects, 223 safety prevention activities, 183–184
hopper dredges, 85 search and rescue (SAR) Program,
navigational maps, 191 184–185
preliminary design guidelines for Vessel Traffic Information Service
straight segments, 66–69, 72 (VTIS) Los Angeles-Long Beach
river charts, 191 (LA/LB), 181
TABS-MDS numerical modeling Vessel Traffic Service (VTS),
system, 135 157–158, 179–183
Water Resources Center (WRC), U.S. Coast Pilot, 197
17–18 U.S. Customs Service, 187
Waterways Experiment Station U.S. Navy
(WES) Research Ship Simulator, dock configurations, 120
122 ships, 24
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), 1, 6, 31, slip length and width, 124
157 USCG. See U.S. Coast Guard
Automatic Identification System USC&GS Hodson, 195
(AIS), 180 USS Enterprise, 115
bridge administration, 176–179 USS George Washington, 5
Captains of the Port (COTPs), 189 USS Lexington, 120, 123
casualty investigations, 185–186
districts, 174 Vancouver Vessel Traffic Service
Federal On-Scene Coordinators (VTS), 181–182
(FOSC), 189 Variable alignment, 57, 58
ice breaking services, 173–174, Verrazano Narrows Bridge, 181
174–176 Vertical salinity structures, 35
living marine resource law/treaty Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCCs),
enforcement, 188 23
Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), Vessel simulators, 136
173 Vessel traffic flow simulation, 141
 INDEX 257

Vessel Traffic Information Service Waterways management, 179–183

(VTIS) Los Angeles-Long Beach Waterways Safety Act, 113
(LA/LB), 181 Wave climate, 207, 208
Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), 157, Waveforms, 42
179–183 Waves, 27–28
locations, 180 case histories, 207, 208
operational sites for ship channels, generated by moving vessels, 118
157–158 long, 39–42
VTS Berwick Bay, 183 nonastronomical forces on, 42
VTS Houston-Galveston, 182 ship-generated, 119
VTS Louisville, 183 ship motion from, 49–52
VTS New York, 180–181 ship system, 118
VTS Prince William Sound, 182 wind-generated, 42–43
VTS Puget Sound, 181–182 Weather conditions, 157
VTS San Francisco, 181 Weather Radio (NOAA), 197, 198
VTS St. Mary’s River, 182 Weather Service, 197
Vibration, 145 Weather services, 198
VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers), Weather studies, 14–15
23 Wells Harbor, Massachusetts, 243
Volcanoes, 160 WES (Waterways Experiment Station)
VTIS (Vessel Traffic Information Research Ship Simulator, 122
Service) Los Angeles-Long Beach West Neebish Channel, 182
(LA/LB), 181 Western Rivers Marking System,
VTS. See Vessel Traffic Service 171–173
Wheeler, 164
Walk-on/Walk-off (Wo/Wo) cargo, 16 Width, channel, 63–77
Water levels, 27 case histories, 203–204, 209
sea level rise, 44–45 Wind(s), 27–28, 42–43
stabilization of, 101 Wind conditions, 201, 206–208
Water quality, 130–131 Wind-generated waves, 42–43
Water Resources Center (WRC), World Data Center for Marine
17–18 Geology & Geophysics, 192
Waterway elevation changes, 101
Waterways Experiment Station (WES)
Research Ship Simulator, 122 Yaquina Bay, Oregon, 96, 154, 159