CH3D Reports
Wang, P.F., R.K. Johnston, H. Halkola, R.E. Richter, and
B. Davidson, 2005. A
Modeling Study of Combined Sewer Overflows in the Port Washington
Narrows and Fecal Coliform Transport in Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets, Washington. Prepared by Space and Naval Warfare
Systems Center, San Diego for Puget Sound Naval Shipyard & Intermediate
Maintenance Facility Project ENVVEST, Final Report,
June 22, 2005, 26pp.
Richter, K.E. 2004. CH3D Hydrodynamic Model Validation Report.
Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego, CA. September
12, 2004 Richter
CH3D validation 2004 (pdf)
Brown, J. 2001 (ed). User's Guide For A Three-Dimensional
Numerical Hydrodynamic, Salinity, And Temperature Model Of
Sinclair Inlet. July 2001. Concurrent Technologies Corporation,
Contract No: GS-10T-EBD-005, Task Order ID: ABH-170-037, Bremerton,
WA CH3D
Users Guide 2001 (pdf)
Wang, P.F. 2001. Dispersion resulting from aggregating hydrodynamic
properties in water quality modeling. International Journal
of Engineering Science, 39:95-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7225(00)00021-5
Wang, P.F and K.E. Richter 1999. A Hydrodynamic Modeling
Study Using CH3D for Sinclair Inlet, Draft Report. Space and
Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego, CA, November 3, 1999.
Wang
Richter CH3D Modeling Report Nov 1999 (pdf)
Modeling Contaminant Fate and Transport in Estuaries SSC
Pacific web site
Results of Integrated Model Evaluation
The observed FC data from streams and stormwater basins and
the modeled flow from the watershed model was used to calculate
the observed load. The observed loads were compared to the
modeled loads to evaluate loading from the watershed. The
loading evaluation
compared plots of the simulated and observed load (fecal coliform
counts per hour) for each drainage basin (DSN) based on data
collected at the station nearest to the basin's pour point
(see summary
of loading evaluation).
Then the observed FC data from the inlets were compared to
the CH3D-FC predictions to evaluate how well the model did
in matching the observed data. The observed FC concentrations
were compared to the predicted concentrations using both the
91x96 grid (see plots
from 91x96 grid) and 94x105 grid (see plots
from 94x105 grid). The analysis also helped to identify
sources of uncertainty and measure confidence in the model
predictions (see summary
of verification results).
No attempt was made to “fine-tune” the FC predictions
because there was no way to know if the model was “wrong” or
if additional sources were missing from the model. Under-prediction
of FC concentrations where measured marine samples were higher
may be due to additional sources not explicitly included
in
the model such as failing onsite sewage systems, wildlife,
waterfowl, agricultural waste, and/or leaking sewer infrastructure.
Model Evaluation for Dyes Inlet
Model Evaluation for Sinclair Inlet
Model Evaluation for Port Orchard and Rich
Passages
There are uncertainties and limitations to what
the model can simulate. The model indirectly accounts for
sources from failed septic systems, leaking sewer infrastructure,
and upland waterfowl and wildlife only to the extent that
these sources contributed to the empirical data used to develop
the FC loading concentration estimates. Potential sources
of FC not in the model included marinas, recreational and
commercial boating, broken pipes, CSO events, sediment resuspension,
regeneration of bacteria spores, nearshore waterfowl, marine
mammals, and any other unknown sources.
Inventory of CH3D-FC Input Files and Supporting Information
Connectivity
between HSPF and CH3D-FC
Loading Evaluation
Load by DSN (pdf)
Comparison
of Observed and Simulated FC Loading
Waste Water Treatment
Plant Data
Simulation Input Files
WY2004 Input Files
April
2004
May 2004
Oct 2004
WY2003 Input Files
WY2003
|
