• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 List of Figures
 List of symbols
 List of tables
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Study approach
 Results and discussion
 Summary and conclusions
 Appendix A: Derivation of streamline...
 Appendix B: Derivation of analytic...
 References






Group Title: UFL/COEL (University of Florida. Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Laboratory) ; 92/003
Title: Tidal flood water withdrawal, with special reference to Jupiter Inlet, Florida
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00080458/00001
 Material Information
Title: Tidal flood water withdrawal, with special reference to Jupiter Inlet, Florida
Series Title: UFLCEOL
Alternate Title: Flood water withdrawal with special reference to Jupiter Inlet, Florida.
Physical Description: xiii, 84 leaves : ill., photos ; 29 cm.
Language: English
Creator: DelCharco, Michael James ( Dissertant )
Mehta, Ashish J. ( Thesis advisor )
Thieke, Robert J. ( Reviewer )
Montague, Clay L. ( Reviewer )
University of Florida -- Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Dept
Publisher: Coastal & Oceanographic Engineering Dept., University of Florida
Publication Date: 1992
Copyright Date: 1992
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Jupiter Inlet (Fla)
Tidal inlets -- Florida
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage: United States -- Florida -- Jupiter Inlet
 Notes
Abstract: The focus of this study was the flow patterns of a flood tide near an inlet. The objectives were to examine flood flow patterns with particular reference to non-uniform or selective withdrawal as influenced by bottom topography and longshore currents, and to test the applicability of conceptually simple analytic solutions to realistic sandy inlet bottom topographies, which often include an ebb shoal. Specifically, the applicability of three analytic solutions, two of which include offshore selective withdrawal, to modeling of tidal water withdrawal during flood tide under variable bottom topography and varying ratios of longshore current to inlet velocity, was examined. The three analytic solutions, including those for a horizontal (flat) bottom, a linearly sloping bottom and a logarithmically sloping bottom, together with a uniform longshore current, were derived using potential flow theory. These solutions exhibit uniformly distributed flows, selective offshore withdrawal, or an exaggerated offshore withdrawal, respectively, depending on the bottom slope. In order to investigate the flow patterns that exist during flood flow at a real inlet, experiments were conducted in a fixed bed hydrodynamic model of Jupiter Inlet, Florida. Measurements were made to determine streamlines and velocities. A field study at the prototype also tracked drogue patterns to determine streamlines and velocities. The physical model tests compared well with the field data. Comparison of the laboratory and field data was then made to the analytic solutions to determine whether the topography at Jupiter Inlet, which includes a well-developed ebb shoal, simulates a flat, mean linearly or logarithmically sloping bottom. By comparing velocities at six selected points, a significant relationship between the physical model and field data to the flat bottom analytic solution was evident. The physical model tests and field data suggested that the flood tidal prism was drawn from the region predominantly shoreward of the ebb shoal, thus implying a nearshore selective withdrawal. Because the flood tidal prism was drawn from the nearshore, the flow patterns at Jupiter Inlet did not resemble the analytic solutions of a linearly or logarithmically sloping bottom, even though over a relatively long distance offshore, the bottom topography does slope offshore at this inlet. In general, different inlet topographies would lend themselves to different analytic solutions, two examples being 1) the linearly sloping bottom of Koombana Bay Inlet, Australia, which shows an offshore selective withdrawal and 2) the basin-like nearfield topography of Jupiter Inlet which shows a more uniform nearshore withdrawal. The implications of this study are relevant to inlet management issues such as the mining of an ebb shoal for use as a source of beach sediment and changes in larval transport patterns due to jetty modifications.
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
Thesis: Thesis (M.Eng.)--University of Florida, 1992
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (leaves 82-83)
Funding: This publication is being made available as part of the report series written by the faculty, staff, and students of the Coastal and Oceanographic Program of the Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00080458
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001754888

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 3 MBs ) ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Page i
    Acknowledgement
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
        Page iv
    List of Figures
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
    List of symbols
        Page viii
        Page ix
        Page x
    List of tables
        xi
    Abstract
        xii
        Page xv
    Introduction
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
    Study approach
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
    Results and discussion
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
    Summary and conclusions
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
    Appendix A: Derivation of streamline equations
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
    Appendix B: Derivation of analytic solution velocities
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
    References
        Page 82
        Page 83
University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - Version 2.9.9 - mvs