Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:02 PM
Re: FW: FW: O-1 thru O-3 Modeling White Paper??
Modeling Approach white paper 5-12-08.pdf
Page 1of 53/3/2011I agree. It is troubling how far apart we (USIBWC and Baker) are with regards to HEC-RASmodeling capabilities. I would hope they agree that HEC-RAS is a one-dimensional model, andtherefore is unable to evaluate transverse flows. (Reference "white paper", page 3, paragraphstarting with "While HEC-RAS offers ......" See attachment). Regards.>>> " 10/17/2010 10:18 AM >>>
Please see Baker's response to you e-mail.
Friday, October 15, 2010 2:11 PM
Re: FW: O-1 thru O-3 Modeling White Paper??
There appears to be some confusion relative to our analysis and recommendations as we have neverrecommended that a two dimensional model be developed for the O-1, O-2 and O-3 segments for thereasons stated below.It appears that IBWC may have misunderstood the main point of the May 2008 white paper. Although wetouched on various applications/hydraulic models that could be used for this effort and the limitations ofusing HEC-RAS, we recommended that HEC-RAS be used for our analysis because we believe itprovided an accurate estimate of the impacts of the fence on the floodplain.As you know, the HEC-RAS model submitted with the May 2008 report uses the blockedobstruction/modified geometry approach as we recommended in the white paper. This approach takesinto consideration all the headlosses due to friction with the fence and also indirectly accounts fortransverse flows by allowing the water to flow back and forth across the fence in order to keep the watersurface elevation balanced on both side of the fence. This approach does not consider the headlosses
(b) (6)(b) (6)(b) (6)(b) (6)
(b) (6)(b) (6)(b) (6)(b) (6)(b)(b) (6)(b) (6)(b)