Ship Navigation Simulation Study, Houston-Galveston ...Technical Report HL-94-3 September 1 %94 US Army Corps DA 8 70 of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station Ship Navigation Simulation

Technical Report HL-94-3

September 1 %94

US Army Corps DA 8 70of EngineersWaterways ExperimentStation

Ship Navigation Simulation Study,Houston-Galveston Navigation DT.Channels, Texas D DTC1"

OC I25994" IReport 3 LIGalveston Ship Channel and FL_Houston-Galveston Entrance Channels

by Dennis W. Webb

94-%32958

Approved For Public Release; Distribution Is Unlimited • ,.

Prepared for U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston

I

The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising,publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade namesdoes not constitute an official efldorsement or approval of the useof such commercial products.

riaw=oN uCVY= PAIPU

Technical Report HL-94-3September 1994

Ship Navigation Simulation Study,Houston-Galveston NavigationChannel, Texas

Report 3Galveston Ship Channel andHouston-Galveston Entrance Channels

by Dennis W. Webb

U.S. Amiy Corps of EngineersWaterways Experiment Station3909 Halls Ferry RoadVicksburg, MS 39180-6199

Accesion ForNTIS CRA&IDTIC TABU;al:,:o.. ced

Jusficaton......

ByDit•. ibution j

A idsla'Iilty Codes

Avail andi 'orDist I Special

Report 3 of a series EApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited

Prepared for U.S. Army Engineer District, GalvestonGalveston, TX 77553

US Army Corpsof Engineers N

Waterways Experiment S Cn DataStation C

NNOOLUR LOSma~a L J

nelsTeays RExporiet 3,tGlveson ShpChlanneland- ustn- Gablveston en-a

trance channels / by Dennis W. Webb ; prep~qred for U.S. Army EngineerDistrict, Galveston.270 p. : i11. ; 28 an. -- (Technical report : HL-94-3 rept3)Includes bibliographic references.Report 3 of a series.1. Navigation -- Texas - Simulation methods. 2. Channels (Hydraulic"

engineering) - Design and construction -- Testing. 3. Galveston ShipChannel (Tex.) - Design and construction -- Evaluation. 4. Waterways --

Gulf Coast (U.S.) I. United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. Galveston Dis-trict. II. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Ill. HydraulicsLaboratory (U.S.) IV. Thit. V. Tita: Galveston Ship Channel and Houston-Galveston entrance channel. VI, Series: Technical report (U.S. Army Engi-neer Waterways Experiment Station) ; HL-94-3 rept.3.TA7 W34 no.HL-94-3 rapt. 3

Contents

Preface ......................................... vi

Conversion Factors, Non-SI to SI Units of Measurement ........ .vii

1I-Introduction ..................................... I

Existing Conditions ................................ IEntrance Channel/Bar Channels ..................... IGalveston Ship Channel .......................... I

Navigation Problems ............................... 3Crosscurrents ................................. 3Turning in Galveston Channel ...................... 4Turning from the HSC into Galveston Channel ........... 4

Proposed Improvements ............................. 4Entrance/Bar Channels ........................... 4Galveston Ship Channel ......................... 5Outer Bar Channel .............................. 5

Purpose and Scope of Investigation ..................... 5

2-Data Development ................................ 7

Description of Simulator ............................ 7Required Data ..... ............................. 7Test File ..... ................................. 8Scene File ...................................... 8Radar File ...................................... 9Ship Files ...................................... 9Current File .................................... 10

3-Navigation Study ................................ I I

Validation ................................... 11Preliminary Tes.ing ............................... 12Test Scenarios .................................. 13

Test conditions ............................... 13Test reaches ................................. 13

4-Study Results ................................... 22

Test Reach A ................................... 23

liii

Existing conditions, ebb tide ........................ 23Phase I conditions, ebb tide ........................ 24Phase II conditions, ebb tide ........................ 24Existing conditions, flood tide ....................... 24Phase I conditions, flood tide ....................... 24Phase II conditions, flood tide ....................... 25

Test Reach B .................................. 20Existing conditions, ebb tide ........................ 25Phase I conditions, ebb tide ......................... 25Phase II conditions, ebb tide ........................ 26Navigation parameters, ebb tide ..................... 26Existing conditions, flood tide ....................... 27Phase I conditions, flood tide ....................... 27Phase 11 conditions, flood tide ....................... 27Navigation parameters, flood tide .................... 27

Test Reach C ..................................... 28Existing conditions, ebb tide ........................ 28Phase I conditions, ebb tide ........................ 29Phase II conditions, ebb tide ........................ 30Navigation parameters, ebb tide ...................... 30Existing conditions, flood tide ....................... 30Phase I conditions, flood tide ....................... 31Phase II conditions, flood tide ....................... 31Navigation parameters, flood tide .................... 31

Test Reach D ..................................... 32Existing conditions, ebb tide ........................ 32Phase I conditions, ebb tide ........................ 32Phase II conditions, ebb tide ........................ 32Existing conditions, flood tide ....................... 33Phase I conditions, flood tide ....................... 33Phase II conditions, flood tide ....................... 33

Test Reach E .................................. 3Existing conditions, Freeport set. ................... 34Phase I conditions. Freeport set ...................... 34Phase II conditions. Freeport set ..................... 34Crosscurrent magnitude ........................... 34Existirg conditions, Sabine set ...................... 35Phase I conditions, Sabine set ....................... 35Phase 11 conditions, Sabine set ...................... 35

Test Reach F ..................................... 35Existinv conditions. Freeport set ..................... 36Phase I conditions, Freeport set ...................... 36Phase II conditions, Freeport set ..................... 36

Test Reach G ..................................... 36Phase I conodtions, Freeport set ...................... 37Phase II conditions, Freeport set ..................... 37

Test Reach H ..................................... 37Phase I conditions, Freeport set ...................... 37Phase I conditions. Freeport set ..................... 38

Test Reach I ..................................... 38Pilot's Evaluations ................................. 39

iv

5-Recommendations ............................ 44

References .......................................... 46

Plates 1-216

SF 298

Vm

Preface

This investigation was performed by the Hydraulics Laboratory (HL),U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES), for the U.S.Army Engineer District, Galveston (SWG). The study was conductedwith the WES research ship simulator during the period April 1990-June1991. SWG provided survey data of the prototype area. Current model-ing was conducted by the Estuarine Processes Branch, Estuaries Division,HL, and by the University of Notre Dame Civil Engineering Department.This is Report 3 of a series. Reports I and 2 discuss the navigation studyfor the bay and bayou segments of the Houston Ship Channel, respectively.

The investigation was conducted by Mr. Dennis W. Webb, NavigationBranch, Waterways Division, HL. under the general supervision ofMessrs. Frank A. Herrmann, Jr., Director, HL; Richard A. Sager, AssistantDirector, HL; M. B. Boyd, Chief of the Waterways Division, HL; andDr. Larry L. Daggett, Chief of -he Navigation Branch, HL. Ms. PhylisBirchett, Civil Engineering Technician, Navigation Branch, assisted in thestudy. This report was prepared by Mr. Webb.

Acknowledgment is made to Dr. Thomas Rennie and Mr. Al Meyer, En-gineering Division. SWG, for cooperation and assistance at various timesthroughout the investigation. Special thanks go to the Galveston/TexasCity Pilots Association for participating in the study.

At the time of publication of this report, Director of WES wasDr. Robert W. Whalin. Commander was COL Bruce K. Howard, EN.

Tit contents of this report are sot to be used for adveriiin,. publication.or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not comstitute anolffcial adorsement or approval of the use of suich commercial products.

vI

Conversion Factors, Non-SI to SIUnits of Measurement

Non-Sl units of measurement used in this report can be converted to SIunits as follows:

Multiply By To Obtain

degrees (angle) 0.01745329 radians

foot 0.3048 meters

knots (international) 0.5144444 meters per socond

miles (U.S. statute) 1.609347 kilometers

vii

1 Introduction

The Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels are located along theGulf of Mexico Coast in eastern Texas, Figure 1. These channels includethe Entrance Channels, the Galveston Channel, the Bar Channels (theInner and Outer Bar Channels and the Bolivar Roads Channel), the TexasCity Channel, the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and the Houston Ship Chan-nel (HSC) which branches off the Bar Channels, traverses Galveston Bay,and ends in Houston. This report focuses only on the Galveston Channeland the Entrance Channels, Figure 2. This report describes the navigationstudy conducted on these channels by the Waterways Experiment Station(WES) in 1992. Previous reports describe navigation studies conductedat WES on the Galveston Bay (Hewlett 1993) and the HSC Bayou Seg-ment (Webb and Daggett 1993) of the Houston - Galveston NavigationChannels.

Existing Conditions

Entrance Channel/Bar Channels

The Houston/Galvtston Entrance Channel/Bar Channel region is com-prised of a series of straight reaches; the Bolivar Roads Channel, the InnerBar Channel, the Outer Bar Channel (i.e., the Bar Channels), and the En-trance Channel. This is the only portion of the Houston-Galveston Naviga-tion Channels project under the joint jurisdiction of both the Galveston/Texas City Pilots Association and the Houston Pilots Association. Thepresent deep-draft navigation channei in the Bar Channel Reach, as main-tained by the U.S. Army Engineer District (USAED), Galveston (the Dis-trict), is 40 ft deep, below mean low tide (mlt), and 800 ft wide. Thepresent deep-draft navigation channel in the Entrance Channel, as main-tained by the District, is 42 ft deep, below mean low tide (mlt), and 800 ftwide. The additional 2 ft of depth in the Entrance Channel allows for thevertical motion of the ships due to waves.

Chapte 1 Introduction

Ia N.IAcS PAim LLO~UNANA

L 7EXASI

Iu~tCTJ . UtpL" OF• Wa~o

BAPR O HAVlWoM lY

i 1h.1~~indwal-i 6 U VF OF ME M•O

Figure 1. Project location map

Galveston Ship Channel

The Galveston Channel, which serves the Fort of Galveston, as pres-ently maintained by the District, is 40 ft deep and 1, 100 ft wide. The Gal-veston Ship Chaiinel has docking facilities on both sides of the channel,

serving both deep- and shallow-draft vessels. Facilities include grain ex-_

porters, oil importers, and containerized cargo.

r 1Chapter 1 introduction

n ," • alvesto Shi Channel'!' -

vesto Shi lhi elha docin faiiiso;ohsieftecanl

• ..'•..,tL,,,,, ~ ~~..'... . -'..... o,,.•"• - - -- ,, .

" ............... " :M i . 77"':,-. ......... -'.......""" ':::::....:

S.... .. , lo LL,.I . ... :::::::::::

Figure 2. Galveston Channel/Entrance Channel/Bar Channels _-.

Navigation Problems

Crosscurrents

Crosscurrents in the Gulf of Mexico provide problems to local pilotsfor two reasons. First, vessels experiencing the effects of crosscurrents inthe Entrance Channel must steer at an angle into the curents to transit thereach. This means that the vessel is navigating at an angle in the channel,thus reducing the channel width available to other vessels. Second, ships •are not affected by the crosscurrents while they are protected by the Gal- .veston jetties. Therefore, as the ship exits the jetties, the bow of an out- ;bound vessel is hit by crosscurrents while the stern is not. This causes thevessel to swing in the direction of the current. When the bow of the in-bound ship enters the portion of the channel protected by the jetties, thecrosscurrents are still pushing the stern. This causes the vessel to swingin the direction of the current. Crosscurrents from the north (which pushthe vessel south) are referred to by the local ship pilots as a Freeport set,and crosscurrents from the south (which push the vessel north) are knownas a Sabine set. Sabine and Freeport are parts near 0sliveston, locatednorth and south of Galveston, respectively. For an inboundt ship, a Sabineset would cause the ship to turn into oncoming traffic at the jetties, whilea Freeport set would make the turn at the jetties more difficult. Any prob-lems in the Entrance Channel entering or leaving the jetties, are madeeven more significant by the turn betweeti the Entrance Channel and theOuter Bar Channel just west of the gulf-side end of the jetties. ;

Ohftpter 1 Intrduction 3

," : ." .•.. ..

.... ...

Turning In Galveston Channel

Vessels turning into the Galveston Channel can be subjected to strongcrosscurrents when broadside in ihe channel. Flood currents are of panic-ular concern because there is a danger that the vessel might be swept intothe Pelican Island Bridge, located at the west end of the channel. Thereare several instances of vessels begin swept into the bridge while beingturned. The Galveston/Texas City Pilots have recently installed a currentmeter at the bridge. They can access this meter via modem from their of-fice for immediate current information.

Turning from the HSC intu Galveston Channel

Sometimes, vessels will leave Houston and call at Galveston beforegoing to sea. Usually this is not difficult because these vessels are light-loaded and therefore not restricted to the authorized channel. Howc ver,occasionally these vessels are approaching almost fully loaded and call atGalveston to "top-off" with additional grain. This is done if the elevatorin Houston runs out of grain, or if the vessel is to carry a different type ofgrain not available at the dock in Houston. These vessels are turned in anaturally deep area southeast of the intersection of the Galveston Channeland the Inner Bar Channel.

Proposed Improvements

The District has proposed an improvement plan for the Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels. The feasibility report (USAED, Galves-ton 1987) recommended a single-phase 50-ft project. This project waslater divided into two phases by Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engi-neers (USACE).

Erdtrance/Bar Channels

Phase I entrance channels (Figure 3) are to be 47 ft deep and thePhase II channels are to be 52 ft deep (Figure 3). The additional 2 ft ofdepth allows for the vertical motion of the vessel due to wave action. TheEntrance Channel will have to be extended 4 miles for Phase I and an addi-tional 7 miles for Phase II (for a total of 11 miles), into naturally deepwater. Both the Phase I and Phase II Entrance Channel extensions are at adifferent alignment than the existing Entrance Channel alignment. Thischange in heading occurs near the end of the existing Entrance Channeland reduces the channel length required to reach naturally deep water forboth the Phase I and Phase II extensions. The channel is widened to1,000 ft at the turn in the proposed Entrance Channel extensions. ThePhase I extension channel remains at the existing channel width of 800 ft.

4 Chapter 1 Introduction

M M EOT" mtrance (4C-FT xONTOenoON FT

Do OF PiNAW 119TIII (47-" F T OfhU W

pliE I iI7F.4S CRMu NEInhl

so OF P44511 SI 0"U" (15-t OiTO

Figure 3. Entrance Channel extensions

The Phase II extension narrows to 600 ft. Bend wideners were installedfor both phases of the proposed improvemerts for the Bar Channels.

Galveston Ship Channel

The Phase I Galveston Channel was proposed to be deepened to 45 ftand realigned to a 450-ft width (Figure 4). The Phase II channel was pro-posed to be 550 ft wide and 50 ft deep on the same alignment as thePhase I channel.

Outer Bar Channel

The Outer Bar Channel was widened 100 ft on the north side (I-ig-ure 5). This modification to the feasibility plan was in respoiise to apilot's request to allow an inbound vessel additional room to recover fromthe Gulf crosscurrents as it enters the jetty area.

Purpose and Scope of Investigation

The navigation study was conducted using ti.e WES Hydraulic Labo-ratory's ship simulator facility. The objectives of the study were to:

Chapter 1 Introduction

ANCOOAELF PARKH JE UTTY T

------------ PHS I O-E ".AR Cki

&CMLE IN FEET

FiguTes th4 dqac.ftcPhs Phase II Galveston Ship Chan-efaiiiyrpr

Chpe 100 Inroucio

2Data Development

Description of Simulator

It is beyond the scope of this report to describe in detail the WES shipsimulator;' however, a brief explanation will be made. The purpose of theWES ship simulator is to provide the essential factors necessary in a con-trolled computer environment to allow the inclusion of the man-in-the-loop,i.e., local ship pilots in the navigation channel design process. The simula-tor is operated in real-time by a pilot at a ,hip's wheel placed in front of ascreen upon which a computer generated visual scene is projected. The vi-sual scene is L - 4ated as the hydrodynamic portion of the simulator pro-gram computes a i.-,w ship's position and heading resulting from manualinput from the pilbt (rudder, engine throttle, bow and stern thruster, andtug cuimmands) and external forces. The external force capability of thesimulator includes effects of wind, waves, currents, banks, shallow water,ship/ship interaction, and tug boats. In addition to the visual scene, pilotsare provided simulated radar and other navigation information such aswater depth, relative ground and water speed of the vessel, magnitude oflateral vessel motions, relative wind speed and direction, and ship's heading.

Required Data

Data required 'or the simulation study included channel geometry, bot-tom topography, channel currents for proposed as well as existing condi-tions, numerical models of test ships, and visual data of the physical scenein the study area. A reconnaissance trip was carried out for the purpose ofobserving actual shipping operations in the suwdy area. Still photographswere taken during the recounaissance transits to aid in the generation ofthe simulated visual scene. Discussions with pilots were also held during

"I Hydraulic design of deep draft navigation channels." PROSPECT (Proponent Spon-sored Engineer Coips Training) course notes, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways ExperimentStation, Vicksburg, MS, 19-23 June 1989.

Chapter 2 Data Development 7

this trip so that WES engineers could become more familiar with concernsand problems experienced during channel operations.

Test File

The test file contains initial conditions (ship speed and heading, rudderangle, and engine setting) for the simulation and geographical coordinatesfor the channel alignment. The channel is defined in terms of cross sec-tions located to coincide with changes in channel alignment and current di-rection and magnitude. The information used for the development of theGalveston Channel/Entrance Channels database was obtained from theDistrict's project drawings. The Texas state plane coordinate grid wasalso plotted on these drawings and was used for the simulator databasecoordinate system. Also included in the test file is the steepness and over-bank depth (water depth at the top of the side slope) adjacent to the chan-nel. These data are used by the computer to calculate bank suction forceson the test vessels.

Water depths for the simulator were based on authorized projectdepths. For the simulated existing channel, the water depth representedthe existing condition taken from the most recent dredging survey (May1986) furnished by the District. Also, bank slopes and overbank depthswere obtained from the District's dredging survey. These data are used inthe calculation of ship hull bank forces. Briefly, bank forces occur whena ship travels close to a submerged bank (also wall or docked ship), andthe resulting effect is characterized by a movement toward the bank and abow-out rotation away from the bank.

Scene File

The scene database is comprised of several data files that contain geo-metrical information enabling the graphics computer to generate the simu-lated scene of the study area. The computer hardware and software usedfor visual scene generation is separate from the main computer of the shipsimulator. The main computer provides motion and orientation informa-tion to a stand-alone graphics computer for correct vessel positioning inthe scene that can be viewed by the pilot. Operators view the scene as ifthey are standing on the bridge of a ship looking toward the ship's bow inthe foreground. View direction can be changed during simulation for thepurpose of Icoking, at objects outside of the relatively narrow straight-ahead view.

Aerial photographs, navigation charts, and dredging survey charts pro-vided the basic data for generation of the visual scene. The simulationtesting required low visual resolution beyond the immediate vicinity of

8 Chapter 2 Data Development

the navigation channel. All land masses in the vicinity of the navigationchannel were included in the scene. All aids to navigation in the vicinityof the study area were included. In addition to the man-made and topo-graphical features in the vicinity, the visual scene included a perspectiveview of the bow of the ship from the pilot's viewpoint. Visual databasesfor all design ships were developed at WES for use in the simulation.

Radar File

The radar file contains coordinates defining the border between landand water and significant man-made objects, such as docked ships andaids to navigation. These data are used by another graphics computerwhich connects the coordinates with straight lines and displays them on aterminal. The objects viewed comprise visual information which simu-lates shipboard radar. The main information sources for this databasewere the project drawings and dredging survey sheets supplied by theDistrict.

Ship Flies

The ship files contain characteristics and hydrodynamic coefficientsfor the test vessels. These data are the computer's definition of the ship.The coefficients govern the reaction of the ship to external forces, such aswind, current, waves, banks, underkeel clearance, ship/ship interaction,and internal controls, such as rudder and engine rounds per minute (rpm)commands. The numerical ship models for the Galveston Channel/En-trance Channels simulations were developed by Tracor Hydronautics, Inc.of Laurel, Maryland (Ankudinov 1991). The test ships were chosen basedon the District's economic analysis of future shipping business and opera-tions and are shown in Table 1. The length of the ship is measured as thedistance between perpendiculars. As in the simulations of the Bay andBayou Segments, the design vessels were loaded to 1-ft underkeel clearance.

Table I

Design Vessels for Simulation

Channel Ship Type Tonnage Dimensions, ft

Existing Tanker 132K 920 x 144 x 39

Existing Bulk Carrier 93K 775 x 106 x 39

Phase I Tanker 165K 990 x 156 x 44

Phase I Bulk Carrier lOOK 775 x 106 x 44

Phase II Tanker 175K 1,013 x 173 x 49

Phase II Bulk Carrier 155K 971 x 140 x 49

Chapter 2 Data Development

Current File

The current file contains current magnitude and direction and waterdepth for each of eight points across each of the cross sections definingthe channel alignment. Current data for a ship simulation study are usu-ally obtained from physical or numerical models. In this study, currentdata were available from a numerical model of Galveston Bay (Lin 1992).The model bathymetry was modified for generation of currents for the twoproposed conditions.

Crosscurrents in the Gulf of Mexico and in the entrance channels weredeveloped by Dr. Joannes J. Westerink, University of Notre Dame(Westerink 1993).

10 Chapter 2 Data Development

3 Navigation Study

Validation

The simulation was validated with the assistance of two pilots from theGalveston/Texas City Pilots Association. The following information wasverified and fine tuned during validation:

a. Currents.

b. Bank conditions.

c. Ship/ship interaction.

d. Ship engine and rudder response.

e. The visual scene and radar image of the study area.

(1) Location of all aids to navigation.

(2) Location and orientation of the docks.

(3) Location of buildings visible from the vessel.

Validation began by the pilots maneuvering through the visual scene ..ia fast-time mode to quickly check building and buoy locations. After this,real-time simulation runs were undertaken with the vessel transiting theentire study area. Special attention was given by the pilot to the responseof the ship to external forces. Problem areas were isolated, and the proto-type data for these areas were examined. The model was adjusted and fur-ther simulation runs were undertaken through the problem areas, and ifnecessary, additional adjustment was made. This process was repeateduntil the pilot was satisfied that the simulated vessel response was similarto that of an actual vessel in the prototype.

Chapter 3 Navigation Study 11

Preliminary Testing

After the model was successfully validated, the validation pilots madepreliminary test runs in the 450-ft-wide Phase I Galveston Channel. Testsof the bulk carrier outbound from Houston and turning into Galveston re-vealed that the ships were unable to make the turn during ebb or floodtide. None of the runs came clos to making the turn, and the runs wereaborted when the pilot lost control of his ship. Tests of the bulk carrieroutbound from Galveston showed the pilots had problems keeping theirvessels in the authorized channel for both ebb and flood tide conditions.Of additional concern to the pilots was the fact that the 450-ft-wide chan-nel ran along side the docks between pierm 10 and 36, Currents are strongin the Galveston Channel, and to maintain steerage when running with afair tide (i.e., the vessel is heading in the same direction as the current, in-bound flood and outbound ebb), the pilots must keep a headway of at least4 knots. If the 450-ft channel runs alongside the docks, ships traveling at4 knots or faster run a significant risk of sucking docked ships away fromthe docks, resulting in broken mooring lines and potential damage. Pilotsalso had a difficult time knowing their position in the curved, 450-ft-widechannel.

In response to concerns about the proposed Galveston Channel alignment,the 450-ft-wide Phase I channel was realigned (Figure 6). The 550-ft-wide Phase II channel was aligned identically to the Phase I channel. Thisalignment takes advantage of a naturally deep area just north of the Gal-veston Jetty and provides a funnel from the Inner Bar Channel and theBolivar Roads Channel into the Galveston Channel. Additionally, the

*l .......

Figure 6. Phase I Galveston Channel, as tested

12 Chapter 3 Navigation Study

reach between Pier 10 and Seawolf Park was straightened so that out-bound ranges could be positioned in Galveston Bay. These ranges couldbe used as rear ranges fPr inbound ships.

Preliminary tests were conducted on the realigned Galveston Channelwith the validation pilots. Based on these runs, the modified alignment re-placed the feasibility alignment in the navigation study.

The capability to test two simulations at once was not in place duringthe first week of validation. Therefore, portions of the project, includingthe crosscurrents in the Gulf of Mexico, were validated by the first pair ofpilots to come to WES for testing and not by the original validation pilots.This reduced the number of actual test runs made by the first pair of pilots(Pilots I and 2).

Test Scenarios

Test conditions

The test scenarios, design vessels, and environmental conditions wereselected to test the existing and proposed channels in the "maximum credi-ble adverse situation." That is, the worst conditions under which the har-bur would maintain normal operations. This approach provides a built insafety factor when analyzing the results. Three channel configurations,the existing channel, the Phase I channel, and the Phase II channel weretested during the simulations at WES. The existing channels were testedto provide a base with which to compare tests conducted in the proposedchannels and to provide a basis of comparison of conditions to the pilotsinvolved in the testing. The same bank conditions were used for the pro-posed channels as were used in the existing channel.

To test all channels with a variety of meeting and passing scenarios,the study area was divided into nine test reaches, A through I (Figures 7through 15 at the end of this section). Testing of two way traffic was ac-complished with two real-time piloted simulations conducted simi'lta-neously. The pilots were in radio contact with each other and could seethe other vessel on their visual scene and radar display.

Test reaches

a. Reach A, inbound to Houstonloutbouud from Houston. This test(Figure 7) was designed to test the meeting and passing of a loadedtankr (inbound to Houston) and a loaded bulk carrier (outboundfrom Houston), as well as to provide a track plot from the GinIf ofMexico through the Houston Ship Channel north of the Gulf Inter-costal Waterway (GIWW). The meeting and passing was to occur

Chapter 3 -Navigation Study 13

in the Inner Bar Channel. This reach was tested for both the maxi-mum ebb and maximum flood currents.

b. Reach 5, outboundfromn Galveston. This test reach (Figure 8) wasdesigned to test a loaded bulk carrier leaving the Port of Galvestonand turning into the Inner Bar Channel. This reach is normally oper-ated as one-way traffic. The primary concern of this test is the ef-fect of crosscurrents on the vessel as it turns from the GalvestonChannel into the Inner Bar Channel. This test was not run inboundsince inbound vessels are typically light-loaded or in ballast andtherefore are not restricted to the confines of the authorized deep-ened channel limits. This reach was tested for the maximum ebband maximum flood currents.

c. Reach C, outbound from Houston into Galveston. This test (Fig-ure 9) was designed to teit a loaded bulk carrier outbound fromHouston and turning into Galveston. This maneuver is done in theprototype as some grain ships leaving Houston will add to their loadof grain in Galveston prior to going to sea. Test Reach C was testedfor both the maximum ebb and maximum flood curients. Althoughthe situation occurs in the prototype, tests were not conducted forvessels going from Galveston to Houston. These vessels are eitherin ballast or light-loaded.

d. Reich D, passing in the Outer Bar Channel. This test reach (Fig-ure 10) was designed to test the meeting and passing of a loadedtanker and a loaded bulk carrier inside of the jetties. This was ashort test run that ended once the meeting and passing had been suc-cessfully completed. This reach was tested for both the maximumebb and maximum flood currents.

e. Reach E, passing in the Entrance Channel - northern portion. Thistest reach (Figure 11) was designed to test the meeting Pnd passingof a loaded tanker and a loaded bulk carrier outside of the jetties.This was a short test run that ended once the inbound vessel had re-gained control inside of the jetties. This reach was tested for cross-currents (both Freeport and Sabine sets) in the Gulf of Mexico. Theships were not affected by the crosscurrents while they were pro-tected by the jetties.

f. Rev:ch F, passing in the Entrance Channel - southern portion. Thistest reach (Figure 12) was designed to test the meeting and passingof a loaded tanker and a loaded bulk carrier in the southern portionof the Entrance Channel. The area of passing was farther east of thejetties than the area tested in Test Reach E. This was a short testrun that ended once the meeting and passing was successfully com-pleted. This reach was tested for a Sabine set only.

g. Reach G, passing in the Entrance Channel 1.000-ft widener. Thistest reach (Figure 13) was designed to test the meeting and passing

14 Chapter 3 Navigatlon Study

of a loaded tanker and a loaded bulk carrier in the 1,000-ft widenerat the beginning of the Phase I portion of the Entrance Channel.This was a short test run that ended once the meeting and passinghad been successfully completed. This reach was tested for a Sa-bine set only. Testing was done only for Phase I and Phase 1I chan-nels, since this is a new channel.

h. Reach H, passing in the 800-ft-wide Entrance Channel. This testreach (Figure 14) was designed to test the meeting and passing of aloaded tanker and a loaded bulk carrier in the 800-ft-wide Phase IEntrance Channel. This was a short test run that ended once themeeting and passing had been successfully completed. This reachwas tested for a Sabine set only. Testing was done only for Phase Iand Phase II channels.

i. Reach I, passing in the 600-ft-wide Entrance Channel. This testreach (Figure 15) was designed to test the meeting and passing of aloaded tanker and a loaded bulk carrier in the 600-ft-wide Phase IIEntrance Channel. This was a short test run that ended once themeeting and passing had been successfully completed. This reachwas tested for a Sabine set only. Testing was done only for thePhase II channel.


7,

OUVGTO MANIA

ALWENTN ISLAND

PECALI MLANDE

Figure 7. Test Reach A

16 Captr 3Navgaton tud

\'*'..LLX COP AM

"V W M

Figure 9. Test Reach C

ANOMOflAG9 -

OUTGO - - ---- u

-ý

$OUTH AMT

SCALE Ni PM

Figure 10. Test Roach D


- - - GULF OF ME= *C

SCALE~N U 4tj%-.

Figure 11. Test Reach E

NN

% 0*

sCAemi M FM

Figure 12. Test Reach F

18 Chapter 3 Navigation Study

OA'

clýl

0 3000

L _

Figure 13. Tet Reach G


*C

N •IIM OF MI PHU=

Figure 14. Test Reach H

20

Chapter 3 Navigation Study

SCL IN FEE

LNi

%'s;

.. A._

Figure 15 Tet eahm C

-. .-

",N Nj,

SCALE iN FEET --.0 300g0 N ',,__

Figure 15. Test Reach I"-

Chapter 3 Navigation Study 21 ,

4 Study Results

Six professional pilots from the Galveston/Texas City Pilots Associa-tion participated in the simulation testi, g of the Houston/Galvesto:.; Ln-

trance Channels and the Galveston Channel. Tests were conducted 'i arandom order. This was done to prevent prejudicing the results as wouldhappen if, for example, all existing conditions were run prior to runningthe plans. The skill gained at operating the simulator could show theplans to be easier than they might really be. The primary method of analy-sis for these results are visual inspection of recorded track-lines and analy-sis of vessel control parameters.

During each run, the control, positioning, and orientation parameters ofthe ship were recorded every 5 seconds. These parameters included posi-tion, port and starboard clearances, ship speed, engine speed in propellerrevolutions-per-minute (rpm), rudder angle, and rate of turn. These statis-tical parameters are plotted against distance along track. The distancealong track is calculated by projecting the position of the ship's center ofgravity perpendicular to the center line of the channel and is measuredfrom the beginning of the center line. For reference purposes, the loca-tions of important landmarks are identified.

Composite plots were used to analyze Test Reaches B and C. Individ-ual plots were used to analyze the two-way traffic in the remainder of thetest reaches. Composite plots were not done for tests of two-way traffic,since the plots become too "busy" and thus meaningless. Each of the indi-vidual track plots shows rlearances during the meeting and passing situa-tions for the particular run.

The composite plots of navigation parameters (Test Reaches B and C)present the statistical analysis as a mean of means within a sample chan-nel section. A 500-ft channel section length was used. This means thatfor each individual run, each parameter was averaged over 500 ft, andthese means were averaged over all runs under a given condition, thus amean of the means. Individual control parameters are plotted for both ves-sels in the two-way test reaches and presented immediately after the trackplot.

22 Chapter 4 Study Results

In evaluating the meeting and passing scenarios, it is important to re-member that the Houston/Galveston Entrance channels do not providemany visual cues to keep the pilots informed of their location. The dis-play of aids to navigation in a simulator visual scene is a problem with allsimulators. Ranges in particular must be exaggerated in size to be seen.Pilots can take binoculars onto a real ship. They are not effective on asimulator. This is not a problem during the one-way portions of the testsbecause the Entrance Channels are designed for two-way traffic. Thus asingle ship has about twice as much room as it needs, and therefore, theexact location of the ship is not as critical. The problem becomes more ap-parent during the simulation of the meeting and passing of two ships.Often during the meeting and passing one ship or the other will leave theauthorized channel when it is obvious that is was not forced to do so inorder to avoid a collision. Such cases, when it is clear that a large portionof the channel was not being used, do not necessarily imply a navigationproblem. This hypothesis, that the visual representation is at least par-tially responsible for the results, is supported by the fact the best resultsfor two-way traffic were obtained in the portions of the Phase I andPhase II that are presently open sea. Due to the length of the channel seg-ments and the depth of the water where range structures would have to bebuilt, ranges were deemed inappropriate as aids to navigation. A gatedbuoy system was used in the simulation of Test Reaches G, H, and I.Gauged buoys are easier to see in the simulator. The results seem to indi-cate that this improves the test results.

Test Reach A

A plot of the center line for Test Reach A and the distances from thebeginning of the center line are shown in Plate 1. Individual plots of thevessel track-lines and control parameters for all runs conducted in TestReach A are shown in Plates 2 through 64. Most of the runs were stoppedupon completion of the meeting/passing. This was done to save time in anextremely full test schedule. Since this reach of the channel is designedfor two-way traffic, there were few problems encountered in the one-wayportion of the test.

Existing conditions, ebb tide

The ship track plots and the navigation parameter plots for runs in theexisting channel with an ebb tide (Plates 2-13) show that the pilots of theoutbound ship kepy the vessel on the southern edge of the Inner Bar Chan-nel. The pilots stated that for this situation, they would keep an outboundship along the channel edge. This is how the pilots navigate this reach inreal life because there is deep water in that area. Since the outbound shipwas on or out of the southern edge of the channel at the moment the twoships were abeam of each other, the ship/ship forces were reduced. The

Chapter 4 Study Results 23

only significant ship/ship interaction in the navigation parameter plots is

an increased rate of turn at the moment of passing.

Phase I conditions, ebb tide

The results of test runs in the Phase I channel with an ebb tide(Plates 14 through 22) show that the pilots of the outbound ship kept thevessel on the southern edge of the Inner Bar Channel as they did in theexisting channel. For one run (Plate 20), the inbound pilot misjudged histurn from the Enktrance Channel into the Outer Bar Channel. This was dueto his misinterpretation of visual cues. He recovered and was able to com-plete his run. As in the existing conditions runs, the only navigation pa-rameter showing ship/ship interaction is an increased rate of turn.

Phase i1 conditions, ebb tide

The results of runs in the Phase II channel with an ebb tide (Plates 23through 34) show that the pilots of the outbound ship kept the vessel onthe southern edge of the Inner Bar Channel as they did in the existing endPhase I channels. With the larger ships in the Phase II channel, the in-bound pilot moved his ship closer to the northern channel edge and thepassing tended to take place farther inbound of the turn. In all cases, theships tended to have adequate clearance even though the outbound shipwas often near or outside the southern channel edge at passing. The navi-gation parameter plots show that the Phase II ships did not increase theirrate of turn at the moment of meeting as much as did the ships operatingin the existing or Phase I channels.

Existing conditions, flood tide

The track plots for runs in the existing channel with a flood tide(Plates 35 through 43) show that the pilots of the outbound ship kept thevessel on the southern edge of the Inner Bar Channel. They did P'ot stayon the southern edge for as long as they did in ebb tide runs because witha floo.d tide, the passing took place farther west. Once the meeting andgssing was completed, the outbound ship moved to the center of the chan-nel. The navigation parameter plots show little ship/ship interaction.

Phase I conditions, flood tide

The results of runs in the Phase I channel with a flood tide (Plates A Ithrough 55) show that, although the ships came near the channel edge in afew locations, they had enough room for a safe transit of the area. Onerun shows an extremely high rate of turn just after the meeting operation(Plate 45). However, this is not due entirely to ship/ship interaction. Thepilot turned his ship to port to get back to the center of the channel before


he grounded at the end of the naturally deep area. He did, however, leavethe channel on the starboard side.

Phase II conditions, flood tide

The track plots for runs in the Phase II channel with a flood tide(Plates 56 through 64) show results similar to the runs in the Phase I chan-nel except that all inbound ships had a problem turning into the BolivarRoads Channel after the meeting/passing operation. This was probably be-cause the passing took place so close to this turn and the ships did nothave adequate time to completely recover. It would seem to be advisableto avoid passing in this area and pass farther east in the Inner Bar Chan-nel. The channels are extra wide in this area and there is adequate clear-ance for passing. The navigation parameters plot shows high rates of turndue to both ship/ship interaction and making the turn between the BolivarRoads Channel and the Inner Bar Channel.

Test Reach B

A plot of the center line for Test Reach B and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line are shown in Plate 65. Composite plots of thevessel track-lines and control parameters for all runs conducted in TestReach B are shown in Plates 66 through 75.


The composite track plot for runs in the existing channel with an ebbtide (Plate 66) indicates that there could be a problem area near the splitbuoy. This is because during ebb tide, the pilots purposely head outboundships toward the split buoy in preparation for the set they know they willexperience with the ebb tide. The split buoy is in deep water and is calleda split buoy because vessels drafting 20 ft or less can pass on the westernside of the split buoy, thus splitting the traffic. The only other time a ves-sel approached the channel's edge was north of Pier 10. However, thisship did not leave the channel.


The composite track plot for runs in the Phase I channel with an ebbtide (Plate 67) shows three of the six ships leaving the channel north ofPier 10. This occurred because several of the pilots had a difficult timejudging their position in the channel and when to begin the turn. This is aproblem, because any buoys placed in the channel to mark this turn wouldrestrict navigation for shallow draft vessels. This tur, i was not difficultfor the ships to navigate, just difficult to determine the ship's position.


Ships also left the channel to the southwest of Pier 10. This was alsocaused by the difficulty of determining the ship's position. However,none of these vessels would have grounded, assuming that the area will bedeepened to allow access to the docks. One ship left the channel south ofSeawolf Park. This was caused by his making the turn at Pier 10 too late.As in the existing channel, ships left the channel near the split buoy.

Phase 1i conditions, ebb tide

The composite track plot for runs in the Phase II channel with an ebbtide (Plate 68) shows test results nearly identical to results from thePhase I runs. Ships left the channel southwest of Pier 10, north ofPier 10, and near the split buoy. This was caused by the same situation asthe Phase I test channel.

Navigation parameters, ebb tide

The navigation parameter plots for runs conducted with an ebb tide arepresented in Plates 69 and 70. Analysis of the port and starboard clear-ance plots shows that for most of the reach, the wider existing channel av-eraged a higher clearance. This is to be expected, given the existingchannel's 1,1 00-ft width as opposed to the Phase 1 450-ft and the Phase II550-ft width. However, port clearance at the split buoy was negative forthe existing channel and positive for both Phase I and II channels. This isbecause the realigned channels did not allow the vessels to turn north asearly as does the existing channel. The average port clearance for bothPhase I and II channels is nearly identical throughout the length of the Gal-veston Channel. The increased width for the Phase II channel accountsfor the fact the while the average starboard clearance for Phase I ap-proached zero near Todd Shipyard and became negative past Pier 10, star-board clearances for Phase II remain positive.

The plot of the vessels' average rate of turn shows that at the splitbuoy, the Phase II vessels did not turn as fast as the vessels operating inthe existing or Phase I channels. This is probably due to the increasedsize and bulk of the Phase II design vessel.

The plot of the vessels' average engine speed shows that the vessels inthe existing channel used considerably less rpm than Phases I or II. Theplot of the average rudder angle shows the existing channel requiring lessrudder angle than either proposed channel in the reach from Pier 10 to SeaWolf Park. Both the reduced engine speed and rudder angle required areindicative of the additional width available for the existing channel.

Plots of the average ship speed correspond to the engine speed used forthe reach and the fact that the Phase II ship was larger and slower than theexisting or Phase I vessels.



The composite track plot for runs in the existing channel with a floodtide (Plate 71) shows the only problem area to be near the split buoy. Thestrong flood tide pushes the vessels west at the point as thy attempt tomake the turn to the east in the Inner Bar Channel. One ship did comeclose to another ship docked across the channel from Todd's Shipyard.This occurred because the pilot was distracted early in the run. He recov-ered and completed the run successfully.


The composite track plot for runs in the Phase I channel with a floodtide (Plate 72) shows that with the exception of one run (which left thechannel by more than the ship's beam width), the pilots were better able tomake the turn at Pier 10. This is because with the ships moving againstthe flood tide, they ere able to go slower and still maintain steerage. Asstated in the analysis of the ebb tide tests, runs leaving the channel south-west of Pier 10 were in no danger of grounding. The ships were pushedout of the channel near the split buoy just as they were in the existingcondition.


The composite track plot for runs in the Phase II channel (Plate 73)shows one ship leaving the channel southwest of Pier 10 and one ship leav-ing the channel after making the turn near Pier 10. The flood tide pushedseveral ships out of the channel near the split buoy. These results are sim-ilar to those in the Phase I channel.

Navigation parameters, flood tide

The navigation parameter plots for runs conducted with a flood tide arepresented in Plates 74 and 75. Analysis of the port and starboard clear-ance plots show that for most of the reach, the 1,100-ft-wide existing chan-nel averaged a higher clearance. However, port clearance at the split buoywas negative for the existing and Phase I channels and positive for bothPhase II channels. None of the channels averaged negative starboardclearance at any point in the reach.

The plot of the vessels' average rate of turn shows that at the splitbuoy, the Phase II vessels did not turn as fast as the vessels operating inthe existing or Phase I channels due to the increased size and bulk of thePhase II design vessel.

The plot of the vessels' average engine speed shows that the vessels inthe existing channel used considerably less rpm than in Phases I or I.


The Phase I rpm plot follows the existing rpm plot until the turn atPier 10, where it increases to match the Phase II plot. The plot of the aver-age rudder angle shows the existing channel requiring less rudder anglethan either proposed channel in the reach from Pier 10 to Sea Wolf Park.Both the reduced engine speed and rudder angle required are indicative ofthe additional width available for the existing channel.

Plots of the average ship speed correspond to the engine speed used forthe reach and the fact that the Phase II ship was larger and slower than theexisting or Phase I vessels.

Test Reach C

A plot of the center line for Test Reach C and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line is shown in Plate 76. Composite plots of thevessel track-lines and control parameters for all runs conducted in TestReach C are shown in Plates 77 through 86. The areas of significance inTest Reach C are the two turns. The first turn is from the Inner Bar Chan-nel into the Galveston Channel. Some of the test run plots of this turnshowed the vessel out of the authorized channel. Often, after completionof the test, the pilot was surprised to see the true position of his ship onthe track plot. There are few visual aids in this area, and due to the limita-tions of depth perception, the pilots were mistaken about the ship's loca-tion. The second turn is in the Galveston Channel prior to docking.Turning the ship in the Galveston Channel on the simulator was fairly dif-ficult due to the visual limitations of simulators. In real life, the pilotscan position an additional pilot on the bow of the ship. The second pilot,with a radio, can keep the pilot on the bridge informed of the distancefrom his bow to land. In addition, there are other visual ques, missingfrom simulators, that pilots rely upon to know their position and headway.In evaluating the results of these two turns, it is important to consider notonly if the ship left the channel but how much area was required for themaneuver. Often, the channels provided enough rooin, but the pilot didnot have his ship in the proper position before beginning the turn. Typi-cally, the amount of room required to turn a ship is defined by a circle.However. both of these turns were done in 3 to 4 knots of current. There-fore, the area of the turn would be better circumscribed by an ellipse, withthe long axis of the ellipse being the critical parameter. Accordingly, thedistances from the initiation of the turn to the completion of the turn isshown in Table 2.


The composite track plot for runs in the existing channel with an ebbtide (Plate 77) shows that both runs required the naturally deep area northof the Galveston Island Jetty to turn the vessels prior to entering the Gal-veston Channel. One pilot came to a stop, turned his ship 180 deg and


T•ble 2

Distances Required for Turning

Channel Tide Pilot Turn 1, ft Turn 2, ft

Existing Ebb 5 4,130 1,000

Existing Ebb 6 2,960 1,320

Existing Flood 5 960 2,980

Phtese 1 Ebb 1 2.420 1,200

Phase I Ebb 2 3,700 1,420

Phase 1 Ebb 5 3,820 1,410

Phase I Flood 1 2,950 2,330


Phase I Flood 4 1.900 1,850


Phase 2 Ebb 4 4,740 1,840

Phase 2 Ebb 3 3,370 1,930

Phase 2 Ebb 5 4,180 1,880

Phse 2 Ebb 6 4,290 1,700

Phase 2 Flood 4 2,020 2,970

Phase 2 Flood 3 2,870 2,900

Phase 2 Flood 5 1,670 3,520

Phase 2 Flood 6 2,520 3,380

then maneuvered into the Galveston Channel. The other pilot attemptedto drive the ship from Bolivar Roads into the Galveston Channel. Thisrun left the Inner Bar Channel on the north side. Both ships turned in theGalveston Channel near the Todd Shipyard, The pilots stated that thewater in the Galveston Channel is deep from bank to bank. Therefore,leaving the authorized channel is not a problem, particularly for ships thatare lighter then the authorized channel depth. One ship did touch the landboundary west of Todd Shipyard.


The composite track plot for tests conducted in the Phase I channel isshown in Plate 78. Results from the first turn show two of the three runs


leaving the authorized channel. Two of the runs had difficulty enteringthe 450-ft portion of the channel near Seawolf Park. One ship came to thechannel edge on the west side of the channel, the other came near the edgeon the east side. All turns prior to docking were successful.

Phase II conditions, ebb tide

The composite track plot of runs in the Phase II channel is shown inPlate 79. Both turns were more difficult because the Phase II design bulkcarrier is nearly 200 ft longer than the Phase I bulk carrier. The additionallength greatly increases the effects of currents striking the vessel broad-side. As in the existing and Phase I channels, the most successful turnfrom the Inner Bar Channel into the Galveston Channel was accomplishedby bringing the ship to a stop in the area north of the jetty and turning theship dead in the water. Two of the four runs performed successful turnsprior to docking, while the other two runs grounded while turning.

Navigation parameterm, ebb tide

The navigation parameter plots for runs conducted with an ebb tide arepresented in Plates 80 and 81. Average parameters are not plotted for theportion of the reach used to turn the vessel into the Galveston Charneland were ended at the Todd Shipyard prior to the vessel's turning in theGalveston Ship Channel. Navigation parameters are projected from thevessels center of gravity perpendicular to the channel edge. Because thevessels are sideways in the channel for a long period of time, the parame-ter plots for that portion of the run are impossible to interpret.

Analysis of the port and starboard clearance plots shows that vesselsoperating in all three channels had a low average port clearance for theturn from the HSC into Bolivar Roads.

The plot of the vessels' average raie of turn shows that due to the bulkof the Phase II design vessels, the Phase II vessels did not turn as fast atSea Wolf Park as the vessels operating in the existing or Phase I channels.

The plot of the vessels' average engine speed, average rudder angle,and average ship speed (Plate 81) show relatively little difference betweenthe three channels.


Turning from the Inner Bar Channel into the Galveston Channel is easierwith a flood tide than with an ebb tide because the tidal currents help slowthe ship's speed. This was true for all channels tested. Only one run wasconducted with the existing channel and flood tide (Plate 82). This plotshows the ship being pushed into the area near the split buoy by the


currents. The turn in Galveston Ship Channel prior to docking was alsosuccessful.


The composite track plot of the runs conducted in the Phase I channelwith flood tide (Plate 83) shows that all ships were able to turn in the au-thorized area north of the jetty. One pilot left the west side of the 450-ftchannel near Seawolf Park, and two runs left the west side of the channelnear Pier 10. One ship hit land turning prior to docking.


The composite track plot of the runs conducted in the Phase II channelwith flood tide (Plate 84) shows all ships were able to turn in the author-ized area north of the jetty but were also pushed out of the channel nearthe split buoy. Two of these runs hit the split buoy. This is because thelarge Phase II vessel drafting 49 ft is more susceptible to currents than thePhase I ship drafting 44 ft. It appears that there is adequate room to theeast so that the pilots could wait until iater to begin the turn and allowmore room for the ship to drift to the west One run grounded while mak-ing the turn prior to docking. The remainder of the ships were able to turnsuccessfully.

Navigation parameters, flood tide

The navigation parameter plots for runs conducted with a flood tide arepresented in Plates 85 and 86. Average parameters are not plotted for theportion of the reach used to turn the vessel into the Galveston Channeland were ended at the Todd Shipyard prior to the vessel's turning in theGalveston Ship Channel for the same rcasons as stated in the discussion ofthe ebb tide navigation parameters.

Analysis of the port and starboard clearance plots shows that vesselsoperating in all existing and Phase II channels averages a negative clear-ance between the split buoy and Sea Wolf Park.

The plot of the vessels' average rate of turn shows little difference forthe three channels.

The plots of the vessels' average engine speed, average rudder angle,and average ship speed (Plate 86) show the vessels operating in the exist-ing channel used more engine speed (and therefore an increased shipspeed) in the reach near Sea Wolf Park. The ships in the existing channelused port rudder in the reach from Pier 10 to Todd Shipyard, while vesselsin the proposed channels used starboard rudder in the same reach.

Chapter 4 Study Reaults 31

Test Reach D

A plot of the center line for Test Reach D and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line is shown in Plate 87. Individual track plots ofall runs conducted in Test Reach D are shown in Plates 88 through 107.


The track plot of the run conducted with the existing channel and ebbtide (Plate 88) shows adequate channel width for the meeting and passingof the two ships. The navigation parameters plot (Plate 89) shows that theinbound pilot used about twice the rudder angle as did the outbound pilot.This is because the inbound vessel is still recovering from the turn fromthe Entrance Channel into the Outer Bar Channel. The outbound ship issomewhat smaller than the inbound ship and requires ruder to turn fromthe Inner Bar Channel into the Outer Bar Channel.


The track plot of the run conducted in the Phase I channel with ebb tide(Plate 90) shows that while the inbound ship did come within 27 ft of thechannel edge, there was adequate channel width for the maneuver. Theoutbound vessel was able to stay 125 ft from the southern channel edgewhile remaining 370 ft away from the inbound ship. The navigation pa-rameters plot (Plate 91) shows that (for the same reasons as in the existingchannel) the inbound pilot used about twice the rudder angle as the out-bound pilot as the vessels approached and met each other.

Phase II conditions, ebb tide

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with ebb tide are shown in Plates 92 through 95. Thetrack plots show one run (Plate 92) with adequate clearances for both ves-sels. Plate 94 shows a 56-ft clearance between vessels, with the outboundship heading toward the north edge of the channel at the end of the run.The outbound ship had 220-ft clearance to the south edge of the channel atthe meeting location and would have had a better run if he had made histurn sooner. It is not clear why he waited so late to turn. Plate 93 showsthe inbound pilot using more rudder than the outbound pilot, but the differ-ence is not as great as in the existing and Phase I channel. This is becauseboth vessels are large and bulky. However, as in all scenarios, the in-bound tanker is larger than the outbound bulk carrier. Plate 95 shows theoutbound vessel using more rudder angle than the inbound because out-bound pilot had to make a port turn quickly to avoid grounding on thesouthern side of the channel.



The track plot of the run conducted with the existing channel and floodtide is shown in Plate 96 with adequate channel width for the meeting andpessing of the two ships. The navigation parameters plot (Plate 97) showsthat the inbound pilot used more rudder angle than the outbound pilot.However, the rudder angle required of the inbound vessel with flood tideis not as much as that required for the inbound ship with ebb tide.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase I channel with flood tide are shown in Plates 98 through 101.Plate 98 shows the inbound ship leaving the channel by 54 ft on the northside. After the run, the pilot stated that he did not realize he was out ofthe channel and there was adequate channel width for the maneuver. Theother run (Plate 100) reveals that the outbound pilot did not move over toallow the inbound ship to remain in the authorized channel. Plots of thenavigation parameters (Plates 99 and 101) reveal that one outbound vessel(Plate 99) used less rudder at the point of meeting/passing while the other(Plate 101) used more. This shows the outbound pilot attempting (success-,ully) to swing the ship's stern out of the way of the inbound vessel.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with flood tide are shown in Plates 102 through 107.These plots show none of the ships leaving the channel, although duringone run (Plate 104) the outbound ship made a very erratic maneuver at themeeting and passing situation. This is due to the fact tha 'ýe outboundship was on the north side of the channel and had to move quickly to thesouthern side to avoid the inbound ship. The inbound pilot waited too lateto turn west and entered the aichorage area. One vessel parameter plot(Plate 102) shows that the pilots had maneuvered their vessels near theedge of their half of the channel and had placed their ships rudder at mid-ships for the meeting/passing.

Test Reach E

A plot of the center line for Test Reach E and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line is shown in Plate 108. Individual track plots ofall runs conducted in Test Reach E are shown in Plates 109 through 148.


Existing conditions, Freeport set

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in the exist-ing channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 109 thror gh 116.These track plots show that for all runs both vessels suffered a severe setto the south and the outbound ship left the channel. It shoul be notedthat the parameter plots (Plates 10, 112, 114, and 116) show that al-though they used some starboard rudder, none of the pilots on the inboundvessels used all the rudder available to maneuver their vessel to the northside of the channel. Only one inbound vessel (Plate 111) approached theoutbound ship on the north side of the channel. Therefore, not only didthe outbound ship have strong crosscurrents to contend with, it was meet-ing a vessel that was in the middle of the channel. This explains that factthat for three runs, the outbound vessels used starboard rudder eventhough they were being set to the starboard side of the channel by thecrosscurrents. The outbound vessel in the remaining run (Plates I I and112) used starboard rudder to recover from the meeting/passing.

Phase I conditions, Freeport set

Individual track plots and navigation paratr eters of the runs in thePhase I channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 117 through 124.These runs show the same problem as in the existing channel. One run(Plate 119) was somewhat successful with the outbound ship only clippingthe channel edge.

Phase II conditions, Freeport set

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 125 through 130.These runs show the larger ships being more affected by the crosscurrents.Although two of the runs (Plates 127 and 129) show that the inbound shipwas able to stay on the north iddo; of the channel, the outbound ship wasstill pushed out of the channel by the crosscurrents.

Crosscurrent magnitude

As discussed earlier, the current magnitude and direction was calcu-lated by Dr. Westerink's model. There is a lack of prototype data in thisarea, and the magnitude of the crosscurrents for the Freeport set was vali-dated by the pilots to setup a "worst case scenario." Perhaps, now that theresults can be examined with perfect hindsight, the magnitude of the cross-currents, particularly for the Freeport set, was too severe. Runs conductedin the other test reaches in the Gulf of Mexico were acceptable becausethe magnitude of the currents decreases the farther the ships get from thejetties.

34 Chaptor 4 Study Results

Existing conditions, Sabine set

The magnitude of the crosscurrcnts is less for a Sabine set than for aFreeport set, therefore the vessels had less difficulty staying in the chan-nel. Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in the ex-isting channel with a Sabine set are shown in Plates 131 through 136.These plots show one successful run (Plate 133), one run where the in-bound vessel clipped the north edge of the channel (Plate 131), and onerun where the inbound vessel ran slightly out of the channel for nearly1/2 mile (Plate 135). Plots of the navigation parameters (Plates 132, 134,and 136) show that the pilots used both port and starboard rudder for bothinbound and outbound ships.

Phase I conditions, Sabine set

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase I channel with a Sabine set are shown in Plates 137 through 142.These track plots show two successful runs (Plates 137 and 139) and onerun where the inbound vessel clipped the north edge of the channel(Plate 141). These track plots also show that for all three runs, the stemof the smaller outbouad vessel was pulled toward the inbound ship. Plotsof the navigation parameters (Plates 138, 140, and 142) show that theship/ship interaction cause both vessels to have an abrupt drop in speed atthe moment of meeting/passing.

Phase II conditions, Sabine set

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Sabine set are shown in Plates 143 through 148.The track plots show two runs (Plates 143 and 145) in which the inboundship left the north edge of the channel. One run (Plate 147) shows the in-bound vessel more than 100 ft out of the channel. Two of the navigationparameters plots (Plates 144 and 146) show that the ship/ship interactioncaused both vessels to have an abrupt drop in speed at the moment ofmeeting/passing. The other navigation parameter plot (Plate 148) doesnot show as abrupt a loss in speed, because the vessels were farther apart.

Test Reach F

A plot of the center line for Test Reach F and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line is shown in Plate 149. Individual track plots ofall runs conducted in Test Reach F are shown in Plates 150 through 173.All runs in Test Reach F were conducted with a Freeport set.


Existing conditions, Freeport set

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in the exist-ing channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 150 through 157. Thetrack plots (Plates 150, 152, 154, 156) show at least one of the ships leav-ing the authorized channel for each test conducted. However, for existingconditions, the water is deep in this area and none of the vessels wouldhave grounded. The pilots were following their current operating proce-dure by keeping the meeting vessels as far apart as possible in this reach.The navigation parameter plots (Plates 151, 153, 155, 157) show that noneof the pilots used maximum rudder for a length of time greater than that re-quired to start the ship turning.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase I channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 158 through 165.The individual track plots (Plates 158, 160. 162, 164) show successfulruns with the exception of one inbound ship (Plate 160) that left the au-thorized channel. There appears to be no reason to do this unless he washaving difficulty knowing where he was in the channel. The navigationparameter plots (Plates 159, 161, 163, 165) show that none of the pilotsused maximum rudder for a length of time greater than that required tostart the ship turning.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 166 through 173.The track plots (Plates 166, 168, 170, 172) show two successful runs(Plates 168 and 172) and two runs (Plates 166 and 170) where one of theships slightly left the authorized channel. The navigation parameter plots(Plates 167, 169, 171, 173) show that none of the pilots used maximumrudder for a length of time greater than that required to start the shipturning.

Test Reach G

A plot of the center line for Test Reach G and the dist-nces from thebeginning of the center line is shown iri Plate 174. Individual track plotsof all runs conducted in Test Reach G are shown in Plates 175 through190. No test runs in the existing chaminel were conducted since there ispresently no authorized channel in this area, because the water is naturallydeeper than 40 ft. All runs in Test Reach G were conducted with a Free-port set.



Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase I channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 175 through 182.The individual track plots of runs conducted in the Phase I channel(Hlates 175, 177, 179, 181) show successful runs with the exception ofone inbound ship (Plate 177) that clipped the edge of the authorized chan-nel. The navigation parameter plots (Plates 176, 178, 180, 182) show thepilots using more rudder during the meeting/passing but not using hardrudder for an extended period of time. The pilots did not use maximum,rudder for a length of time greater than that required to start the ship turn-ing during the other portions of the run.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 183 through 190.The individual track plots of runs conducted in the Phase II channel(Plates 183, 185, 187, 189) show two successful runs (Plates 183 and187), one run (Plate 185) where the inbound ship clipped the channel edgeprior to the meeting/passing, and one run (Plate 189) where both of theships left the authorized channel after the meeting/passing due to thestrong ship/ship interaction. The navigation parameter plots (Plates 184,186, 188, 190) show the pilots used more rudder during the meeting/passing.Two of the plots (Plates 188 and 190) show the pilots held maximum rud-der on the ship to counter the ship/ship interaction. The pilots did not usemaximum rudder for a length of time greater than that required to start theship turning during the other portions of the run.

Test Reach H

A plot of the center line for Test Reach H and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line are shown in Plate 191. Individual track plotsof all runs conducted in Test Reach H are shown in Plates 192 through207. No test runs in the existing channel were conducted since there ispresently no authorized channel in this area, because the water is naturallydeeper than 40 ft. All runs in Test Reach H were conducted with a Free-port set.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase I channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 192 through 199.The individual track plots of runs conducted in the Phase I channel(Plates 192. 194, 196, 198) show two successful runs (Plates 194 and 198)and two runs (Plates 192 and 196) where the outbound ship clipped the


edge of the authorized channel. The navigation parameter plots (Plates 193,195, 197, 199) show the pilots using rudder during the meeting/passing.However, the pilots did not use hard rudder for an extended period oftime. The pilots did not use maximum rudder for a length of time greaterthan that required to start the ship turning during the other portions of therun.


Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 200 through 207.The individual track plots (Plates 200, 202, 204, 206) show one run(Plate 206) where the vessels passed close (140 ft) to each other and theship/ship interaction forced both ships out of channel after passing. Theremainder of the runs in the Phase II channel were successful. The naviga-tion parameter plots (Plates 193, 195, 197, and 199) show the pilots usedrudder during the meeting/passing. The pilots did not use hard rudder foran extended period of time, with the exception of one run (Plate 207)where both pilots used hard rudder to offset the ship/ship interaction. Thepilots did not use maximum rudder for a length of time greater than that re-quired to start the ship turning during the other portions of the run.

Test Reach I

A plot of the center line for Test Reach I and the distances from the be-ginning of the center line is shown in Plate 208. Individual track plots ofall runs conducted in Test Reach I are shown in Plates 209 through 216.No test runs in the existing or Phase I channel were conducted since thereis presently no authorized channel in this area. There will be no Phase Ichannel, because the water is naturally deeper than 45 ft. All runs in TestReach I were conducted with a Freeport set.

Individual track plots and navigation parameters of the runs in thePhase II channel with a Freeport set are shown in Plates 209 through 2!6.These track plots (Plates 209 211, 213, and 215) show the ships were outof the 600-ft channel at the time of meeting/passing or, if they did not getout of the channtl, the ship/ship interaction pushed them out after themeeting. This is similar to what would occur in Galveston Bay if tlhe bankeffects did not push the ships back into the channel. The pilots stated thatif anyway possible, they would avoid meeting and passing two ships ofthese sizes in the 600-ft Phase II entrance channel. The navigation param-eter plots (Plates 210, 212, 214, and 216) show the pilots used an extremeamount rudder during the meeting/passing. This was in attempt to controlthe vessel during the ship/ship interaction.

38 Chapter 4 Stuidy Results

Pilot's Evaluations

After completing the week's testing, each pilot was given a question-naire to complete. Included in this report are the pilot's responses to thequestionnaire.

a. How will deepening the channel affect ship maneuverability andsafety?

Deepening of the channel along (Entrance & Bar), will enhanceship maneuverability and improve safety for those vessels whichpresently use the channel. It is to be expected, however, that an im-proved channel will attract larger & deeper ships. which will testthe limits of the improvements. I would, therefore, expect that bankeffect and interaction between vessels of the larger, deeper typewould be more pronounced and have a detrimental effect upon shipmaneuverability and channel safety.

Deepening the channel will be a great help in maneuvering theships that we handle now. But a larger and deeper channel willalso increase the size of the ships that we work with and make itharder to maneuver and possibly reducing the safety factor.

Deepening the channel should increase the maneuverability andsafety for the size of ships we are handling today at 40feet of draftand less. However, a deeper channel will also bring larger shipsand deeper drafts which will be slower to maneuver, thereby reduc-ing safety.

Yes, I feel the deepening of the channel should increase the ma-euverability and safety of the ships. However, like Ithe Capt. in

the previous paragraph] points out, a deeper channel will bringlarger ships and deeper drafts, thereby reducing safety.

It should increase maneuverability if the ships don't outgrow thechannel as they have now.

Based on the Simulator runs the maneuverability and safety aspectswould not be altered much. On the other hand, not having person-ally pil-" .I ships of this size (150,000 + dwt) or draft (49 foot +) on- reguy -.sis, it is difficult to determine accurately. The main con-

cern a•at I have is whether at Phase 145 foot deep channel and44foot draft in narrow congested channels, is one foot clearanceenough ? I have the same concern for Phase 1150' channel + 49'draft ships. My impression is that bottom suction would be substan-tiall, in.:'r . .. I (greater) than the simulated runs.


b. On a scale of I to 10, please rate the safety of the channels.

Existing: 8-9

Phase I: 6-7 Two way traffic deep draft8 One way traffic deep draft

Phase II: 1-2 Two way deep draft, large size7-8 One way deep draft, large size

Existing: 8 at 40 feetPhase I: 6 at 45 feetPhase II: 8 at 50 feet

Existing: 9 at 40 foot draftPhase I: 5 at 45 foot draftPhase II: 7 at 50 foot draft

Existing: 8 at 40 foot draftPhase I: 6 at 45 foot draftPhase II: 5 at 50 foot draft

Existing: 8Phase I: 6Phase H: 6

Existing: 9Phase I: 6Phase i: 8

c. Are the proposed channels wide enough for safe navigation? Ifnot, state where they are not wide enough.

The proposed improvements for the Entrance & Bar channels doesnot address any widening, except for easing the turns at #s 7&8 and9&1O buoys. These changes alone would significantly improve navi-gation safety for existing traffic.

For the reasons stated above in Q#I, however, they would do littleto enhance the safe navigation of large deep draft vessels attempt-ing to pass each other in these channels. The proposed im-provements in conjunction with a "one way" (NO PASSING)restriction on vessels over a certain size and draft would, if not en-hance, at least maintain the safe navigation of these channels.

The channels are not wide enough for safety from Galveston #1 toproposed turning basin. The proposed channel should be around1,200 feet. We need as much space between docked ships as we canget.


The proposed channels are not wide enough for safe navigationfrom Galveston #1 buoy to the proposed turning basin. FromGrasso Fuel Dock to the proposed turning basin should be a mini-mum of 1050 feet wide to safely navigate that part of the channel in-cluding the turns. Also, this would allow more distance betweendocked ships and moving ships, which would lessen the effects ofcushion and suction as the ships passed.

The proposed channels I do not feel are wide enough for safe navi-gation from Galveston "GB" buoy to Galveston Buoy 16. 1 feel thatthese channels should be no less than 1000 feet in width (that is,from the Seabuoy to Galveston Chann~el Buoy 16) if we are going tobe handling vessels 900feet and longer with beams exceeding150feet with 50foot draft. I also feel, like [the Capt. in the previ-ous paragraph] that the proposed channel in Galveston Harbor it-self from Galveston Buoy #1 to the new proposed turning basin willnot be wide enough for safe navigation for these large size vessels.I feel we should maintain a minimum 1000foot wide channel.

I think the channel should be 800 to 1000feetfrom the seabuc.y tothe 1050 foot turning basin.

The area I had the most problems with was from the west •nd ofPier 10 to about Pier 27. This area is a continuous turn •nd is hardto position the whole ship in the center of the channel. 2,c effectsof strong currents either way makes this area even more difficult.Ranges for this area do help (as tested in the simulator), but 1strongly feel this area should be wider than proposed in eitherPhase I or II.

d. What is your opinion of the realignment of the GalvestonChannel?

The realignment will probably work. The inclusion of the naturallydeep water in the approach to Galveston into the maintaiaed chan-nel improvements is good idea. The slight turn and point occurringoff Pier #16 area could cause a problem, but better familiarity willeliminate this concern.

The reach from Seawolf Park to Pier #10 could encounter a shoal-ing problem off the U.S. Coast Guard Base Galveston. The natu-rally deep water occurs closer to Seawolf Park and buildssignificantly off the Coast Guard Base.

The realignment of the Galveston Channel is a very good idea espe-cially the widening of the channel at Buoys 7 & 8 and 9 & 10. Thiswill be a great help to all the pilots.

I like the idea of widening the turns at #7 and #8 buoys and #9 and#10 buoys. This would correct a present problem. The realignment


in Galveston Harbor from Galveston #1 buoy to Pelican IslandBridge needs to be adjusted as described in question #3 to be safelynavigated.

Once again I agree with [the Capt. in the previous paragraph] ofwidening the turns at #7 and #8 buoys and #9 and #10 buoys. Asfor the realignment of the channel in Galveston Harbor from buoy#1 to Pelican Island Bridge is already addressed in the aboveparagraph.

The idea of widening the channel at #7 and #8 buoys and #9 and#10 buoys as in Phase #3 should be a must to safely meet in theseturns.

The proposal to make the turns at buoys 7-8 and 9-10 are very goodideas. It enables us to initiate and complete these known problemareas with more confidence. In Galveston Harbor deepening thechannel on the center line is safer than the south side, enablingPilots to navigate further away from moored ships in the harbor.

e. Are there any places the channel may not need to be widened asmuch as proposed?

I do not support any reduction in the width of any part of the chan-nel or improvements unless a one-way traffic restriction is applied.

NO.

Definitely no.

fE Do you have any suggestions or changes to the aids to navigation?

Existing "Ranges" must be significantly improved by increasingTheir height, size and horizontal and vertical separation.

The ute of "GAGED" buoys alone to mark the offshore approach inPhase I&II is inadequate. A fixed system to indicate centerline isnecessary. An electronic system, capable of indicating channel cen-terline, of a portable receiver type or interfacing with onboardequipment should also be installed.

I feel that passing ranges would be a tremendous help and also anytype of electronic ranges or aids that could be used while transitingthe channels.

(1) The ranges for the entrance channel could be brighter.

(2) The ranges for the outer bar channel need to be raised so thatthey may be seen over the anchored ships.


(3) Depending on the final configuration of the Galveston harborchannel, ranges will have to be established for guidance in thedeeper part of the channel.

g. Do you feel your ability, on the simulator, to turn a vessel in Gal-veston Channel was limited because you could not position an ad-ditional pilot on the bow of the ship?

NO. The close in display was as good an alternative. The greatestproblem encountered while turning around was the inability to accu-rately determine vessel headway or sternway. Information such astug wakes, propeller wash and Seaman's Eye are all useful duringthis maneuver.

The inability of the simulation to produce three (3) dimensional im-ages will always be a limitation of these systems.

Somewhat, in the real world, we would have a pilot on the bow, butin simulation I don't know if the distance off the bank could bejudged accurately enough to make any difference.

Yes.

h. Any additional comments of suggestions.

I would like to comment on the proposed phase 3 pertaining to the600foot deep draft channel from the "GA " buoy to the "GB" buoy,I definitely feel due to currents, strong winds and seas in this areathat one way traffic which means no passing or meeting is a mustfor safety.


5 Recommendations

Based on the real-time ship simulator study conducted by WES, the fol-lowing recommendations are made for the Houston/Galveston EntranceChannels and the Galveston Channel.

a. Based on the simulation results, the Bolivar Roads Channel, theInner Bar Channel, the Outer Bar Channel, and the Entrance Chan-nel should be built as tested (Figure 3) for the Phase I channels.The U.S. Coast Guard should be contacted to investigate the possi-bility of using passing ranges, rather than center-line ranges, in thisarea.

b. Based on the simulation results, the Bolivar Roads Channel, theInner Bar Channel, and the Outer Bar Channel should be built astested (Figure 3) for the Phase II channels. The Phase II EntranceChannel may be built as tested with the stipulation that two vesselsas large as those tested not meet in the 600-ft-wide portion (TestReach I) of this channel. However, it is r-commended that this por-tion of the channel be widened to 800 ft to maintain two-way trafficihrough the entrance.

c. The Phase I Galveston Channel should be built to a width of 550 ftand realigned near the split buoy (Figure 16). The turning area inGalveston Channel should be extended past Pier 36 to a length of4,500 ft. Although this is longer than any of the distances requiredto turn a ship in the simulation of the Galveston Channel, the extralength is required to:

(1) Allow pilots a certain amount of choice in where they turn avessel to account for variable factors such as the position ofdocked ships.

(2) Add a factor of safety to compensate for the fact that vessels insimulators do not affect the currents. Obviously, a vesselturned sideways in an 1,1 00-ft-wide channel will increase themagnitude of the current velocities.

44 Chapter 5 Recommendations

Figure 16. Phase I Galveston Channel, recommended

d. The Phase II Galveston Channel should be built to the same channelalignment as the Phase I channel.

e.. The turning area north of the jetty (Figure 6) and used by loadedships leaving Houston and going into Galveston should be built.The turning length provided by this area is 5,500 ft. The CoastGuard should be contacted regarding possible aide to navigation thatmight better mark the area.

45Chapoter 5 Recommendations

References

Ankudinov, V. (199 1). "Development of maneuveling simulation modelsfor five full form vessels for use in the WES Houston Ship Channel(HSC) navigation study," Technical Report 90062.0122, prepared forU.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS,by Tracor Hydronautics, Inc., Laurel, MD.

Hewlett, J. Christopher. (1994). "Ship navigation simulation study, Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas; Report 1, Houston Ship Chan-nel, Bay Segment," Technical Report HL-94-3, U.S. Army EngineerWaterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Lin, Hsin-Chi J. (1992). "Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels,Texas Project; Report 2, Two-dimensional numerical modeling ofhydrodynamics," Technical Report HL-92-7, U.S. Army EngineerWaterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston. (1987). "Final feasibility reportand environmental impact statement, Galveston Bay area navigationstudy," Galveston, TX.

Webb, Dennis W., and Daggett, Larry L. (1994). "Ship navigation simu-lation study, Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas; Report 2,Houston Ship Channel, Bayou Segment," Technical Report HL-94-3,U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Westerink, Joannes J. (1993). "Tidal predictions in the Gulf of Mexico/Galveston Bay using model ADCIRC-2DDI," University of NotreDame, Notre Dame, IN.

46 References

oc

w

ci

zzg 0

,' C)

Plat 1

UJ 30 o-

Wpmo

wo

z0~

Oza

CLOm0n

co

'Ioco

Ii __4_

0001'IPlat j

PORT CLEARANCE

uoo

800-

Geoo

400-

200 -

0-

o0 - STARBOARD CLEARANCE

Soo-H4000

200-

O0

40-RATE OF TUMN

10-

10--

40--

3I0--

H OUTER AR I ENTRANCEA CHANNEL CHANNEL

1111 TTTT~iliiiiiiilii lliii iliilI lj 1111111111 111 1111 1110 1o 20 so 40 so soDISTANCE ALONO TRACK, 1000 FT

'1 VESSELS MEETING I PASSINGPILOT 3 MOUrn NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

-.-.-.-.-.PILOT 4 OUTBOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 3 INBOUND, PILOT 4 OUTBOUND

Plate 3

ENOINE SPEED

O0--so

sO-

14020

0-.

RUDDER ANG40

20

520

10 L

20

40

SPIEED

12-

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL. MM NAR OANE. OUTEAN OE AE

0 ,o 0 :.0 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

VESSELS MTENM I PASSINGPILOT 3 MOUN NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

..-....-. PLOT 4 OUTBOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, SbB TIDE

PILOT 3 INIBOUND, PILOT 4 .)UTBOUND

Plate 4

mo

A

I/A

-20

*0 0

IL 0(IJ

Plate 5

PORT CLEARANCE

1200

"100-

400-

200

1200 STARBOARD CLEARANCE

1000-

800 -

1400-

200

-400

30

20-

30-H

B4TE AR ENTRANCEHOUSTON SWI CHANNEL PiER AR CHANNEL CANNEL CmANIW.

o 0 0o 30 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

VESSELS MWlNMO I PASSWO- PILOT 4 INOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A• -.-.-. PLOT a OUmOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE

PILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 6

ENOINE SPEED

l00-

140-

a 4 0

0-

RIS°-- NGL

•0 -

920-

40

18•1

0

3

0 !0 to 30O 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, t000 FT

1'VESSELS MEETING I PASSINNGPLuOTr 4 INOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A•-,-,PL.OT 3 OUTBOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE

PILOT 4 INBOUND. PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 7

1 /41IiII

0

C6

I~CL)

44

Plate 8

PORT CLEARANCE

11000-400-

00

4co -- STATEDOM TUMNC-

1000-

400R

N000

-400-

RATE OF TUARN

So-

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL INNIR SAFI CH I CHUTER CHl NTANNEL

111-1111 9 II11 I1 I 1111 11111111 11Jil1 1111

0) 10 20 30 40 50 so

VESSELS MEETING I PASSIGPILOT WUNDU~ NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

S-..-.-..PLOT : OUTSOUNC EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

Plate 9

100

go-

140-

-|0

30

40--"-

40-

so

mmm

a*--

lo-

3-.

0

HOUSTON SWp CHANNEL 1 *IM BAR CHIjANNEL UTEIl R HANNE

010 20 30 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

VE..EEL8 M3ETrNO I PASSINGPLOT 5 MOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

--,-4-•PLOT I OUTIBOUN EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 10

II•

ILU•O~wn

•"w0

I , .0zIx

4b6.i

Plte1

PORT CLEARANCE

slo

400

30 - ITARBOARD CLEARANCE

n--0,

-00

6400

40 RATE OF TURN

!0--

30--

40-

go--

I I AR ENTRANCEHOUSTON SHIPhmSL INNER BAR CHANNEL dOCAIWI49E.L C/ANNELl~ i , , l , , ,1 1 1 1 11, , 1 i 1 , l l l IT 1 1 1 1 11'[ ' 'I' 'I I '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11IT '

a 10 to so 40 so so

DISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

*VESSELS MEETING I PASING- LOT 5 MuOUD NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

S..PLOT I OUTfOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 6 INBOUND, PILOT 5 OUTBOUND

Plate 12

20--

RUDER ANGLE40-

~a.O

so-

It*40-

SPEED

0I

HOUSTON S# CHANNEL ROMR BAR CMNAP@L OUTRMAR ~I WRANCE

I III~IIII~~i 1111111111I1I11111111 ~h IT7T7ELo 10 Po 30 40 so so


VESSELS MEMEO I PASSINGPLOT I MOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

S-.-.-.-.-.PLOT S ITVou D EXISTING CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 13

<LUO"""4 E

IL

UZO

I' ICL. o.

.dt%

Plt 14

PORT CLEARANCE

* 800"

s oo -

400-

200-

1200- STARBOARD CLEARANCE

1000-

Wo-

S400-

200-

0-

-200-

-400

40-RATE OF TURN

30-

S20-

0o-

20-

30o

40

IOU~TER EaRI ENTRANCEHOUSTON SWI CHANNEL INNEIREARCHANNEL CHANNEAL CNAMdEL

11 1 17 T 11 1 1 1 1 1 Ii ~ II I lI M-7 I I II I II Il i l SI I 50 IIIIII


VESSELS MEETING I PASSING- PILOT 4 MOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A...-.-PLOT 3 OMfOUND PHASE I CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 15

ENGINE SPEED

I00-

C40-

20-

0 _

RUDIER ANGIX40

so-

20--

0-

ZI

20-

HO8O GHPCANLtE A HNE OUTER lIAR. ENTRANCEHOUTONI;IP :HANE INER IA CHNNE ICHANNEL C HAM&NL

0 10 to 30 40 so 60DISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

VESSEuLS ,MUTIN I PAS,-r--- ILOT 4 INSOM NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

*--+--PLO' 3 OUTBOUND PHASE I CONtDTIONS. EBB TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 16

W=)

3 -II Wm

zO0

w z

CLo(IILi IL

I OX

.d11

Plate 17

PORT CLEARANCE

U00

1000-

S0o

400-

30

um STARBOARD CLEARANCE

300

4000

200-

a-

-200

-400

40RATE OF TURN

30-

10-

30

40

U0

HOUSTN SW HANNE INNE BAROHATER 5 E-MAR ENTRANCEHOUTONSlI CHNPU WdUR AR HANEL CHANNEL CHANNEL

010 20 30 40 so so


IVESSELS MEETING I PASSING-PLOT U INBOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

.- 9ew44P1LOT I OUTBOUND PHASE I CONDTIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

plate 18

ENGINE SPEED

SO--

go-Co-

0

RUDDER ANGLE40-

20

5 20-•

40

SP

20a.

3--

10

14OUSTON SH CHANNE i-SA -EO"A.CESCANL ! MHNNEL

0i

0 ,o 20 30 40 50 so

DISTANCE ALONG TRACK. 1000 FT

VEBS-LB MdEETING I PASSING

- PILOT 5• MoLMD NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH Aw-- PILOT 6 OUTBOUND PHASE I CONDTIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 19

/1 1

IusF.i-ol

zoA'2lO0

Nj A. Le

IcWIo

Iii

Plate 20

PORT CLEARANCE

1000

Sao-

400

200-

0-

1200- STARBOARD CIEARANCE

1000-

600-

400

200

-200 - -

"-O00

40-RATE OF TURN

30-

j20-10-

40-

HOUSTON SlIP CHANNEL INNER BAR CHANNEL OUTER BAR IEANEHOSTNSHP HNNLCHANNEL CHNNL

I11111 1 T1 III Il •ilII"ll 1I, •II -11111111111 II l i I1 1T]

0 10 20 30 40 so goDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

t VESSELS MEETIO I PASSNGPILOT 6 IOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACP L,

.-.-,�...PLOT 5 OUTBOUND PHASE I CONDTIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 6 INBOUND, PILOT 5 OUTBOUND

Plate 21

1 40 -

0

-0-RUDDER ANGLE

40

so -

VATAG AON TmCK AooF

10 VESiL I•Tm v tlm

420

aar

HOUSTON Or. CHNAITONE BARCANNELERSTEST BRENTANCE

II

010 20 30 40 so 60DISTANCE ALONG TRACK. 1000 FTI

tVESSELS MEETING I PASSING-PILOT S II4SOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A~--4PLOT G OUTBOUN4D PHASE I CONDTIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 22

/ouj~

Iý-s

0

IL0iic

cc x1 I-i~1- i.,."

Plate 23

PORT CLEARANCE%too

goo-400

200

U0O STARBOARD CLEARANCE

goo

too

400

RATE OP TURN30

20-

HO0ONSI CHANE L06 1BAR HANL HN CANE

OUTR SM IENRTRANCE

FFF 1FrTrTr17 Tm II111111111 ill III I 7 CyFFFI-TrlFm-T~n 10 020 30 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 PT

TVESSELS MEETIG I PASSING-PILOT 3 INOUN NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A.--.--PLOT 4 OUTBOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE[ PILOT 3 INBOUND, PILOT 4 OUTBOUND

Plate 24

ENQBE SPEED

so-

go-I

20

40

so

0-

10-

Sao

401

SPEED

Is-

12-

0

0-

HOUSTON S~W CHANNEL HRARCNEL UERBR ENTRANCE

INNERSAMCHANNEL_ A,,NRNUSL" CHOANNEL

I ~ 11111 -] ii I111111ii ii Ili 111111111 I 77-770 10 20 30 40 60 so

DISTANCt ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

SVESSELS inMhG I PASSINGPILOTS3 INSOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A...... PILOT 4 OUTEOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, EBB TIDE


Plate 25

IU 0

IL-j

IIpW

CLiCOj'

Plate 2B

POR•i CLEARANCE

a200-

100 -0

400-

0- --

=OO- 1 STARBOARD CLEARANCE

10 0 0

Goo-

400-

100- ..

0

-400-

40--RATE OF TURN

SlO-

30-

20-

40-

HOUSTON 8HP CHANWEL INNER BAR CHANNEL I OCUTEHBANL I ENTRANNECHAN~l.I CHANNELF 7 Tl l l l7 7 i' l ' i i l -ri i i lT7 7 T7 7 7 - ,7 Fi. 1 1 1 1 1 71• L l l l j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- 1 -l

0 10 20 3o 40 so 60


VESSELS MEETING I PASSINGPILOT 4 WOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

,-.-.-4 PLOT 3 OUTBOUND PHASE II CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 27

ENMSE SPEED

*0

-

W40

2:]

RUDDER ANGLE40

820

&a.S0-

G-

10-

£920 -1E

40 --

SPEED

I-

3-

0-

A'

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL INNZR SAM CHANNEL I CHMANMNEL ENTANCEL

0 10 20 3'0 40 s6 soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

V.ESSELS MEETW~a PAUSING-PILOT 4 INBOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

*--..--PLOT 3 OUTBOUND PHASE 11 0ONDITIONS. EBB TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 28

~~2'

I' cow,

UL ICO0

M~ (0

I. o

= cI!o(I<

§14

Plate 29

PORT CLEARANCE1280

1000

400

goo

t200 -• TARBOARD CLEARANCE

I000

400 --

200

40

300400

20

40

110

jc 0 1 03 4 0

SVE8SELK MEETEJO I PASSING•PILOT a muOUwo NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

• ...-...-o•PLOT S OUTBOUND PHASE II CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

Plate 30

I4

ENGINE SPEED

StOo500

$0-

rz40

20 0L

RUDDER ANGLE40-

30

I1-

lie20

AA

iis

0

HOWN&INE SA CANL OUTrER BARI ENTRANCE

0 10 20 30 40 so so

DITANCE ALONG TRACK, 1o000 FT

SVESSELS MEETING I PASSINPI,,LOT 5 IMOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

• ..-. P,.OT I OUTBOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT G INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

Plate 31

! • " i I !' r ' •j " :I =s

u=i

" II

4' V I'"!

= 0

I' i,= i

ac

2 A,

Plata 32

PORT CLEARANCE

1200

240000000-

I00 --

200 -

800 STARBOARD C.EARANCE

1000

200-

a--

-200-

-400-

40 RATE OF TURN

30-

10-

t0-

20-

30

40

so

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL INRBRCAN OUTE14 EAR ENTRNCESUEREARCHANEL CHANNEL CHANNEL

I17T7 1 1 1 1 1 11~ [1 IT7jli 111 1111111110 10 20 30 40 so so


VESSELS MEETING I PASSINGPILOT S MOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

*-,-,..."PLOT 5 OUTBOUND PHASE II CONDITIONS, EBB TIDEPILOT 6 INBOUND, PILOT 5 OUTBOUND

Plate 33

ENGINE SPEED

400

to

t0

RUDDIER ANGLE

Sao

15

.2 - -,

0 0 1 03 4 0

DITNEALN RCK 00F

40ESL SE~SI ASJ

-PILOT I ISOUD NAVIGA~iOSPARMTRSEETDEC15----LTIOUhUDPAEI ONIINEBTD

1I2 NON PLT5OTON

Plte 9

" 'I0:

<00

U ~izz

CLOI0Im

bd--7

.dI~.

Plte3

PORT CLEARANCE

goo -

400

200 -


1000

goo

S00

400

to:

-200

-400

40RATE OF TURN

30

t0-

l-130H

-400-

cmmi

soII OUER ARl ENTRANCEHOUSTON SWI CHANNEL. INNER BAR CHNE OCUHANNEL CHANNEL

0 0 20 30 40 so s0


VESSELS MEETINGI PASSING- PlLOT 3 INOUN NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

*-*-.PILOT 4 OUTBOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 3 INBOUND, PILOT 4 OUTBOUND

Plato 36

ENGINE SPEED

*0

S40-

20-

S ao-

10-

630-

40--

SPEED

151

12-

0

OUTER BAR ENTRANCE

HOUSTON S1 HANNLP CHANNEL CHNNL CUHANNL CHANNEL

0 10 20 30 40 so 00DISTANCE ALONG~ TRACK, 1000 FT

TVESSELS IWEEING I 488INPILOT 3 I4WOUNlD NAVIGATION PARiAMETERS, TEST REACH A~-&--"--PLOT 4 OUTBOUNID EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plate 37

0/,0 'o0

IL!I;:! I0

~1 ii O)

'Ibco

I \, Icooo"Ii

Plate 3

PORT CLEARANCE1200

1000-

|000

000

400too-

40-i

1200 TARBIOARD CLEARANCE

1000 agoa

U00 --"DO0 --

400

40--200-

-400-

RATE OF TURN30-

10-

S20-

30

40--

so-

EO--EBARCHAN~l OUTER BAR I NTIP1ANCE

HOUSTON SWP CHANNEL CHANNEL B CHANNEL

0 10 20 30 40 so soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

SVESSELS MEETING I PASSIINGPILOT 4 MouND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

. PLOT 3 OUTBOUN EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 39

ENGINE SPEED

100

so-

&40

RUDDER ANGLE40

so

0o-

l 20

40

12

a-

0- ALONGTRACK._1000.FT

I OUTER3AL ENTTAE E

Pla te 50 40 40 00DISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

•'VESSELSa M-ETh I PAUSING•PLOT 4 mo~ NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

• -..-. PLloT I ou'rsoum EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 40

U.

jZ,

I ~02

0 z

II 1m i

oi; I!K 1

hVo

Av3

Plt 41

PORT CLEARANCE

goo

800

400

200

am STARbOARD CLEARANCE

~400

0-

-400

40RATE OF TURN

30

20

lo-

40

so

HOUSTON SOI CHANNEL I IER BAR CHNE C UTEER BAR IENT-RANCE

0 to 20 30 40 s0 soDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

tVESSELS 14EETINO I PASSINGPLOT I WIOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

wq-v-p-"-.PLOT 8 OUTBOUND EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

Plate 42

ENGNE SPEED

s0-

S0 - -- --

so

0--

RUDOIDR ANGLE40-

so

40--

10-

to

40

WI

12--

3-.-

0-

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNIEL INERAR CHA~NNE EAIT~ LR ENTRANCEI CHANNEL

00 go 300 40 so goDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

T VESSEL8 MEETING I PASSING--- PILOT 5 MOUND NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH Aow-....s--PLOT S OUTroUKO EXISTING CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plate 43

I I

I .00

* I a 0I:,' LJz

46 '

IL

It

Plate 44

PORT CLEARANCE

Goo-

400

200-

0 ---

200- STARBOARD CLEARANCE

1000-

F00

600

a40--

10--

-400

407 RATE OF TURN30-

Ito-

90-

40-

O BARCUTER BAR I TRANCEHOVUTOk SW CH4ANNL CHAR NEL CHANNEL CI4ASU

'10 20 sog6 oSDISTANCE ALONO TRACK, O0N 17

tVEBSELN METIuG I ASEROPLOT 3 YOCMS NAVIGATION PARIAMETIERS, TEST REACH A

4-w-wPLOT 4 OUTBOUND PHASE I CONDTIOIS. FLOOD TOEPILOT 3 INBOUND, PI|.CT 4 OUTBOUND

Plate 45

ENGINE 8PEED

so-

RUoou AN=t.

400

so-14

40

0-

t o 3 01' 4 0 s oI l

=ITAMCK ALO010 TRACK, I0M PT

? MET" lUmN I Pms•P"T a mocur NAVIGATMO PARAMETERS, TEST REAC•H A•--.-PLOT 4 OrrltmUN PHRASE I CONDTIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plfte 46

!' • ' ' r , " , , ' I'?•''r '!e i : ," ' "w"-m--

WI-,O

NC 0

CO)

PWSt 47

PORT CLEARANCE

1000

Soo

noo

400-3 I00 • -

0

20 STARBOAR CLEARANCE

an"anOO

40

ar ~ ~ ~ OVEIR BAR WR~HOUTONOWCHANEL IS BA CHWM CSAINEL CN4MU.

0 20 to 40 so 60ITNWE ALON TRACK, N F'T

IVESSLS NNi1 I mohhsaPLOT 4 foam NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH APLOT 3 ounTUOW PHASE I CONDTIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Pluto 48

20-1

0

RITANC ALNSTaCKu WP

0- J, L U

P1LO 4 IN OU D PI O U B UN

Plo- 4

i f

a ~UJI-

00

0 2

I? "

0.8

14,

PIlC 50

PORT CLIARANCE

nuoH

400-

to--

1300- ISTARBOARD CLEARANCE

foo-00a-

*00-

400

40- RATE OF TURN

30--to+-

10- 0 20 Ac 430--

POTgo"w NAIAINPAR MAMIETERSTEST AR ENANCHA

HOUSTON SW CHANV- CHIR • •,AMIL |CHANNEL

a ,0 2,0 30 40 so soDISTANCE AVMO T"RACK.X 1000 IFT

" VESSELS. MEETIG I PAlINGPLO a.' WLW om' NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

•r.-..-*-PLOT I otrfTBmOD PHASE I CONDTIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 0 OUTBOUND

Plate 51

ENO WPEED

go -

'40 -

go

A A..

4,-

'ar

Is-

0-

OUTELR SA ETMANCE

OMMTON 6W OWNh&E OM UAR CHANNEL CHANNEL

0 to to 30 40 so goDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

IVEU. MINT IN P AWSNG-PILOT 5 WOSOWS NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

*-9ý1111LO I OMflOUN PHASE I CONOTIONS. FLOOD TIDEPILOT 5 INBOUND, PILOT 6 OUTBOUND

Plate 52

1%-0j ~~z.

H~I C)29.

II

dW I

Plat 53

PORT CLEARANCE1200

goo -too-

400 -200 -


1000

&00

S400-

200-J

a--

-200

-400

40RATE OF TURN

30

to-10-

20

30

40

so

HOSO MPCANLj=NrL OUTER BAR I ENTRANCEHOUTONSHI ONPOU ~ AR HAN~l. CHANNEL CHANNEL

0 10 20 30 40 60 sDISTANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

VESSELS MEETING PASSING.PILOT 6 BISOU14D NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

..-.-PLOT 5 OUTSoiM PHASE I CONDTIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 6 INBOUND, PILOT 5 OUTBOUND

Plate 54

ENGINE SPEED

100-

so-

&40-

20

0

RUDDER ANGLE

40-

15--

$0-

iiO if,ýAýý, ou.,.i

0400

40

SPEED

-• DSTANE AONG RAG, 100 F

It-

40

0-1

HOUSTON SHIP 'NAVMIE TIER BARAMHANNEL OUTER BAN I ENTRANCEHOUSTO N 8 CHANNEL PHASE EAR CANEL"ION I CHANELI *r*'*~*I'* **r*-r*1 I IIIIIIII 11 1111111 11 1 I I I I II l 1 liii71 T

0 10 20 30 40 so soD16TANCE ALONG TRACK. 1000 FT

VMS"EL mama I PASSPId-PILOT 6 INIBOUND 'NAVIGATION PARAMF:TERS, TEST REACH A.u.-..PLOT 6 UBU PHASE I CONL.TIONS, FLOOD TIDE

PILOT 6 INBGO-lD, PILOT 5 OUTBOUND

Plate 55

~'/ ~ ' I 2c/,Iýaq

A0"

Olei

II

Plate 5

PORT CLEARANCE11200"-

1000-

100

400-

200


1000--

o00

~400 - ..

200 --

0-

-200 -

-400

40- RATE OF TURN

30-

I0-

0-

30-

40-

s0-

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL PINER BAR CHANNEL OCUTEURNBAR EHNTRAC

1 1 1 1 11111 11111111 111i 11i 11 11 7 1 11 1 111 1i 11111110 10 20 30 40 50 60


'•VESSELS MEMOIN I PASSING.- EILOT 3 MEIOuI NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH Ao-...4-.-PLOT 4 OUTBOUND PHASE II CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plate 57

MAN~E SPEED

100-

So-

&40-

20-

RUDDER ANGLE40

30.

520-16*10

In

0- I:-J4"0

0

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL lINER SAR CHANNEL OUTRIEAR ECTANCEL

lii 111111111 ii 11111711 I111111 1111 1 1i i I T7710 10 20 30 40 50 so

D1STANCE ALONG TRACK, 1000 FT

IVESSELS WMETING I PASSING-PLOT 3 INON NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A...u.PLOT 4 OUTBOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS. FLOOD TIDE


Plate 58

S11

i HI

I=0

-I" o.B* .• ' " " - 2 2 : 2 . . ,< .

Plate 59

i"i

I I I I: i

PONT CLEARANCE

w~e

UN STARIOAR0 CLEARANCE

~40-RAEOFTR

30-

S-I

40-

HOUSTON sw O"WE INNE SAOHANNEL TU ER ENTRANCE1111 11 I I I i i i II~ I II ~ H IcmA NN L E C HANNEL 1

0 a 20 so40sooDISTANCE ALONG TRACKC, 1000 Fr

VESSELS Th0G I PASSESK.PLOT 4 INBUN NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

.-... PLOT 3 OUTBOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDEPILOT 4 INBOUND, PILOT 3 OUTBOUND

Plate 60

so-

U RIfRANL

T "i iq -. v

40

5m.

_3-

I0

S---

0 t4

HOUSTON SHI CHANNL lUS SAM • OUTNER SR-E--R-NC

0 10 20 30 40 50 50

DISTANCE ALONG TRACK, *000 FT

VIES mSELs TIN I PIASSINGPILOT 4 mou NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH A

.-.-.-.-. PLOT 3 OMUTUOW PHASE II CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plate 61

II

Io

-. GQ ' -a

Plate 6

POET CLEMARAG

"-1

40

so- 4'C-'go-

to so so) Go4 S1WlTAI4EN ,.N AL "4 ',,MX, IOO FiT

-- LmOT: onow 'NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH APL-..,OT eOUTBlOUND PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plate 63

I~ r iI I I I I I 7 I I •1 , 1 I s "i ! /! ! ! • ; _

S. . , ,!Wi I I

so - • ": - es ,vr-40

4 0 to 30 40sos

0'-

~~.i

00TANCE ALO TRACK, an FT -i va'ms MMz. I mo..

MOT Io m oumm NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH APL....••OT o €•MMM PHASE 11 CONDITIONS, FLOOD TIDE


Plato 64

I LU

CE

4c:

Plat6

R

I

�v. / I III')

I',I

//

//

Plate 66

it iiV|

/ I //

•F/

Plate 67

cow

CL

i/I ii

Plate 68

PORT CLEARANCE

1400 -

1200 -1000 -- •

100-

100-

200. - - ---

STARBOARO CLEARANCE

1400 --

6200-1

4000200 --

*00 -1" -• ' \ ..

RATE OF TURN

ii* aGALVESTON CHANNEL MCSA BAR CHANNEL11111111111111 IlIl121 2 2 25 22 30

0 2 4 * 1 10 12 14 10 20 22 24 29 Z1 30


-- EXISTING CHANNEL

--PHASE IHANNEI NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH 0PHASE u CHANNE. EBB TIDE

Plate 69

ENGINE SPEED

100

RUDDER ANGLE

24

I V 0 1 4 3 1 0 2 4 2 8 3

DATNEAOG AK 00P

- XITNGCANE

P3M!IO4MNi AIAIO AAEESTS EC

PNASSONANEL EBWTID

Plate 0

ic

I Io

Plate 71

Si ~i \d I\ Ii

i -- qmmiPlt

7-- 'II

I \\\I

)

' t I

Plate 72

I ! !

i IiCE

I CL

P i7

Plate 73

PORT CLEARANCE

1400-

60001

400 - N /*

STARBOARD CLEARANCE

1400-

ImE

S. - RATE OP TLIN


EXISTUGG CHANNEL

------ PHASE I CHANNEL NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH B* PHIASE I CHANNEL FLOOD TIDE

Plate 74

ENaOE SPEED

| o40 -

RUDDER ANlE"

24-

U 'I-

0-

16--

, I

GALVESTON CHANNEL INNER BAR CHANNEL

0 2 4 1 0 10 12 14 W 11 20 22 24 26 2 30

DISTANCE ALONG TRACK. W000 PF

- EXISTING CHANNEL

----------- PHASE I CHANNEL NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH BPHASE P CHANNEL FLOOD TIDE

Plate 75

I IU

I / ccI ' 1V I

I I ICDI I LuI''. 0

'V I-I I Cl

'--A Io

+ \ N

4FC

aZ

Plate 7-

ilk• ... ...... .

Plat 7-. - |

I

I wt

II N

*1 /

I I~, "N

P•a

t Plate°77

I Ic

I LU

11 o

Plate i8

uj-

I ~I Ii iiI il

-I "

X0

I \,

t j,/

Plate 79

ii I

PORT CLEARANCE

STARBOARD CLEARANCE

RATE OF TURN

DISTANC.E ALONG TRACK. 1000 FT

a*..

.......... CH NNM NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH C

---- PHASE IA CHANLNALESNELIANE

- PHAUSE I CHAwE. EBB TIDE

Plate 8o

map*M SPEED

too-so- X -----

40

RUDDER ANGLE

.EXWEO4E B AVIATO PARAME ERSTEST REACHEC

PHABE I CHANNEL-- PHASE I CHANNEL E89 TIDE

plate 81

C6

I n

ifi

Pe

Ni

//

II i

SPlat 82•

W 0u

Ow'aCC

0~

sCl

~ 1/

:LU

INIA11\

Plate 83

OwaI I--

U)cc

C/

/O

~70ft

ON ,'

Plate 84

PORT CLEARANCE

'14001200

so600400200-

0-

STARBOARD CLEARANCE

1400-,

too- RATE OP TURN

~0*j 0

HOU STON_ s!Q t. ,.INNR BAR CHANNEL GA V S O H N ECH•ENEL C.,,.mP-L VESSEL TURNING | GAVTNCANE


EXISTING CHANNEL............ PHASE I CHANNEL NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH C------. PHASE N CHANNEL FLOOD TIDE

Plate 85

ENGINI SPEED

go-

RUDDER ANGLE

321-24-]P

a

1SPEED -

"HO -UDTON a INNER BAR CHANNEL GAL MSTON CHANNELMW VESSEL. TURNING GLETNCA~E

d 'I'I1141T I121012212 13101 32 34136s 1640 11421414141


EXISTING CHANNEL NAVIGATION PARAMETERS, TEST REACH C--.------ --- PHASE I CHANNEL

PHASE I CHANNEL FLOOD TIDE

Plate 86

/ /l>. / /.

IC./ /

/ / so/ /

C.1-

Plt 87C

-in

/ /

1ll ei ' ,// a

2j-

I /i

IC a' 0.zz

0~06 a!

plate 88

I - . ._

w

CL a m

z-jo 0

*l m Zrii

.cao0 < OOZa o

iOd O38VwadI93M39U (A W

z .

04 m0

*c 0v F 44 C4mnm"dw IeeO41avgvL

LU~dNI 3NVMV1~ Lii N UONUVFOM LLIPlat 89

0 cc

0 =I

(U o

II

I .1A

Plate 90

Ac

~r~g 0z LCO

crO

Oý.F~0

0~

U

WdU QWdOVOUL

SUAIIA

~ C4

rT7=~- F--s. -.-. - -v a OC

"ic

v.L4

cL. F6

JJIJ NI 30ONVin*1 Im~ mI 30NVw3v

Plate 91

/ // /°

t/ •IoU,

LI, -•

/z

/ " �0(J /

/ 004 c

I /

I j .=iI / V)

I/ id

PI t I

I I I

Plate 92

0

:g -8r.00T"N -I-r--F-.L U- (

(1110532 Mad uuuuuu w

0( =

rFT-F--0

Vidu iw~d OMVOUmv±B

'MONO

0 0 IN a'a co

21l-I itiuui&M0 0Liii NI 3*NVMVBID 133W NI !3NvWv~1o

Plate 93

06P/

(- 0

I ~IDI ~C,

I Mi

Plat II4

su 0

ZU JQT7-T-1

ONOOUi W34 sumia z2CO

t-t

mm000000 00

RiM LMWd auvogmvJig

-usi

LUU

I II -I_ 7S 0#

aUi NI 3*NVVVInO 133d NI 30VVIAV31

Plate 95

0 I/oco 0

/U /

/ /A

/S 0

1'X 0

IL '

I I .CJUN

Plat 96

z K

z I

cc <0 W 0-

IA. z

SJLO0)M Cc

z~~ Z -

z 0 - o

w

z

LUU

L NIINlt 97

W / /Ca/

/C /F- 0 -

/~ /- d6/o

/

0 Co

I Is

Plat 98

~ II- m

CO a F

0 Tu 0 Mocc F-- o '

lu WZ=A

I-

2.LNd QJMOm CLOUVL - zaNooDs tod sawasa ILi

= 0-

IL a) C

UC,

I-K

0.0 0

"Jud LvOd OUVOOMS±sameua

IU

00

FT I~ I *7F7-

,0300U, 33aaz

IM~ NI BONVUVFin I33U MI 3ONVWY310

plate 99

/ / '

Quiz/i / // 0"

LU I- W

1' / I-ga.

I / / Uri

"Z-i CD

I -I

r-06 n-..I

I- I L

0 I

/- -

II

PlatI 1

I I

'7 ii(, (

Plate \1100~~I

I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~

0 C10uc W z0

IC Iro~ z E 0-

00-S

zoa~~~ 0 COL,

ON0039 ~ ~ Wz..j6C U

< ILi

CL

> '

o5

Calzu

occoa*RfF~I a w -0a

UidU~~~

LMdavo~i0~ 0

z

U', 0 I)

L- z

mFT-77l7 7777-77 800 o00000 a0 I

Iashi NI 3ONVWVUnO .lau 3dM OVWV310

Plate 101

- // /0

1' / • 0

-M of--00

I-I

--- , /I--I-// / z

( I~2[

I I

IL C o,

P 1 ! I

I !

I [ I

' 0 iI

I

. . . .I I

' "' Plate 102

UU

w 0 0

n. ~00-0 I-

co-I.-Mo-

IO IW ~ I IIg ' a

ON003S vid 233WO3a

E (3 4

F C 2'U,

li z

M-F7 I j -a00000130 @ 0 00

vidU .JMOd OUVO9UAV±S2DIU03C

w w-e

'U.

0 1i20

0 /

3 00

.LUD 0IE N M F O.3~ N O V V i

P0t 0

4ol/ // 0

/0 0/C /J (ALIu / .

0~=

Ix 0

I ~C'

I Ic

1 / foN

Plat 10

It 0

01 I 00a S

~< z

01~jS.LONNi IUOd euvoUuv.Ls =z

aNOO3 NI 93393 SUUUO

IL co0.

2

IL C

0040 00.

VWW IMOd abUVOBUVIS

-~ 0

z Ct

z -C

cc 0 .0

000

l~IM NI BONVUV310 133J NI 3ONVUV3*13

Plate 105

00/1C 0sco -S'

I W / L

I; I,0 IL

Q /

I,' Ii-~

-A0/

~~CO)

Plate 106

LC)

t:Z

< Otm~ UIWO

Ui 0 ~OU.~c SM o -~o ~w On

Ii C I-QWI-

14OOD a~ sm2 EDW

.00.

E aa

00 Cc

Z 0

z

IFFTF1 -7- ----

Vidil .iOd OUVOUWVI9

/ U.

I-I

9-C aI

aLl -J

0-j-

.0 0 0ri

LIMd NI 3ONVWV910 133:1 M 3ONVNV310

Plate 107

C)

VIP/

I I-

/ / lw

I-! / i.

moo

Pa 10

//

// /

//

S / I m

!//t ---

III I I

/°

Plate 10

I( /

_ i t Jt/ / . . . .

o / • /

" tUlI. L

•.•t'•;. / // I-,

/ //.

/tei00

/c /

/~00C/x=FcwA

/ CO)

/4

plte/0

uj ccwL Z

dc I.. CO

LU z C/3.

w I-

0=0

NO @'0d NY. M 00SIOX mod OUVOSUVIS M0UrM WIHUd 633W0313

~Z Z

~L 00

0..

5u cie1

ulI00000000 L) 0 0 0 0 0

owinw . ~w - wp,cc ~ £VO~±

I~~~dV-- IM4 a-oui

U-

zw~wU

ou 2

0 00

0 z~

In 0 0

macc coo~2- 0.v0. aIVC

J33A MW

Plate 110

/ //uj/

CC/

/ j~ILIS/ -•o,/

// /-.. o.~

/ CL

//

I I //

/ /

S/i

r3'

/ -

r-=

ivi

Plate 111

UU

I Lu

ww 0

z 6f Uc Z

S±ON)i .Lkioda OUhOUIS gc

31MM d MU < oSL 13

110000) 00

z

Z0

o151

I F-7 1-7-7

010 IN ) CI c0

LU

I EVFTTF0000000 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 z 0 02 -Kww

cn cc 3

Pltc1

/w 0

4C M

/~ 0WF / I W

/ / I~-0AI/6 / _/ /

/ £rz0

~wa/ CO)

/x1~'

Plt 1

Iii E

00 c- I

II.

0* 4

o Lu C1WU I-

r", I_ 5 I

0', ommqe=

52

2 z p

i -x -a!~LUU. OLVOUCLLsn~sua

0-. -

LU-

INIZ

Plat 114L_

/ / w

0W

w. /0/0

c o I H W

w cc'

O.0

az~/ cr Z

/ /f <0/L R IrZ/ / _ (n

Plt/1

R

w

Oz0

±M~QMVOUU/3 LL

I.' -uz-"0

"4 4 rd

SIONX I'#UUM0MISfo

U. R=

~W

dc z

zA 4 -

I, z44

0 0=

tot

Plate 11

/ / w

/0 //a 0

I,'I

(d(DI00

00

Plate 117

UU

00

mu u

wC.~W :13o

U.I-

Wu2 d

a 0 a

IIN ImSalvoisEz w

0 C

RdUd

0 10

ICC 0*

r77 771F7rO~i L

Imm

plate 118

/a 0

IL 0

U o~/o o=/pn

/j /

/4 0

oili

plate 119

ww

4' 1- ý-c

cc-F

ILcc 0i SUSMS

ULL *0 C

V q wa C4 a 0-a=

zwq

I- X

0- c

q - - z

-I-

"MAuu mIWdM OM

Plate 12

/ /I-

i / & 0

/ •

U / /,02 d

/ 0

,< 0

/ /

/ // / /

o Io

Plat 121

/ /

,Plate 12

!@

0 0b

IILEICE

.- u coi M-

mlZ 0ISaN IOzwiVSw cwm WN musaai

*I--0 l'

0~ -oI

0 a~ 15,

gamma m

40!0 090 0002000

@0 00 C o

iUad L~

Plate 122

#1

< to

CCU /- /

0

/ -a.

I 0

/ / OUZ

C /// O

!/ /

/ /

Plate 123

C II I/ II I i .

w

-U,

LU

w C,ffl ~ lwLAI UJWt

EFT IMo

SION)i .LV04d alivogumvis 03.LfAM WWd 933U930 a0 z

12-z ZW

~2 0

dc Zzz4 4

UZ

04

co~~~1 C.

4LUaI

I- KI-.

WE 001-A =!I

ZR020000co 00tie 00 a0O N V 00V

Plate 124

/u z

VI 0/U /

Ona

/ (0

/C 2

.14

/ £z

/uII U0

/LX=

C-R

Plate 125

WS U. x

UJ A<I-0

ww

I-w'

z Ir .0is WJ=

lu 0

rn-Fr-n- MUv a 0 Z =0)

S.L#4 .MM ON 6ObW3Q <0

*to~U. x

Ro

v N Ow

eu 0

00

LUU

2 144 U

U ~Sa

00.

Iasi

Plate 12

/ /IL C/'J

I-.0/ / .0

/I /

/ (0

/ý CO</

IL' X

/AP

Plt/2

00

zz

z93 cc 0 WCLOI! 2'

We U COL1-(

0 U

-~ Cd

S.LON)I .LUOd OUV0OSWV.LS 0 C3.LrWM b~d 93!3M3 t-

0

muL im

-a >

Ic 0

0000 000C aaa9009000 0

vidu Luod aUVOgUV.LSE3UW93G

00

I . 0 0

Ia4 021

UtI'

Plate 128

/u /

/C 0

I /CA W.0/ UJ~W

/I =

/ / A20be0/

/ Co

I /i0

Plt 2

LU

IU Kw :=O cc -

m .

ILi -E

.. u C/J.

--

w- zz

IcL

M-CDtx

SUM30

w w

4K. 0

M

cc00 000

000~I0

Wdj JM2 lowVV 9 a .w Slag Ax"o

Plate 13

/c /

LU&W /

0/3

/ ~I-.o

o /!

/z

C.o)

/x 0

% /t

Plt /3

Luý-

uJt

4 ~ tutnEc Z 0

3.P E

wo

S.LON)I UOd QWVO8MVI.3 * oBUNM M~d $33W030 0 z0.

0 0

I z. c~

zu

4I I.-9-i0

00-p- a-i

FT IPlate 132

I / LU

/c 0

LU/z

0/

/ I-I-

-Jz2

/ / 00Z

a- /

/ / 41P

Plt 133Q

wZ

FE1)

I-~L - winCA-IR *a IRV

SIONX~~ IM4 OUOGI

0 L

SU.U

0 !z0

0000000000

40 14

"awalw

LLZI- w

C 4 N

0 0

,. 0

Plate 134

, /

/ <w 0

/ ~WCOw /; <

/ /

0 ad,mILI

/x /

aoo,

/ i I•

I

/

1' /(-I Ii /j

fI / c!

4 :"i/ /

/ ////

I / /S/ /

1 ~/

I I /

Pla

- , Plate 135

2 Ul

<0

it Lcn-,co

L uo

3JJWVILL M- 3UI

a az

'1 0Ono 0

g0 LID

tu z

wI

05000400 0000 0

U.

mu mu

-I -b

0 Z1mu

M-08800 0000

.33Rd L3hi

Plate 136

/ RQ z

(10

/r /,,1<

/ /

// /

I /"

/,/ I!/

I,, g,..0 I

4'O)

P

Plate 137

W

U1 0

CC C6

piK

SIONN~~. 1EdaMOWVL00

000

<C

wc z

00

tuu

IcI'U 0'U0

312

Pae138 mmI

00

4c--I

~I 0. =.

Ii/F

/U

.1Plate'139

UULi.

0L

£4c Ci 0~

CIDn

W d~

aC~ a N 0 v0

SI0t4) .LU~d OUYOUUVJ.S rn

0 -==0

000000 0 ~ 00

"dM Luod OUVOUVW.Le

W 0v i-

C 4o . . cc m

lull Iju

Plate 140

afW ~ILI '

(/ c/ ~C u 1.-o

/ / wIAI-I'

/ / U)/ / cob-

I,0

/

LU

I/IL

/ / / IAt

U 6.I

/IS 4

L6

aa

UON~l LVd [email protected]~o

~z

lwd auvoowlg~

3-MA.

Lou

PING 14

/ / (a/1�

I."', /

I,,0

// /

/ /

/ / we3 // /

/ / // /

/ // /

/1/ I

/ @2/

1,'/ ,1 I Ii

/

/ / /

( // I!/

I-

WIi/I f •0' �rf'1

I;]Plate 143

t 006

w[ug 3 .*qW@c 0M~

I I0I IIW

gas::.mm W~ aMVWV.L

ul

If

ptg~i 5< i~ Iiz

... / ,/ L" U

[,1 , /wUJ

/ /

3, ! // /

:/ /!

./ /

/~ 11

,.- PlteI.-

/a 145

UU

tu

:coI L=IIS2

z

L i-rrNdU Lw~d GOIIWOUV.U

4 E 4

PWaO 146

I I

LU 1

A' /•

/ /

/ /

// //! /

I 0

//I i•

//ON

Plate 147

N)j

1 II [ m l.j i

g0

_ 4

BLWNIWOd cc~fW±u I'f w 1 Id Ia-"l I =

z~m

-- II

P1 a 1 m4,,l .. g dJ , • In

Plato 140

//

/ //

II 'I7!

/ . C

//

'IC/

3 / "t , i

Plate 14

/ .;// //

Li-

=10

0~

wo/ I// /U

/ /1

Plate 15

U.)

<F-

ioawa

ONLBX

au

~-0wzz.

I -- z

W44

000000~L 000

-20

154

F---7- I III

0 Z.... (00

SIM~~~Plt 151 C 0aF4O

L-

IF I-DI-

(u2

Ocio

/Z /

/0 /

/I /w IL

a//

Plate 15

LL

P-

0 QIJL-Ii w-.

CdL

W-

z .- *-Slow 8.1 GW30 0

9NLLSIX3

-505

rli ii r-7-rI I I I

s -. FPlateoo153

U-

0 W

0 I-ho

cioIZ/0

/ /i/ /

II

It / /

A.W1

Plate 15

t-

¶ ioe. B-0

I-gFU 0dc-n 0

vqmD-@o <oil

I~~fl~~ffP Lad 0iiaz s

'a, z

Imm

.LOWOId *ONUM±UIX a

21 ow -

Plate 155

U-

9oU 53"'.5I wr

1 .7

I I-o'.1 MEB.

// �8I//

/ U0

U)

I I,/

� /

/

/

I /

/ / I ii�/ ,// // /

A.4�/ ,/

/

/

// / i!1/

Plate 156

IL

3 z

wu.mxa

uitslowu~ w33w

gou

MUSIX3

I~ 0g

Ind!

Plate 157

/ I =L ;-

4.,t /

III - /w

S /

!/' ,, I-/ # 0

/ II,

II,

I #,# i

/// I/ i/

I /

!/

//

Plate 15

II

1:1ý0 t

III U'

I ~ i4I SI

iiiss tax s*& A1111v OF 4061114&rd

Plate 159

U-

/ zA' / 035

Flb/ I

U 4��7/ / wI�i�S / -

/ / IC1' / 0/ /

/ / ces/

/

/ I

/ if

//

/

I/ / /

I. / /

,/ , I /I/ Ii� /1� / / �/IF/

/

/

I, f /

/ il/I IL�1d / / / - I /

/ /

/ ciiI /

/ /Uv, / / I

/ /4.', / / /

/ //

// __

//

/

/

Plate 160

IL

zob Oi.- 2 U uswONLLMX top

:-DS-rmY2J

£U

o I Un-0I-zn.

N±1CM MW 233MO3a go

.LOVQz

U9IL3EX9

it~~ ~ 1:1ts8

11TT11101

IM~lat 161UWL

, =

// /

iI /• /

3/I/ o•-

7 </ 9, -I , I /11iE

"/, /i/

$'

Plt 162

IL

-w

si ON 0(1

SM z

Blow Mal933woud

MUII

$1~~Plt 163 1Ita

4c U P. -

I , I I , I I ./ • , I, i .. 1

/ U-0

o Ww•~ ILC

I // e.i1z n.

/ / 00-

/ •.ood

__ / /

// /

h 0

Pa 16

w/

II' Plate 164

< ILL

I9OWOd "X CUJzIN CWX ~F- to

V.' j 0-ID

V 2J

VW O.

<KOa

10Cdm it

zOIO d a -

of 4

I- a F

ovd

W ±010Md USOMJ.3tX3

-C 0

010

Plate 165

LiL/°' IL

no

9L "X ---

I,-

/ /

3/ I / I-o--

/ /7i //

// /

•! ox

// / au

/ /

// ia/7 CO

P /

I 1'

//

//

,'' p • /r i "I " i "±

Ir 0

UJ

r-1 r7-T fx BI111two~o 4g~ It i

910 KrMid93O-

E0

-W~ 0 Owl'I

so OOA

0 01433J3

rIPlate 167

S LL

cc w In

0/ 2

//E

/q /

/c

Plt 166O

- U-

~I--

ftbo

g~ -0

zz

0fi~uO~r40<0,

3.10To- ILINKd C) 3~

- z

IOwOd U 5 5;.LsI&LUX

10dou.

210 zN

I TTim limi

PIt 6

A..

3 "LL' Z< ca M

I 1- ww0SI--u I-

/ I//~ 7,

/ -

v 0

out

S.L

/

II / ,/ /I IL I

/ 170

/ /

/ //

/ , /I

//

///

/ ~;/

/ I

//

Plate 17

-~La-

4Io±OVO LU

CA 0

ItO~u FE t5

StdI±IM -A

gfl u ZoK

W MOO~ Wil $3030oa INU

OWIX40 C40

laslat 171V

lbl

I / I-LW•

/. �.-0

a /a

/ 172,O ....

/ -/// ! --

/iII! I / a

//1 11 l =====

I,

/ / . /

I/ /

I // 1'i

/I II,

P lte 172

LL

<u0 .

WEE

.Lovow 0

JoVOtd 3 >

ma IVu avcm I.LU

I ItIas

Plate 173

0

C.)

- LU/

/

/ / C,)

/

//, f/'f//I/ / I-

/ / 0z/ / 0

/ -J'I w

/ U�, / z

/ /� I-// a

�*7' /A'

C //

//

�' /1''I

a�' // /

//

I'/

/

If /

/

�/�/ �

/

/

Cl// IIIPlato 174

///

S // 0•

! / // /

, . .•/ I ./ ,/, '/It/ /),,' /'/ //

/ / /

/ /

Plte17

0u

ad IP

PO~

4m .

Fols

00

do GNIrT77- r-T1 -i l Ii$asu- IR202II

rrkvF aT111

rT7777-1 m --

111111011'e11

Plate 176

4.0,, /Ul ,• 1P / WI- .

/ //

t , 'Yl// /

!Z/ /!//

\ -,/

II (

I. . , n n n nP n 7 n II l n

'M

we-

III0 i0CZ

9100 M~ aIwvovi6L m<. C. zm3.LflMK~ a3 vUS3

@303od cm0

rT77F7_ _ -1 ri

Plte17 .usi ta-

Cl

WI-- to0~

/, / WI-ao

,, / l--w./ /0

/ / 0°/ b

/ / I~zo

/ /

/ / /

/ // r/ rI I/ /

/ / // WI

Z CA.

SI/ / /

Ood

/ /

//

00

2P

/4 0

Plate 179

0

LU I L,-

UOWO.

-acý

1: L

i3f

Iop~ j 0i

And An~dal vui

Plate 180

6"' 0

/~ I-t/ L) I4.d

/ P3/2

Iplate 11

0

SLOSIWO CLW61.OUUILUn WdL 3MS

. i a1W5:

I t zIZ

=VSi

0 ccI-I U W09C.I

fllIH 0 1 -@gLU~d LU>

Plate 15

J~~~U I 0J

/ '7/ /

/ I" / /• .-lj

//

~~~a( ,' // qz!

cc05

IL

co ,,N!w

1 ~ 4 ii

vh

Plate 183

Sm ..C,

O)0

LO

"I UL 0icc

LL

.0

L 2Z

M .1

.dome

SIUX Iw mv~I

0

L*3roi-w

WAWI41:1

I II II IrrFFT FT

Pd~ ~~~ LUd VOU±LullSN

Plate 18

0/ /

/I /

//C 0W/u

/eL/L

/0

I-I0

CORTIE

/C

0//

Plate 185

"oWI

J.OVOm Mds ms

W-c

z

I IXIUIX dosl ]0

.LW ~do 61OUV.

r7-777-1 77rum I04 awoswi

do 00

iiwmie 1111iiao

Plate 186

W/

Iv'

-LL P.A.0

0/ '/'C

di /

// 6 0 /

', ,",t ,/ Wc

/ .-0

II:

Zan

=

_ _cc

Plate 187

W Dcc)

do. Imi] =

UJOWN~~ uuel~w0

IWI.NX

no Iwd omv0UUVLs

mIt

1R111 aN

Plate 1 88_

t. -

44.

/4 -

0O)

Plte18

W g

IJ~fl~ M~d UMDDO

z

1WO101

Lwd Gvov-t

rT77 '-1 -1 -r-r r--i

111H IDISVd OWO0 J

JAN

Plate 19

S=

-J (a)

IN w

I-I / / 0I- - /

ICC

- / / I-/ CI i��" / z

/ , 0/ /

I' ,' IC/ / w/ U

/ / 2/ /

/ / I-/ / cc

,./ ',#''' a/ /

/ /

#1/ �/

/

AtI /

S.,,,it, �/

/

/ /

/ /

/ 4,'/

�/ //a, //

/

/// I!I/

//

Plate 191

, .0

ZI-

et/ /

/

/ v /

c 0

I / /~

/ /91

/ ii

4$rII ii

Im

/ /

II

Plt i

/Plate 192II u 4l*

*DoVi~d 14-oog02o

J.WoVd I USvwd Aid &JN ?-JUj

12~ 0 :

______ O) LL.c~

id-cog~u co =! I

NJ138lNIK Uud 0f~N a.-

J-4-09 .4 N ON VUIN r- I 1***39V4d.L-Oag ~ z

SI.LOFOi Imo owSYmvi dOm

I0O~ I 29~ A

*w z

-air_1UUVH-O !O#EVULN& -

.LUOc ONVOUUV.L3

1UNWNO EON VULNI9 DimVd J.Zi-oo 0

J.OWO~d I USVNd dIo ON3

I 3S~l 1I 1IIIL i-00 VH.40 00 L

Plate 193

0

i i I I L d I , , IL I, ,

I-oo

gjw=Z• IL

/ /

,/

0

/ /

E -

•cc

del

Plt 1/

/// /

¢"/ /

///'# / P

/ /

II LI I /II I I

Plate 194

<a13NMVHO 3NONVUJ.MNI USV~d.Li-CoI .

103PO~d I 32VHd AO ON~

"uW 0-IL~v~uwvJ.

___ VII" -009 zO aOYJN3 I--

00

lINNYHO NONVM.LNxN=

.O I OWiUvHddo OL+0 I- I

-01

L~~aPO~lat I W5.0 N

fie-M I

I-t

I ,W In/0

a

COD

/ !/,I iA. #a.

!ZI CI , N

/ /

/

Plate 196

13NNVHD SDNVUJNI3< 39V~d Li-+000 C

103OOW I 3SVHd do M4 -JU

w1 0Co i-*W ILWa.

-~. Z~ wdiINVM UONVJHd * g. 0.

919Y~ too W'0-'a0

luWNIOd amvoWvv.Lv O

4'(0T NVO 3ONV I- 0 Z-i

10 w IZvd40O

UNNVHO 3*NVMJJ4N3-

77TJ.+0 V 40 ONl

Onrrt1 1 Ow

LU~I OMVOUMVLI10uuuoia ~ ddoO

dc

iw 1

1-INVHO BONVU±H3 00I

Plate 197

Z

WIon

4t, / c cc

" / 0

It / /

/7/"7,/ •/ /

/

Plat 19

0 /d/ A

/ / 0

/ A// cc

/~C / 1/ cc

/ / ii*

Ilag

/lat 198/ ~

1UNNVHO HO#IVWIN30 38Y~d .14009 0

I±OIOW I ASVN41 dIO ONE L

> *0Z c W0.

1INNVHO DONVUJ4E -ý. Z LIIS9VH41 .Eff

1.+4001 JO WI *N -

vjg..4vac .. a ;&E.LflM I Ud U3UvovvI 0 0..

z w*

1UV4HO EONVk.U3 9L

LUOdI USVNd.do ONE -

BI

13NNVHD !ONVW.N3

.14+009 do MNEF1TfI r-rT-r=

PRdw IMU4i auvosUvj.U633ID30E

13*VHO 3NONWIN91~r~ I hIvwd do +0E -

10 Nw fl9vmd &to4GO03

ISNNYH-O UONVWAMI

"-14-009 dO ONE

Plate 199

=10

fjOCL z

go)

/I K

CO)

Ip41lt 200

"1D4VHO 3O V.N3 %16

1*LOhI0 I 38VHd AO ONE -L W Z

Si i_ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~.1c

IUmIvNd w41+-0 do z4

VION~~U' Imo-*womvv

LO~~tO~~d go hNt d

3DdH ONVMJ.N3 x =L*rCd I hVHd AC E

'l3NMYHO SONVWN

Rdw~ U3Vod .Ld-OOS.L

JOtdIUSVHdO ONUN3 r

I IV~ SEW ' +000

103jS~@ II6~ J N

Plat 201

"IIRE!

/ 0Iii/

/ / �u3/

/ / �st/ /

/ - Co/ /

/ // ci)// /

// /

/ /

/ /I I //

S /itI r/ w

I //

//

/ /,1 ii/ / a

Ii 1./

/ /

/ / I!,/ ,

/ /

45/ ,/A., /o /

4W /

/ /

/,�,/ / // ,/" i�I/

//

Plate 202

r X

*33I~d3to g U mI-

LI-

130IVHO VONVUINU o - ~0IL-O do 0143 -

0 0VIONX* DSVod .Li-OOU o

ILA

UNNVMO 31h1VWNIDVd

a~ill

.OOdI ulYkd 3-400U NOY i as .L46ai-

3t

o-

00

13"HPlat 2OV303

- 0&- "#

/

/ /8///

/ //

/ //

/ /I

// /S/" /..

S/ /

/ /I / / /

( / • /"/

/ I"/ /"

N /I, , ,' ii,,,,

.LoirodmI Nvwi J10 amm - I u

:u torrnKc 0kUOýU- OMVOUV0

U.IIUS Ud 33

ee

"*UWd1-001 J1 GN

poom-04mi i iwoBum mum;A

IIUV~c 00

flinr~~ 1400 aO0C=. I im

iolrovPlat 205~ d

0

4cc

WI-rnL

OVOp0

/ <=0C/ x/

/ FE/ /o

P1/ 206

I BSVNd 1:1-0093

03OdI 39VHd adO OHU -T L

co o.m j a-oLL

ThVH 10V±M - a 1'

3.LflNWI< Mid SUMD C...

IUNNVHO 3ON VMLN3 0 11 hUV ~ dj .1-0 U

0

MM14*IH 3ONVWJUI U

0 t

I BSVHd 5

0000009 .0 000

F7 I I - i i i -40 v a

Md 1o .LOOVOI ISVS J N

13NNVHD SONVUM3 00.Ilvdiamvw 0LOOdI-C9VH JO ON3

00

0008000w 0080

-ru r7-1 I

Plate 207

id

I-

- w/ /

/ /.

//,/

/ 1// .;[ ----

I /

/ /*// / /

/ / /

,/• "

/

/

Plate 208

wz

IntI

U..

o K

00 .

'r- C )

//

_c

• ~///

Plate 209

AL

4c0

ULU

is u

4T F Df a -0C40N E.UiN Ld OUYOGUVISL mz

UJ.WIW mad 9h3mma <

<0

zNu F

c,

0 a co * 0 a a"q 0) "OW - 4 0)

Inman

IL.

004. 0

mEd

0 0)

030.:. Iog~

Plate 210

si-c

wz

Wi-0w•

iU0WoC

z 0W0~

.0

AS. ino

/

,I /

cC

II4b!

Plate 211

S: • - __--B

S16

S0I I- W to~

BLOWN~~L 0U1 Mi IMU

*00*wz_

Row~~C wa a m

UU

it0 0 0o 0

fldM~ ~ LUd MOW

IUC-

0

UU

009I- -COR

am coc cc oaoMoI

Plate 212

,0

0./ •-

La.

/0

0i

cc Lug -

II

4#'*1

////

//

Plate 213

CdCOD

LL

-j CNo

wwz~

Eu LU 0

rirm mad i gam 0 a

Zio

! ~ U=!

EO

IMod OUVOUMYLS

0 IC

jIM LIUi

Plate 214

ILo

E--izr

/ /

//

/ / //

/ / /

//

//

Plate 215

-ý

U,

J.U~~91 au.i0 ~Z

0L0

- ~ Q z

0 U

aO bO a 0 go oSo ~ ~ a w a % C4 4" V

Rdw imOCUVOSUUYS

CC

cc 0 0

00 a 0io- C isa

Plt 216

Form A4proved

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188

coilem no t ino a to.suif ig~ ugq .,tlo.n formdcl mtisburen " ....................... r...... O~e tCEteCEl& r m in f l eailt• Mid -eet 5215• Jeflertor

DevI~ihwS. tlle520 .*iig@i 222a243*. aOW to thle Offke of Managmen &M ludget. Paperner Radudlon FrdICM Ip4uahlgonOc 20503

l. AGENCY USE ONLY (LeaW bNink) 12. REPORT DATE 13. REPORT TYPE ANb DATES COVERED

Se}ptember 1994 Report 3 of a seriesTI. TILE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDuIiG'NUMBERS

Ship Navigation Similation Study, Houston-Galveston NavigationChannels, Texas; Report 3, Galveston Ship Channel andHouston-Galveston Entrance Channels

6. AUTHOR($)

Dennis W. Webb

7. PERFORMING ORGANU.ATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station3909 Halls F.rry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Technical Report HL-94-3

9. SPONSORING/ MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/ MONITORINGAGENCY REPORT NUMBER

U.S. Army Engineer District, GalvestonP.O. Box 1229, Galveston, TX 77553

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royel Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

124. DISTRIBUTION iAVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

The Houston/Galveston Navigation Channels are located along the Gulf of Mexico Coast in eastern Texas.

These channels include the Entrance Channels, the Bar Channels (Bolivar Roads Area), Galveston Ship Chan-

nel, Texas City Channel, the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW), and the Houston Ship Channel (HSC),

which branches off the Bolivar Roads Channel, traverses Galveston Bay, and ends in Houston.

The existing Entrance Channels are 42 ft deep and 800 ft wide. Phase I and Phase II of a proposed im-

provement project will deepen them to 47 ft and 52 ft, respectively. The Phase I and II Entrance Channels

will be extended into the Gulf of Mexico to naturally deep water. The Galveston Ship Channel is presently

40 ft deep and 1,100 ft wide. Phases I and II of the proposed improvements will deepen the channel to 45 and

50 ft, respectively, while decreasing the width to 450 and 550 ft, respectively.

The U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station conducted a navigation study to evaluate the ef-

fects of the proposed improvements on navigation. This study was conducted at WES using a "real-time" ship

simulator.

U1. SUBJECr TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

Deep-draft navigation Ship simulation 270Galveston Ship Channel Ship/ship interaction 16. PRICE CODE

Houston Ship Channel17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 1B. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19, SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTPACT

NSN 7540-01-21045500 Standard Form 29B (Rev 2-89)Prwfcribed by ANSI Std 139-IS210-102

Documents

Ship Navigation Simulation Study, Houston-Galveston ...Technical Report HL-94-3 September 1 %94 US Army Corps DA 8 70 of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station Ship Navigation Simulation