Numerical Simulation of
River Ice Control with Booms
LIANU LIU AND HUNG TAO SHEN
INTRODUCTION
initiated, this cover presents a barrier to frazil and ice
The middle Mississippi River, from its confluence
floes arriving from upstream. Ice will either accumulate
with the Missouri River to where it joins the Ohio River
at the leading edge of the cover or, if the water velocity
at Cairo, Illinois (Fig. 1), is a vital navigation route.
is sufficiently high, it will be carried under the leading
During the winter months, however, floating ice can
edge to be deposited under the ice cover. If the water
accumulate and block shipping from that section of the
velocity is too high, ice will be swept downstream and
river. Ice sources are the Missouri River and the middle
the ice cover will not progress. Tuthill and Mamone
Mississippi itself. In addition to suspending navigation,
(1998) showed that installing an ice retention structure
financial consequences include ice damage to river
in the lower Missouri River to reduce the quantity of
training structures when the ice releases. Severe ice
ice reaching the middle Mississippi would also have
conditions occur roughly one winter in seven, with
the benefit of reducing the ice jam problems in that
1989, 1979, 1977, 1970, 1962, 1958, 1951, and 1936
stretch of the river and at the MissouriMississippi
standing out in the recent historical record. The worst
confluence. Ice control schemes, consisting of floating
of these cases occurred in January 1977, when an ice
booms, pier structures, and artificial islands, have been
jam delayed barges at Cairo for 27 days at an estimated
used successfully on the St. Lawrence River (Tuthill
cost of million. The 1977 event also caused
||content||
.5
1995). For the lower Missouri River, the average slope
is on the order of 1.7 104. The average water velocity
million in damage to river regulating structures below
Commence, Missouri, when the ice jam released. Even
is high, with a range of 0.75 to 1.8 m/s. Using a one-
during winters without major ice events, delays to
dimensional, steady-state model of ice cover
navigation and operational difficulties resulting from
progression, Tuthill and Mamone (1998) found that, at
ice are common problems. Tuthill and Mamone (1998)
low Missouri River flows, the water velocity approaches
provide a detailed description of the middle Mississippi
0.7 m/s between RM 15 and 20, and that floating booms
ice problems and control alternatives.
might be successful, so a detailed study of the boom
The Missouri River, which is officially closed in
locations was needed. This report details a two-
winter for navigation, and is uncontrolled for 1250 km
dimensional dynamic simulation model of river ice that
upstream from its confluence with the Mississippi River,
was developed to assess the feasibility of ice control
generates large amounts of ice. Records from the
on the lower Missouri River using booms.
Missouri River Division (MRD) of the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers report that ice jams have formed at RM*
MODEL DEVELOPMENT
6. The Lewis Bridge at RM 8 may aid the initial ice
arching (Fig. 2). The backwater from the Mississippi
Theories on ice jams that are based on the static
confluence may also contribute to jamming in this reach
equilibrium of floating accumulations of granular ice
by reducing water surface slope and velocity. Once
are well developed (Pariset and Hausser 1961, Uzuner
and Kennedy 1976, Beltaos 1983). Static ice jam
theories, which neglected the dynamic effect of the ice
*River mile.
Previous Page
