Evaluate the following physical forces along the Hudsons shores:

GROUP A
Currents
Waves
GROUP B
Ice
Wakes
Numerical Modeling
Empirical Data
Depth, m
Hudson region of the 7-state-wide,
Stevens NYHOPS OFS.
A great forecast model
used by the NWS,
USCG SAR, NOAA HAZMAT,
Hudson River Pilots, among others.
The NYHOPS OFS grid includes the
whole tidal Hudson up to Troy.
But the computational grid is
somewhat coarse.
2,444 boxes used to describe the
Hudson from Battery to Troy.
www.stevens.edu/NYHOPS
The Battery
Poughkeepsie
Poughkeepsie
Troy
Depth, m
Based on the NYHOPS hydrodynamic
model, we built an ultra-high
resolution grid.
And then coupled the forces that
move the water to it, in a more
accurate and distributed manner.
E.g. Better shoreline definition,
tributary networks, etc.
2,444 boxes in NYHOPS OFS ->
77,452 boxes up to NYSDEC coastline
-> 114,464 boxes up to +10m NAVD88
contour.
Almost two orders of magnitude
increase in generated information.
The Battery
Poughkeepsie
Poughkeepsie
Troy
Anticipated products from the numerical model
Basic (mean and standard deviation)
and probability statistics (percentiles) for:
Water Level
Depth-averaged Current Components (u, v)
Depth-averaged Speed
Significant Wave Height
Peak Wave Period
Vertical Water Level Datum
Based on a 365 day simulation on the ultra res grid.
Time series extracted at each cell on or near the NYSDEC shoreline.
Geo-referenced information (GIS layers).
W
i
n
d

s
p
e
e
d

m
/
s
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t

W
a
v
e

h
e
i
g
h
t
m
The Battery
GWB
West Point
Poughkeepsie
Albany
W
i
n
d

s
p
e
e
d

m
/
s
W
a
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
m
The Battery
GWB
West Point
Poughkeepsie
Albany
RMS=0.3(0.2%)
RMS=4.3 (3.4%)
RMS=3.6 (3.8%)
RMS=4.4 (4.7%)
RMS=7.0 (5.0%)
The Battery
GWB
West Point
Poughkeepsie
Albany
Hastings
Pier 40
RMS=0.3 (0.4%)
RMS=2.0 (3.4%)
RMS=3.4 (6.3%)
RMS=3.3 (6.6%)
RMS=2.7 (4.0%)
RMS=2.2 (3.9%)
RMS=1.7 (2.5%)
W
i
n
d

s
p
e
e
d

m
/
s
A
l
o
n
g
s
h
o
r
e

C
u
r
r
e
n
t
m
/
s
West Point
Poughkeepsie
Albany
M
o
h
a
w
k

a
t

C
o
h
o
e
s
m
3
/
s
The river that flows both ways
though not always
Ultra high resolution model

Computationally expensive
Had to scale floodplain back to the NYSDEC shoreline

Presently on its 5
th
month in 2D mode, and counting.
3D takes much longer (a day for a day).
But seems to be creating somewhat better results.
Hudson River Ice Climatology
A GIS layer of ice probabilities along the Hudson River
Will serve as example for other products:
* Wake Study
* Modeling study (waves, currents, water levels)
So lets review in detail
Photo credits: U.S.C.G.
GWB
Troy
West Pt
Norrie Pt
Catskill
Ice Season: December to March each year
U.S.C.G. files daily ice reports
Available to us since 2005.
GWB
Troy
West Pt
Norrie Pt
Catskill
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Ice regions. 2. Ice occurrence (% of ice season). 3. Prevalent ice type. 4. Median ice covered area, % of region (*).
5. Median ice thickness, inches (*). 6. 95
th
percentile ice thickness, inches (*). (*) When ice present.
POC: Nickitas Georgas (ngeorgas@stevens.edu)
Journal of Physical Oceanography 2011
Decrease in tidal range
.

Increase in range

Increase in mean water level setup

Decrease in tidal current range
.
Only ebb at Albany!
.
Flood
Ebb

Increase in tidal
current range
Complete floodplain grid to +10m NAVD88 Ice climatology