Gireli, Tiago Zenker; Souza, Camila Maria Mateus Alves de; Nobre, Larissa Bertholdo; Garcia, Patrícia Dalsoglio

doi:10.1590/2318-0331.011716092

Tiago Zenker Gireli

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Camila Maria Mateus Alves de Souza

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Larissa Bertholdo Nobre

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Patrícia Dalsoglio Garcia

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil

E-mails: zenker@fec.unicamp.br (TZG), camila.mmas@gmail.com (CMMAS), lbertholdo@gmail.com (LBN), dgpatricia@gmail.com (PDG)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Location of Port of Santos.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Existing proposals of jetties for Port of Santos marine Sandbar transposition.

Thumbnail

Figure 3
Physical model of the Bay and Estuary of Santos and São Vicente with Gireli et al. (2010)GIRELI, T. Z.; RINKE, L. G.; ZANETTI, S. H. Estudo em modelo reduzido de molhes guia-corrente para o Porto de Santos – São Paulo – Brasil, 09/2012. In: CONGRESO LATINOAMERICANO DE HIDRÁULICA, 24., 2010, Punta Del Leste, Uruguai. ... AnaisPunta Del Leste: IAHR, 2010. v. 1, p. 1-10. proposed jetties. Source: Gireli et al. (2010)GIRELI, T. Z.; RINKE, L. G.; ZANETTI, S. H. Estudo em modelo reduzido de molhes guia-corrente para o Porto de Santos – São Paulo – Brasil, 09/2012. In: CONGRESO LATINOAMERICANO DE HIDRÁULICA, 24., 2010, Punta Del Leste, Uruguai. ... AnaisPunta Del Leste: IAHR, 2010. v. 1, p. 1-10..

Thumbnail

Figure 4
Bathymetric survey created to hydrodynamic modeling for Scenario 1.

Thumbnail

Figure 5
Bathymetric survey created to hydrodynamic modeling for Scenario 2.

Thumbnail

Figure 6
Bathymetric survey created to hydrodynamic modeling for Scenario 3.

Thumbnail

Figure 7
Tide Gauge positions. Green line (from Ilha das Palmas to Cosipa), Orange line (from Torre Grande to Base Aérea), purple line (from Ilha das Palmas to Casqueiro). Source: adapted from Sondotécnica (1977b)SONDOTÉCNICA. Comportamento hidráulico e sedimentológico do Estuário Santista. Brasília: Empresas de Portos do Brasil S.A. – Portobrás; Instituto de Pesquisas Hidroviárias – INPH, 1977b. Relatório Final – Desenhos..

Thumbnail

Figure 8
Position of the jetties and the observation points.

Thumbnail

Figure 9
Comparison of surface velocities for the scenarios to Point 1.

Thumbnail

Figure 10
Comparison of surface velocities for the scenarios to Point 2.

Thumbnail

Figure 11
Comparison of surface velocities for the scenarios to Point 3.

Thumbnail

Figure 12
Comparison of surface velocities for the scenarios to Point 4.

Thumbnail

Figure 13
Comparison of trajectory of drifters to the measurement points for Scenario 1.

Thumbnail

Figure 14
Comparison of trajectory of drifters to the measurement points for Scenario 2.

Thumbnail

Figure 15
Comparison of trajectory of drifters to the measurement points for Scenario 3.

Thumbnail

Figure 16
Discharge comparison between the three scenarios for SE-1.

Thumbnail

Figure 17
Discharge comparison between the three scenarios for SE-2.

Thumbnail

Figure 18
Maximum velocity difference map for flood tide condition comparing Scenario 2 with Scenario 1 (reference).

Thumbnail

Figure 19
Maximum velocity difference map for ebb tide condition comparing Scenario 2 with Scenario 1 (reference).

Thumbnail

Figure 21
Maximum velocity difference map for ebb tide condition comparing Scenario 3 with Scenario 1 (reference).

Thumbnail

Figure 20
Maximum velocity difference map for flood tide condition comparing Scenario 3 with Scenario 1 (reference).

Thumbnail

Table 1
Model calibration results.

Thumbnail

Table 2
Comparison of surface velocities for the four measurement points before and after the inclusion of the jetties in the physical model.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Fastest velocities comparison: Scenarios 1 and 2.

Thumbnail

Table 4
Fastest velocities comparison: Scenarios 1 and 3.

Thumbnail

Table 5
Physical and numerical modeling comparison.

Thumbnail

Table 6
Maximum discharge comparison for SE-1.

Thumbnail

Table 7
Maximum discharge comparison for SE-2.

Thumbnail

(1)

Thumbnail

(2)

Thumbnail

(3)

Tide gauge interval	Real data	Model data
Tide gauge interval	d (min)	M (m^1/3/s)	d (min)
Ilha das Palmas - Clube de Pesca	10	35	10
Clube de Pesca - Torre Grande	10	75	15
Torre Grande - Ilha de Barnabé	12	20	9
Ilha de Barnabé – Cosipa	18	25	21
Torre Grande - Base Aérea	10	40	12
Ilha das Palmas – Tumiarú	15	25	13
Tumiarú - Casqueiro	35	20	31

Method: micro-rotor / confetti		No Jetties	Jetties	Results
Point	Tide condition	Velocity (m/s)	Velocity (m/s)	speed increase (%)
1	1/2 F	0.78	1.03	32
1	1/2 E	0.97	0.93	-4
2	1/2 F	0.4	0.9	125
2	1/2 E	0.39	0.72	85
3	1/2 F	0.11	0.72	555
3	1/2 E	0.19	0.83	337
4	1/2 F	0.13	0.61	369
4	1/2 E	0.15	0.79	427

Point	Tide condition	Scenario 1	Scenario 2	Results
Point	Tide condition	Velocity (m/s)	Velocity (m/s)	Speed increase (%)
1	½ Flood	0.60	0.58	-3.3
1	½ Ebb	0.66	0.59	-10.6
2	½ Flood	0.37	0.74	100
2	½ Ebb	0.38	0.73	92
3	½ Flood	0.18	0.75	317
3	½ Ebb	0.20	0.74	270
4	½ Flood	0.15	0.84	460
4	½ Ebb	0.15	0.82	447

Point	Tide condition	Scenario 1	Scenario 3	Results
Point	Tide condition	Velocity (m/s)	Velocity (m/s)	Speed increase (%)
1	½ Flood	0.60	0.58	-3.3
1	½ Ebb	0.66	0.60	-9.1
2	½ Flood	0.37	0.63	70
2	½ Ebb	0.38	0.63	66
3	½ Flood	0.18	0.62	244
3	½ Ebb	0.20	0.62	210
4	½ Flood	0.15	0.70	367
4	½ Ebb	0.15	0.67	347

Point	Tide condition	Scenario 1			Scenario 2
		Velocity (m/s)		diff. (%)	Velocity (m/s)		diff. (%)
		P. M.	N. M.	diff. (%)	P. M.	N. M.	diff. (%)
1	½ Flood	0.78	0.6	-23%	1.03	0.58	-44%
1	½ Ebb	0.97	0.66	-32%	0.93	0.59	-37%
2	½ Flood	0.4	0.37	-8%	0.9	0.74	-18%
2	½ Ebb	0.39	0.38	-3%	0.72	0.73	1%
3	½ Flood	0.11	0.18	64%	0.72	0.75	4%
3	½ Ebb	0.19	0.2	5%	0.83	0.74	-11%
4	½ Flood	0.13	0.15	15%	0.61	0.84	38%
4	½ Ebb	0.15	0.15	0%	0.79	0.82	4%

SE-1	Maximum Discharge Flood (m³/s)	Diff. (%)	Maximum Discharge Ebb (m³/s)	Diff. (%)
Scenario 1	4,451.8	ref.	4,225.4	ref.
Scenario 2	4,196.4	-5,7%	4,051.7	-4.1%
Scenario 3	4,274.1	-4,0%	4,156.4	-1.6%

SE-2	Maximum Discharge Flood (m³/s)	Diff. (%)	Maximum Discharge Ebb (m³/s)	Diff. (%)
Scenario 1	3,994.2	ref.	3,713.5	ref.
Scenario 2	3,811.1	-4.6%	3,588.8	-3.4%
Scenario 3	3,884.1	-2.8%	3,681.9	-0.9%

\begin{array}{l} \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial}{\partial x} (\frac{p^{2}}{h}) + \frac{\partial}{\partial y} (\frac{p q}{h}) + g h \frac{\partial ζ}{\partial x} + \frac{g p \sqrt{p^{2} + q^{2}}}{C^{2} . h^{2}} - \\ \frac{1}{ρ_{w}} [\frac{\partial}{\partial x} (h τ_{x x}) + \frac{\partial}{\partial y} (h τ_{x y})] - Ω p - f V V_{x} + \frac{h}{ρ_{w}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x} (p_{a}) = 0 \end{array}

\frac{\partial q}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial}{\partial y} (\frac{q^{2}}{h}) + \frac{\partial}{\partial x} (\frac{p q}{h}) + g h \frac{\partial ζ}{\partial y} + \frac{g p \sqrt{p^{2} + q^{2}}}{C^{2} . h^{2}} - \frac{1}{ρ_{w}} [\begin{array}{l} \frac{\partial}{\partial y} (h τ_{y y}) + \\ \frac{\partial}{\partial x} (h τ_{x y}) \end{array}] + Ω p

[1] E-mails: zenker@fec.unicamp.br (TZG), camila.mmas@gmail.com (CMMAS), lbertholdo@gmail.com (LBN), dgpatricia@gmail.com (PDG)

Brasil

Brasil

A eficiência de molhes guia – corrente curvos na Baía de Santos – SP: modelação numérica

RESUMO