ASCE Seattle Cozumel

7/31/2019 ASCE Seattle Cozumel

1/68

Cozumels International Cruise TerminalCozumels International Cruise Terminal

Hurricane Wilma Recovery and ReconstructionHurricane Wilma Recovery and Reconstruction

John Bardi, P.E.John Bardi, P.E.

andand

Bruce Ostbo, PE, SEBruce Ostbo, PE, SE

BERGER/ABAM EngineersBERGER/ABAM Engineers


2/68

Most intense Atlantic storm on

record, wind speeds >175

mph, 882 millibars pressure

At time of landfall, wind speed

approximately 140 mph

(Category 4)


3/68

Project Site with Hurricane Wilma 2005 Track


4/68

28 October - Mrida to Playa del Carmen by Car


5/68

After Wilma


6/68

After Wilma


7/68

After Wilma


8/68

After Wilma


9/68

After Wilma


10/68

23 October 2005 End of Storm


11/68

Aerial Damage Survey


12/68

Approach Before Wilma


13/68

Approach After Wilma


14/68

Approach Before Wilma


15/68



16/68



17/68



18/68

Deck Damage


19/68

Deck Damage


20/68

Pile Support - Before Wilma


21/68

Pile Support - After Wilma


22/68

Pile Support - After Wilma


23/68

Domino Effect from Loss of Diaphragm


24/68



25/68



26/68


27/68

Micropiles and Grout in Newer Section


28/68

Dovela Damage


29/68

Dovela Damage


30/68

Scour


31/68

Mooring / Breasting Dolphin Before Wilma


32/68

Mooring / Breasting Dolphin Before Wilma


33/68

Mooring / Breasting Dolphin After Wilma


34/68



35/68



36/68



37/68

Tender Pier Destroyed


38/68

Polluted Water


39/68

Free Medicinal Supplies


40/68

Multi-talented Team


41/68

Summary of Damage

Sh t T R i


42/68

Short-Term Repairs

First priority: Approach pier repairs to restore

tendering service

Second priority: Cruise pier repairs to allow limited

berthing of smaller vessels

Provisional berthing required careful analysis ofmooring loads and pier capacity

Passenger safety and perception required

temporary deck reconstruction

Sh T R i


43/68

Short-Term Repairs

T i l Sh t T R i


44/68

Typical Short-Term Repairs

C l Pil B k


45/68

Cozumel Pile Buck

R i t Li it d S i


46/68

Reopening to Limited Service

The facility was reopened forberthing along the outer face

within approximately 5 months

L T O ti


47/68

Long-Term Operation

Reconstructed mooring dolphin to restore

original service

Second mooring dolphin to allow for larger

vessels

Final mooring loads, including larger vessels New uplift load criteria

Enhanced deck strength to resist wave loads

and provide diaphragm action

L T R i P d O ti


48/68

Long-Term Repair: Proposed Option

L T R i S l t d O ti


49/68

Long-Term Repair: Selected Option


50/68


51/68

Construction Phasing Cruise Pier


52/68

Construction Phasing Cruise Pier

Construction Phasing Approach Pier


53/68

Construction Phasing Approach Pier

Wave Analysis and Uplift Force Design Criteria


54/68

Deepwater wave design criteria

Data compilation, statistical analysis

Project site (shallow water) wave design criteria

Numerical modeling

Model validation Design scenarios

Uplift forces

Numerical modeling

Engineering (empirical) analysis

Recommendations

y p g

Methodology and Approach

Offshore Extreme Wave Climate Analysis


55/68

Offshore Extreme Wave Climate Analysis

Hurricane Wilma

Hurricane Gilbert

Deepwater Wave Parameters


56/68

Hurricane Wilma, Offshore: Hs = 11.0 m, Tp = 12.9 s,

Dir = 120 deg True North, Wind speed = 31 m/s

Hurricane Gilbert, Offshore: Hs= 13.2 m, Tp=13.4 s,

Dir = 45 degrees True North

Deepwater Wave Parameters

Location of Nearshore Gauge


57/68

Location of Nearshore Gauge

Hurricane Wilma Measured Wave Heights


58/68

0

0

0

0

0

00

00

/0000 /0000 /0000 /0000 /0000 /0000 /0000 /0000

Date & Time (UTC)

SignificantW

aveHeight(m)

Offshore

Nearshore

Offshore vs Nearshore GagesNearshore Gauge

Wave Transformation Large Modeling Domain


59/68

Verification with Field Data

Domain #1

Measured: Hs = 11.0 m

Measured Direction =120

Modeled: Hs = 11.1 m

Modeled Direction =119

Wave Transformation Modeling Domain


60/68

Hurricane Wilma Hurricane Gilbert

Hurricane Wilma and Gilbert

Hs= 3.5 m

T= 7.4 s.

Hs= 0.9 m

T= 13.4 s.

Pier Plan View


61/68

Deck portion used for wave loading calculation

Pier Plan View

Uplift Wave Force Methodology


62/68

Uplift Wave Force Methodology

Empirical

Kaplan P., Murray J.J. & Yu W.C. - 1995

Cuomo G., Tirindelli M. & Allsop W. - 2005

Numerical: 1-Dimensional Numerical

Model (VOF technigue) incompressible

fluid with free surface

Cuomo & Tirindelli Method


63/68

Cuomo & Tirindelli Method

Numerical Modeling Method


64/68

Numerical Modeling Method

Dynes/cm2

Wave Loading Design Criteria


65/68

-000

-000

0

000

000

000

000

00 11 00 00 00 11 00 11

Time (s)

UpliftLoad

(lbs/ft0)

MONGOOSEKaplanCuomo & Tirindelli impact

Cuomo & Tirindelli downward

Existing Pier Results of Computations

ModelKaplan

Wave Loading Design Criteria


66/68

Influence of Down-Standing Beams

Recommended Wave Uplift Loading


67/68

Existing Pier Proposed Pier Tender Pier

Load Type Kaplan C&T Kaplan C&T Kaplan C&T

Impact Fmax

575 lbs/ft2 820 lbs/ft2 590 lbs/ft2 740 lbs/ft2 440 lbs/ft2 910 lbs/ft2

Quasi Static Fqs+

90 tons 165 tons 100 tons 150 tons 70 tons 110 tons

Quasi static Fqs-

-100 tons -130 tons -90 tons -115 tons -45 tons -90 tons

Recommended Wave Uplift Loading

Design Criteria

ConclusionConclusion


68/68

ConclusionConclusion

Project currently scheduled to be completed inProject currently scheduled to be completed in

May 2007May 2007 Lessons-learned from wave analysis andLessons-learned from wave analysis and

modeling will be incorporated on future projectsmodeling will be incorporated on future projects

Documents

ASCE Seattle Cozumel