Modeling Working Group

Meeting Notes

Breakout Session Matrix

Working Documents

Environmental Properties
A spill isn't a static point, but a moving volume of consideration as you know. So your slide here seems to be equivalent to the IOOS (US Integrated Ocean Observing System). I've started making those changes to the IOOS box on the diagram, and we can define further the granularity for what is more static (e.g. Bathymetry) to more time varying (near-realtime) for the environmental info that needs to be in hand ahead of time or easily accessible during a response.

Oil Properties
Nice list. Don't need to separate this into properties of the oil and properties of the spill? I would carry those in two different databases, one that fills in what you hopefully have, and then adding the spill info as you get it. Once we can formulate these two I can add to diagram.
Properties of the oil
Fractional composition by component or pseudo-component group
Density
Rheology (viscosity, elasticity)
Adhesion characteristics (module to modify these as properties change?)
Oil-water interfacial tension

Properties of the spilled oil (better term?)
Water content
Emulsion stability
Thickness
Fractional coverage
Droplet size represented (or representative)
Sediment content
Field density

Response Properties
Here it looks like two things: a data base of response resource attributes or capabilities, then the field information of what they are doing and why. I've added to the “Field Monitoring Data Assimilation" box and coupled it with a new box of the database information.

Biological
Previously I would have agreed with you, and I think that is state of the art but as we combine with the plume forecast and response options to really model tradeoffs, does that remain true?

So, my understanding of what you've talked about is incorporated into the attached diagram. Let me know what you think.

Thanks,
CJ

Physical Transport Time Length Scale Matrix (08.12.01) (Word Document)

Posted 09.25.09 per CJ Beegle-Krause, Group Lead:

ICES CRR 295 Manual of Recommended Practices (pdf)
Oil Spill Modeling Best Practices 090624 (Word Document/Draft)

	. Announcements Findings, reports, and working documents will be contiually updated on this website. Please visit the specific subgroups below. For details on the meeting (presentations and agenda), please visit the Modeling Workshop page here>> Topics and Subgroups General Biological Effects Model Subgroup Physical Transportation Subgroup Oil Spill Modeling: Physical Fates and Behavior Subgroup Response Modeling Subgroup GENERAL WORKING GROUP INFORMATION CRRC-Sponsored Spill Modeling Working Group Evaluation of Modeling Approaches and Information Needs for Developing the Next-Generation Oil Spill Model. Presented at AMOP 2009 by Deborah French McCay, Bill Lehr, CJ Beegle-Krause, and Dagmar Etkin 3D Diagram CJ Beegle-Krause, Revised 11.05.08 Parameter Variable Supply Demand Schematic M. Reed, 11.4.08 Subgroup Participant Lists Wrap-up Notes from Modeling Sumit (6.26.07) OCSEAP Oil Weathering Report (This report is 683 pages.) Volume II - Appendices Exxon Valdez Oil Weathering Fate and Behavior: Model Predictions and Field Observations Weathering of Petroleum in the Marine Environment TOPICS AND SUBGROUPS A. Biological Effects Model Subgroup Mission & Goals Meeting Notes Working Documents B. Physical Transport Subgroup Mission & Goals Meeting Notes Breakout Session Matrix Working Documents Environmental Properties A spill isn't a static point, but a moving volume of consideration as you know. So your slide here seems to be equivalent to the IOOS (US Integrated Ocean Observing System). I've started making those changes to the IOOS box on the diagram, and we can define further the granularity for what is more static (e.g. Bathymetry) to more time varying (near-realtime) for the environmental info that needs to be in hand ahead of time or easily accessible during a response. Oil Properties Nice list. Don't need to separate this into properties of the oil and properties of the spill? I would carry those in two different databases, one that fills in what you hopefully have, and then adding the spill info as you get it. Once we can formulate these two I can add to diagram. Properties of the oil Fractional composition by component or pseudo-component group Density Rheology (viscosity, elasticity) Adhesion characteristics (module to modify these as properties change?) Oil-water interfacial tension Properties of the spilled oil (better term?) Water content Emulsion stability Thickness Fractional coverage Droplet size represented (or representative) Sediment content Field density Response Properties Here it looks like two things: a data base of response resource attributes or capabilities, then the field information of what they are doing and why. I've added to the “Field Monitoring Data Assimilation" box and coupled it with a new box of the database information. Biological Previously I would have agreed with you, and I think that is state of the art but as we combine with the plume forecast and response options to really model tradeoffs, does that remain true? So, my understanding of what you've talked about is incorporated into the attached diagram. Let me know what you think. Thanks, CJ Physical Transport Time Length Scale Matrix (08.12.01) (Word Document) Posted 09.25.09 per CJ Beegle-Krause, Group Lead: ICES CRR 295 Manual of Recommended Practices (pdf) Oil Spill Modeling Best Practices 090624 (Word Document/Draft) C. Oil Spill Modeling: Physical Fates and Behavior Subgroup Mission & Goals Meeting Notes Working Documents Water in Oil Emulsification (Word Document) Jim Payne, 11.12.08 D. Response Modeling Subgroup Mission & Goals Meeting Notes (This is an Excel file) Working Documents .



	Modeling Working Group This Page Updated :: December 5, 2008