DMS -Analytical Toolbox aids the user in those instances when the 

 DMS-Manual identifies more than one shoaling classification. The 

 toolbox also provides tools to investigate mitigation methods and gain a 

 better insight into the physical processes. The DMS-Analytical Toolbox 

 is a collection of programs and methods for accomplishing a detailed 

 analysis of the physical processes that create the shoal. It contains 

 programs that calculate hydrodynamics, wave climate, and sediment 

 transport. In addition, it contains suggestions for graphical presentation 

 of the output to help diagnose shoaling problems. 



As such, the three components of the DMS aid the engineer in the diagnosis 

 of shoaling problems and the discovery of a successful mitigation method. The 

 East Pass Inlet case study showed the application of the DMS to three problem 

 areas. For two of the areas, the DMS successfully identified the shoal classifi- 

 cation and pointed to possible mitigation methods. For the third area, the 

 application produced two possible classifications, perhaps acting together. The 

 readily available analytical tools do not, at the present time, provide an 

 unequivocal diagnosis. This unresolved ambiguity indicates the need for further 

 development of the contents of the DMS-Analytical Toolbox. Despite its 

 limitation in identifying the distinct shoaling mechanisms at the trial site, the 

 DMS has provided insight into the possible physical processes responsible for 

 this shoal's creation. 



Application of DMS methodology led to solutions to the three shoaling 

 problem areas found in the maintained channels through East Pass Inlet. 

 Shoaling of the outer bar region of East Pass channel could be mitigated by 

 conducting frequent surveys of the ebb shoal to find the lowest point in the bar 

 and redesignating the channel to cross the shoal in that area. Shoaling in the 

 channel-bend region, caused by horizontal expansions, may be treated in one of 

 three ways: (a) reducing the flow expansion through construction of training 

 walls, (b) reducing the flow expansion by building out the shoreline through 

 dredged-material placement, or (c) preventing material from entering the inlet 

 through lengthening the east jetty or mining the filet in the updrift beach. The 

 tools presently available failed to produce definite conclusions concerning the 

 shoaling in Old Pass channel. If the hypothesis in Chapter 4 concerning the 

 shoaling in this area is valid, then recommendations would include one of the 

 following methods: reducing wave activity through the construction of a 

 breakwater either offshore of the jetties or parallel to the Norriego Point 

 shoreline, hardening the Norriego Point shoreline through construction of 

 seawalls or revetments, or preventing littoral transport into the channel by 

 construction of a terminal groin at the tip of Norriego Point. 



Recommendations 



This report has shown the utility of the DMS for providing a framework for 

 formulating solutions to reduce shoaling of maintained channels. The application 

 of the DMS to this case study has revealed a number of areas requiring further 

 research and development. These areas are grouped by DMS component: 



Chapter 5 Summary and Recommendations 



52 



