AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

NOAA Tidal Datum report -vs- Tidal Benchmark publication

2 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
438 Views
tim-reed
(@tim-reed)
Posts: 104
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I usually report tidal datums and tidal ranges based on the benchmark sheets for a given area. On the benchmark publication MLLW is always Zero.

On NOAA tidal datum reports however MLLW is never Zero. Adding or subtracting the MLLW value from the other ranges gives the correct value for MHHW, MHW, MSL etc.
Why does NOAA report the tidal datums this way where MLLW is not zero? I've seen numerous mistakes made over the years where someone wanted a MHW contour, or they reported the MHW elevation directly from the datum sheet without applying the MLLW correction. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to report tidal datums with MLLW being Zero?

Pick any datum report off this list:
NOAA Datums
Then open the corresponding benchmark publication here:
NOAA Benchmarks


 
Posted : July 13, 2011 1:26 pm
foggyidea
(@foggyidea)
Posts: 3462
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

You would have to pick a point in time to establish that datum, and then with sea level rise, those elevations would rise with it..


 
Posted : July 13, 2011 1:45 pm