1 / 24

Measuring Water Velocity and Streamflow in Open-water and Under Ice

Measuring Water Velocity and Streamflow in Open-water and Under Ice. John Fulton and Steve Robinson U.S. Geological Survey Joe Ostrowski Middle Atlantic River Forecast Center National Weather Service Dapei Wang Water Survey of Canada. Overview. Evolution of Methods Water Velocity

Jims
Download Presentation

Measuring Water Velocity and Streamflow in Open-water and Under Ice

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring Water Velocity and Streamflow in Open-water and Under Ice John Fulton and Steve Robinson U.S. Geological Survey Joe Ostrowski Middle Atlantic River Forecast Center National Weather Service Dapei Wang Water Survey of Canada

  2. Overview • Evolution of Methods • Water Velocity • Streamflow • Open-water and Ice-cover Projects • Radar • Acoustics • The ‘Real Story’ Behind Your Ice Record

  3. Evolution of Methods

  4. Evolution of Methods Current-meter methods umax Chapra (1997)

  5. Evolution of Methods Darcy, in Proc. Roy. Soc., A (1909) • Secondary and vertical flow components develop due to side-wall effects • umax may occur below the water surface Therefore, we need an “alternative” velocity distribution equation USGS (1904)

  6. Evolution of Methods Information Entropy(probability-based solution for characterizing the velocity distribution) “y-axis” contains umax

  7. Evolution of Methods A significant amount of information can be derived from the maximum velocity • uavg = f (M) umax • Q = uavg A •  (M) is a measure of a streams “happy place” and does not change with • flow • velocity • stage • channel geometry • bed form and material • slope • alignment

  8. NWS Proof-of-Concept Study Radar guns “Actual” Stream Flow Rating Curve Current-meter method ADCPs

  9. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Steps … • y-axis • f(M) • umax or uD • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A Yen (1998)

  10. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Steps … • y-axis • f(M) • umax or uD • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A Yen (1998)

  11. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Steps … • y-axis • f(M) • umax or uD • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A Chiu and others (2001)

  12. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Steps … • y-axis • f(M) • umax or uD • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A Yen (1998)

  13. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Steps … • y-axis • f(M) • umax or uD • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A Yen (1998)

  14. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Open-waterChartiers Creek at Carnegie, PaDrainage area – 257 mi2Unregulated system usurf velocity – ADV = 2.6 fps usurf velocity – radar= 2.5 - 2.6 fps Discharge methods Current-meter = 210 cfs Rating curve = 189 cfs Entropy regress = 193 cfs Entropy surf vel = 201 cfs s.d. = 9 cfs f = 0.58

  15. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water usurf velocity – ADV = 2.4 fps usurf velocity – radar= 2.0 - 2.3 fps Susquehanna River at Bloomsburg, PaDrainage area – 10,560 mi2Regulated system Discharge methods Current-meter = 10,800 cfs ADCP = 10,130 cfs Rating curve = 10,550 cfs Entropy regress = 10,330 cfs Entropy surf vel = 9,950 cfs s.d. = 340 cfs f = 0.78

  16. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyOpen-water Open-waterBasin DAs – 260 to 24,100 mi2Regulated and non-regulated systems

  17. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyIce-cover Steps … • y-axis and f(M) established during open water • umax along y-axis • area • Q = uavg A = ( umax ) A

  18. NWS Proof-of-Concept StudyIce-cover • Red River of the North at Grand Forks, ND (1984 to 2002) • Open water measurements • Ice measurements were collected by the North Dakota District on • 01/20/04 • 02/05/04 • 03/02/04 • f = .596 computed for open-water used to calculate stream flow under ice cover STA 84 Qact = 463 cfs Qobs= 476 cfs diff = 3% Nolan, K.M. and Jacobson, Jake, Discharge measurements under ice cover, USGS WRIR 00-4257

  19. NWS Proof-of-Concept Study Future Efforts … • Partnering with the • NWS • SRBC • HIF • University of Washington • USGS, North Dakota District • Water Survey of Canada • Wind and precipitation influences • Flashy conditions • Ice conditions • Real-time areas

  20. Water Survey of Canada Project Scope • Equipment • SonTek Argonaut-SW & SL • Open-channel flow and flow under ice • Flow velocity distribution (FVD) model

  21. Water Survey of Canada • Vertical velocity distribution in open water • universal-velocity-distribution law • bed roughness parameter y0b to reflect effects of channel bed roughness • hydraulic parameterg to reflect effects of hydraulic gradient

  22. Water Survey of Canada • Vertical velocity distribution under ice cover • ice roughness parameter y0i • for effects of bottom surface • of ice cover • approximated by a two-layer • scheme • lower layer - solely affected • by bed roughness • upper layer - solely affected • by ice roughness

  23. Water Survey of Canada • ADVM SonTek Argonaut-SW @ Chateauguay River • Chateauguay River, QC, Canada • two SW installations, 400 m apart • SW data: Dec. 03 – May 04 Open flows & Flow under ice cover • upstream site: flow depth 2-5 m channel width ~ 85 m ice cover 12/11/03 to 3/25/04 21:30 • downstream site: flow depth 2-4 m channel width ~ 40 m ice cover 1/9/04 9:45 to 3/4 12:00

  24. Water Survey of Canada

More Related