Validation of Streamflow Measurements Made with M9 and RiverRay Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers

Boldt, Justin A.; Oberg, Kevin A.

doi:10.1061/(asce)hy.1943-7900.0001087

Cited by 28 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown by the comparison of uncertainty estimates based on two subsets of instruments (section ), the impact of the instrument appears to be negligible between the models tested: M9 and StreamPro, for the flow conditions studied (1‐m depth, 0.50 to 0.75‐m/s mean velocities). This result is in line with performance tests conducted by Boldt and Oberg (). Hence, the uncertainty associated with the team factor may be assumed to represent the operator uncertainty alone.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Previous studies have shown that the average bias of ADCP discharge measurements is negligible, compared to current meter measurements or stage-discharge relations taken as references and based on laboratory validations (Boldt & Oberg, 2015;Morlock, 1996;Oberg & Mueller, 2007). Even when best measuring practices are followed, the uncertainty of moving-boat ADCP streamflow measurements is attributable to various error sources including errors due to the instrument (residual errors after best calibration, beam angle error, near-transducer errors due to flow disturbance, side-lobe interference, etc.…”

Section: 1029/2019wr025296mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to worldwide surveys launched by the World Meteorological Organization, the proportion of ADCP measurements has grown from 16% in 2009 to 27% in 2014 (Le Coz, ). In 2014, ADCP measurements represented 31% (out of a total of 120,000 gaugings) and 58% (out of a total of 1,500 gaugings) of the stream gaugings performed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS; Boldt & Oberg, ) and the Électricité de France (EDF) hydrometry staff in France (Despax, ), respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Decomposition of Uncertainty Sources in Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Streamflow Measurements Using Repeated Measures Experiments

Despax

Coz

Hauet

et al. 2019

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Repeated measures experiments can be conducted to empirically estimate the uncertainty of a stream gauging method, such as the widespread moving‐boat acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs) approach. Previous ADCP repeated measures experiments, also known as interlaboratory comparisons, provided a credible range of uncertainty estimates reflecting the quality of the site conditions. However, the method, which is a one‐way analysis of variance, only addresses the uncertainty of one lumped factor that combines several distinct factors: instrument, operator, procedure, and cross‐section effects. To decompose the uncertainty of ADCP streamflow measurements due to cross‐section selection and team effects, a large repeated measures experiment has been conducted in the Taurion River (France). The experiment design was crossed and balanced, with two sets of 24 teams circulated over two sets of 12 cross sections. A constant flow rate was released from a dam, located immediately upstream of the experimental site. Prior to the statistical analysis, a data quality review was performed using the U.S. Geological Survey QRev software to clean the data set from avoidable errors and to homogenize the discharge computations. A two‐way analysis of variance was applied to quantify the cross‐section effect, the team effect, and their interaction, which was found to dominate the pure cross‐section effect. It was then possible to predict the average uncertainty of multiple‐transect ADCP discharge measurements, depending on the number of teams, cross sections, and repeated transects included in the discharge average. The method opens interesting avenues for documenting difficult‐to‐estimate uncertainty sources of stream gauging techniques in other measuring conditions, especially the most adverse ones.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: 1029/2019wr025296mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decomposition of Uncertainty Sources in Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Streamflow Measurements Using Repeated Measures Experiments

Despax

Coz

Hauet

et al. 2019

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The presence of an integrated Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) ensures a submeter precision in positioning data. Streamflow measurements carried out using the SonTek M9 have been recently tested and validated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Office of Surface Water (Boldt & Oberg, 2015).…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three‐Dimensional Flow Structures and Morphodynamic Evolution of Microtidal Meandering Channels

Finotello

Ghinassi

Carniello

et al. 2020

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The planform evolution of tidal meanders is driven by interactions between channel morphology and periodically reversing tidal flows, which feed back into the development of erosional and depositional patterns. However, the paucity of quantitative data has so far undermined detailed analyses about the geomorphic effects of tidal flows within tidal meanders. Here we aim to bond the morphodynamic evolution of tidal meanders with the structure of three‐dimensional flow that shapes them. By means of an acoustic Doppler current profiler, we have surveyed the flow fields over three different tidal meandering channels in the salt marshes at San Felice (Venice lagoon, Italy), each characterized by distinct planform morphology and evolutionary dynamics. Mutually evasive paths followed by the maximum ebb and flood streamwise velocities determine periodic changes in both the position and the orientation of curvature‐induced cross‐stream flows. These secondary flows can be locally disrupted by patches of submerged vegetation, especially in meanders of small size, with direct implications for the morphodynamic evolution of meander bends. The latter is further affected by flow separation in sharp bends. Flow separation effectively reduces channel width, enhancing bank erosion due to increasing flow velocities. Moreover, it creates low‐velocity zones of recirculating flows at both the inner and outer banks, thereby promoting the formation of point bars and concave‐bank benches, respectively. By relating three‐dimensional flow structure to patterns of channel change, our results provide a first step to unravel the relation between flows and forms within tidal meanders, whose planform characteristics may differ greatly from their fluvial counterparts.

show abstract

“…If the flow condition does not allow the hydrologists to measure flow discharge by wading, the ADCPs may be instead attached to a moving boat to obtain the measurement. Although the use of ADCPs for measuring streamflow has been validated and proved (Boldt & Oberg, ), however, as Rantz () pointed out, under unsteady flow conditions and variable backwater effects, the stage–discharge rating curve hardly defines the varied discharge that could occur in the stream. Moreover, if the riverbed level changes significantly during flood events, the stage–discharge relation may not be adequately applicable either.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating discharge in gravel‐bed river using non‐contact ground‐penetrating and surface‐velocity radars

Hong

Guo

Wang

et al. 2017

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discharge measurement is a critical task for gravel-bed channels. Under high-flow conditions, the elevation of the riverbed changes significantly by intensive torrential flow. The stage-discharge relations commonly used for stream discharge estimation may no longer be adequate. The contact-type velocity measuring is also subject to measurement errors and/or instrument failures by the high-flow velocities, driftwood, stumps, and debris. This study developed a new real-time method to estimate river discharge in gravel-bed channels. A systematic measuring technology combining ground-penetrating radar and surface-velocity radar was employed. The rating curves representing the relations of water surface velocity to the channel cross-sectional mean velocity and flow area were established. Stream discharge was then deduced from the resulting mean velocity and flow area. The proposed method was examined in a steep gravel-bed reach of the Cho-Shui River in central Taiwan. The estimated stream discharge during three flood events were compared to the prediction by using the stage-discharge relation and the index-velocity method.The proposed method of this study is capable of computing reasonable values of discharge for an entire flood hydrograph, whereas the other two methods tend to produce large extrapolation errors. Moreover, when the computed discharge is used in 2D flood flow simulation, the proposed method demonstrates better performance than the commonly used stage-discharge and index-velocity methods.

show abstract

Validation of Streamflow Measurements Made with M9 and RiverRay Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers

Cited by 28 publications

References 15 publications

Decomposition of Uncertainty Sources in Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Streamflow Measurements Using Repeated Measures Experiments

Decomposition of Uncertainty Sources in Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Streamflow Measurements Using Repeated Measures Experiments

Three‐Dimensional Flow Structures and Morphodynamic Evolution of Microtidal Meandering Channels

Estimating discharge in gravel‐bed river using non‐contact ground‐penetrating and surface‐velocity radars

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About