Tethered acoustic doppler current profiler platforms for measuring streamflow

Rehmel, Michael S.; Stewart, James; Morlock, Scott E.

doi:10.3133/ofr03237

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This report describes present capabilities for assessing physical habitat in aquatic ecosystems using data collected with a boat-mounted ADCP, and data quality issues that either have special relevance to this application or are inadequately documented elsewhere. It is not intended to provide a comprehensive discussion of ADCP operations and performance, many aspects of which are documented in literature supporting the use of ADCPs for stream gaging applications (e.g., Simpson 2001;Rehmel et al 2003;Mueller 2003). Where descriptions of instrument characteristics are required to illustrate points not documented elsewhere, the discussion is based on a broadband Workhorse Rio Grande ADCP manufactured by RD Instruments, Inc. 1 Simpson (2001) provides additional details regarding the use of this instrument and the principles of its operation.…”

Section: Purpose and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Aquatic habitat mapping with an acoustic doppler current profiler: Considerations for data quality

Gaeuman¹,

Jacobson²

2005

Open-File Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When mounted on a boat or other moving platform, acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs) can be used to map a wide range of ecologically significant phenomena, including measures of fluid shear, turbulence, vorticity, and near-bed sediment transport. However, the instrument movement necessary for mapping applications can generate significant errors, many of which have not been inadequately described. This report focuses on the mechanisms by which moving-platform errors are generated, and quantifies their magnitudes under typical habitatmapping conditions. The potential for velocity errors caused by mis-alignment of the instrument's internal compass are widely recognized, but has not previously been quantified for moving instruments. Numerical analyses show that even relatively minor compass mis-alignments can produce significant velocity errors, depending on the ratio of absolute instrument velocity to the target velocity and on the relative directions of instrument and target motion. A maximum absolute instrument velocity of about 1 m/s is recommended for most mapping applications. Lower velocities are appropriate when making bed velocity measurements, an emerging application that makes use of ADCP bottom-tracking to measure the velocity of sediment particles at the bed. The mechanisms by which heterogeneities in the flow velocity field generate horizontal velocities errors are also quantified, and some basic limitations in the effectiveness of standard error-detection criteria for identifying these errors are described. Bed velocity measurements may be particularly vulnerable to errors caused by spatial variability in the sediment transport field.

show abstract

Section: Purpose and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Aquatic habitat mapping with an acoustic doppler current profiler: Considerations for data quality

Gaeuman¹,

Jacobson²

2005

Open-File Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Validation of Streamflow Measurements Made with Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. Geological Survey and other international agencies have collaborated to conduct laboratory and field validations of acoustic Doppler current profiler ͑ADCP͒ measurements of streamflow. Laboratory validations made in a large towing basin show that the mean differences between tow cart velocity and ADCP bottom-track and water-track velocities were −0.51 and −1.10%, respectively. Field validations of commercially available ADCPs were conducted by comparing streamflow measurements made with ADCPs to reference streamflow measurements obtained from concurrent mechanical current-meter measurements, stable rating curves, salt-dilution measurements, or acoustic velocity meters. Data from 1,032 transects, comprising 100 discharge measurements, were analyzed from 22 sites in the United States, Canada, Sweden, and The Netherlands. Results of these analyses show that broadband ADCP streamflow measurements are unbiased when compared to the reference discharges regardless of the water mode used for making the measurement. Measurement duration is more important than the number of transects for reducing the uncertainty of the ADCP streamflow measurement.

show abstract

Computation of discharge using the index-velocity method in tidally affected areas

Ruhl¹,

Simpson²

2005

Scientific Investigations Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CONVERSION FACTORS Multiply By To obtain foot (ft) 0.3048 meter foot per second (ft/s) 0.3048 meter per second square foot (ft 2) 929.0 square centimeter cubic foot per second (ft 3 /s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter inch per hour (in/hr) 2.54 centimeter per hour ABBREVIATIONS ADVM acoustic Doppler velocity meter Bay San Francisco Bay bins range gated sample volume Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta GPS geographic positioning system < less than PST Pacific Standard Time UVM ultrasonic velocity meter mean velocity V i index velocity V p water velocity along the acoustic path

show abstract

Tethered acoustic doppler current profiler platforms for measuring streamflow

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Aquatic habitat mapping with an acoustic doppler current profiler: Considerations for data quality

Aquatic habitat mapping with an acoustic doppler current profiler: Considerations for data quality

Validation of Streamflow Measurements Made with Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers

Computation of discharge using the index-velocity method in tidally affected areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About