A comparative study of stream-gaging techniques for low-flow measurements in two Virginia tributaries

Journal of the American Water Resources Association

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 110-122

  Soupir, Michelle L ^a   Mostaghimi, Saied ^b   Mitchem Jr , C E ^c  

^a Iowa State University   (United States)

^b Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University   (United States)

^c Stearns and Wheler LLC   (United States)

Author keywords

Monitoring; Nonpoint source pollution; Stream gaging; Streamflow

Indexed keywords

GAGING; MONITORING; POLLUTION; STREAM FLOW; STRUCTURAL LOADS; WETLANDS;

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDIES; CONTROL STRUCTURES; CURRENT METERS; CURRENT TECHNOLOGIES; DOPPLER; FIELD INVESTIGATIONS; FIRST ORDERS; FLOW CONDITIONS; GAGING APPLICATIONS; LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS; LABORATORY PERFORMANCE; NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION; NPS POLLUTIONS; SECOND ORDERS; STATISTICAL CONTROLS; STREAM GAGING; TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS;

RIVER POLLUTION;

ACOUSTIC DOPPLER CURRENT PROFILER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FLOW MEASUREMENT; FLOW VELOCITY; GAUGE; LABORATORY METHOD; LOW FLOW; NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION; STREAMFLOW; WATER POLLUTION;

EID: 58849086352     PISSN: 1093474X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2008.00264.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Ackers, P., W.R. White, J.A. Perkins A.J.M. Harrison, 1978. Weirs and Flumes for Flow Measurement. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, New York.
2. Campbell Scientific, 1996. CR10 Measurement and Control Module Operator's Manual. Campbell Scientific, Inc., Logan, Utah.
3. Christensen, B.A., 1994. Velocity Measurements by the "One-Orange Method." In Fundamentals and Advancements in Hydraulic Measurements and Experimentation Proceedings of the Symposium on Fundamentals and Advancements in Hydraulic Measurements and Experimentation, (1994: Buffalo, New York), Clifford.A. Pugh (Editor). American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York, pp. 76 85.
4. Costa, J.E., K.R. Spicer, R.T. Cheng, P.F. Haeni, N.B. Melcher, E.M. Thurman, W.J. Plant W.C. Keller, 2000. Measuring Stream Discharge by Non-Contact Methods: A Proof-of-Concept Experiment. Geophysical Research Letters 27 (4 553 556.
5. Fulford, J.M., 2001. Accuracy and Consistency of Water-Current Meters. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 37 (5 1215 1224.
6. Fulford, J.M., K.G. Thibodeaux W.R. Kaehrle, 1994. Comparison of Current Meters Used for Stream-Gaging. In Fundamentals and Advancements in Hydraulic Measurements and Experimentation Proceedings of the Symposium on Fundamentals and Advancements in Hydraulic Measurements and Experimentation, (1994: Buffalo, New York), Clifford.A. Pugh (Editor). American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York, pp. 376 385.
7. Global Water, 1997. Global Flow Probe FP101-FP201 Instruction Manual. Global Water, Inc., Gold River, Colorado.
8. Herschy, R.W., 2002. The Uncertainty in a Current Meter Measurement. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 13 : 281 284.
9. Isco, 1993. 4150 Flow Logger Instruction Manual. Isco, Inc., Lincoln, Nebraska.
10. Kilpatrick, F.A. E.D. Cobb, 1985. Measurement of Discharge Using Tracers. In : Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey. Book 3, Chapter A16, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 52 pp. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/twri/, accessed September, 2008.
11. Mitchem, C.J., 1999. A Comparative Study of Stream-Gaging Methods Employed in Nonpoint Source Pollution Studies in Small Streams. M.S. Thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
12. NRC, 2002. The Twenty Needs Report: How Research Can Improve the TMDL Program. NAS, Washington, D.C.
13. Ott, R.L. M. Longnecker, 2001. Statistical Methods and Data Analysis. 5th. Wadsworth Group, Pacific Grove, California.
14. Pierce, C.H., 1941. Investigations of Methods and Equipment Used in Stream-Gaging: Part 1 - Performance of Current Meters in Water of Shallow Depth. USGS-Water Supply Paper 868-A. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. Available at: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/wsp/wsp868A, accessed September 2008.
15. Rantz, S.E., 1982. Measurement and Computation of Streamflow: Volume I. Measurement of Stage and Discharge. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
16. Thibodeaux, K.G., 1992. A Brief Literature Review of Open-Channel Current Meter Testing. In Proceedings of the Hydraulic Engineering Conference 1992. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York, pp. 458 463.
17. Thibodeaux, K.G., 1994. Review of Literature on the Testing of Point-Velocity Current Meters. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-123. U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, 44 pp. Available at: https://igsrglib03.er.usgs.gov/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=1222B54V44878. 59537&profile=r&source=∼!horizon&view=subscriptionsummary& uri=full=3100001∼!155337∼!1&ri=2&aspect=subtab13&menu= search&ipp=20&spp=20&staffonly=&term=Thibodeaux%2C+Kirk+G. &index=&uindex=AL&aspect=subtab13&menu=search&ri=2#focus.
18. Unidata, 1995. Ultrasonic Doppler Instrument With Micrologger-User's Manual. Lynn MacLaren Publishing, Australia.
19. USEPA, (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 2007. TMDL Definition - What is a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)? United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., Available at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/ intro.html, accessed September, 2008.
20. Valeport, 1995. The Basic Design and Operation Instructions. Valeport Developments, Dartmouth, Massachusetts.
21. Walpole, R.E. R.H. Myers, 1993. Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, New York.