Geology topics

Curtis L. Sanders

Publications and source records attributed to Curtis L. Sanders.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2013

Comparison between two statistically based methods, and two physically based models developed to compute daily mean streamflow at ungaged locations in the Cedar River Basin, Iowa

A variety of individuals from water resource managers to recreational users need streamflow information for planning and decisionmaking at locations where there are no streamgages. To address this problem, two statistically based methods, the Flow Duration Curve Transfer method and the Flow Anywhere method, were developed for statewide application and the two physically based models, the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool, were only developed for application for the Cedar River Basin. Observed and estimated streamflows for the two methods and models were compared for goodness of fit at 13 streamgages modeled in the Cedar River Basin by using the Nash-Sutcliffe and the percent-bias efficiency values. Based on median and mean Nash-Sutcliffe values for the 13 streamgages the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System and Soil and Water Assessment Tool models appear to have performed similarly and better than Flow Duration Curve Transfer and Flow Anywhere methods. Based on median and mean percent bias values, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool model appears to have generally overestimated daily mean streamflows, whereas the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System model and statistical methods appear to have underestimated daily mean streamflows. The Flow Duration Curve Transfer method produced the lowest median and mean percent bias values and appears to perform better than the other models.

Iowa↗

USGS2012

Computing daily mean streamflow at ungaged locations in Iowa by using the Flow Anywhere and Flow Duration Curve Transfer statistical methods

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maintains approximately 148 real-time streamgages in Iowa for which daily mean streamflow information is available, but daily mean streamflow data commonly are needed at locations where no streamgages are present. Therefore, the USGS conducted a study as part of a larger project in cooperation with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources to develop methods to estimate daily mean streamflow at locations in ungaged watersheds in Iowa by using two regression-based statistical methods. The regression equations for the statistical methods were developed from historical daily mean streamflow and basin characteristics from streamgages within the study area, which includes the entire State of Iowa and adjacent areas within a 50-mile buffer of Iowa in neighboring states. Results of this study can be used with other techniques to determine the best method for application in Iowa and can be used to produce a Web-based geographic information system tool to compute streamflow estimates automatically. The Flow Anywhere statistical method is a variation of the drainage-area-ratio method, which transfers same-day streamflow information from a reference streamgage to another location by using the daily mean streamflow at the reference streamgage and the drainage-area ratio of the two locations. The Flow Anywhere method modifies the drainage-area-ratio method in order to regionalize the equations for Iowa and determine the best reference streamgage from which to transfer same-day streamflow information to an ungaged location. Data used for the Flow Anywhere method were retrieved for 123 continuous-record streamgages located in Iowa and within a 50-mile buffer of Iowa. The final regression equations were computed by using either left-censored regression techniques with a low limit threshold set at 0.1 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) and the daily mean streamflow for the 15th day of every other month, or by using an ordinary-least-squares multiple linear regression method and the daily mean streamflow for the 15th day of every other month. The Flow Duration Curve Transfer method was used to estimate unregulated daily mean streamflow from the physical and climatic characteristics of gaged basins. For the Flow Duration Curve Transfer method, daily mean streamflow quantiles at the ungaged site were estimated with the parameter-based regression model, which results in a continuous daily flow-duration curve (the relation between exceedance probability and streamflow for each day of observed streamflow) at the ungaged site. By the use of a reference streamgage, the Flow Duration Curve Transfer is converted to a time series. Data used in the Flow Duration Curve Transfer method were retrieved for 113 continuous-record streamgages in Iowa and within a 50-mile buffer of Iowa. The final statewide regression equations for Iowa were computed by using a weighted-least-squares multiple linear regression method and were computed for the 0.01-, 0.05-, 0.10-, 0.15-, 0.20-, 0.30-, 0.40-, 0.50-, 0.60-, 0.70-, 0.80-, 0.85-, 0.90-, and 0.95-exceedance probability statistics determined from the daily mean streamflow with a reporting limit set at 0.1 ft 3 /s. The final statewide regression equation for Iowa computed by using left-censored regression techniques was computed for the 0.99-exceedance probability statistic determined from the daily mean streamflow with a low limit threshold and a reporting limit set at 0.1 ft 3 /s. For the Flow Anywhere method, results of the validation study conducted by using six streamgages show that differences between the root-mean-square error and the mean absolute error ranged from 1,016 to 138 ft 3 /s, with the larger value signifying a greater occurrence of outliers between observed and estimated streamflows. Root-mean-square-error values ranged from 1,690 to 237 ft 3 /s. Values of the percent root-mean-square error ranged from 115 percent to 26.2 percent. The logarithm (base 10) streamflow percent root-mean-square error ranged from 13.0 to 5.3 percent. Root-mean-square-error observations standard-deviation-ratio values ranged from 0.80 to 0.40. Percent-bias values ranged from 25.4 to 4.0 percent. Untransformed streamflow Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency values ranged from 0.84 to 0.35. The logarithm (base 10) streamflow Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency values ranged from 0.86 to 0.56. For the streamgage with the best agreement between observed and estimated streamflow, higher streamflows appear to be underestimated. For the streamgage with the worst agreement between observed and estimated streamflow, low flows appear to be overestimated whereas higher flows seem to be underestimated. Estimated cumulative streamflows for the period October 1, 2004, to September 30, 2009, are underestimated by -25.8 and -7.4 percent for the closest and poorest comparisons, respectively. For the Flow Duration Curve Transfer method, results of the validation study conducted by using the same six streamgages show that differences between the root-mean-square error and the mean absolute error ranged from 437 to 93.9 ft 3 /s, with the larger value signifying a greater occurrence of outliers between observed and estimated streamflows. Root-mean-square-error values ranged from 906 to 169 ft 3 /s. Values of the percent root-mean-square-error ranged from 67.0 to 25.6 percent. The logarithm (base 10) streamflow percent root-mean-square error ranged from 12.5 to 4.4 percent. Root-mean-square-error observations standard-deviation-ratio values ranged from 0.79 to 0.40. Percent-bias values ranged from 22.7 to 0.94 percent. Untransformed streamflow Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency values ranged from 0.84 to 0.38. The logarithm (base 10) streamflow Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency values ranged from 0.89 to 0.48. For the streamgage with the closest agreement between observed and estimated streamflow, there is relatively good agreement between observed and estimated streamflows. For the streamgage with the poorest agreement between observed and estimated streamflow, streamflows appear to be substantially underestimated for much of the time period. Estimated cumulative streamflow for the period October 1, 2004, to September 30, 2009, are underestimated by -9.3 and -22.7 percent for the closest and poorest comparisons, respectively.

Illinois;Iowa;Minnesota;Missouri;Nebraska;Wisconsi↗

USGS2004

Computation of Flow Through Water-Control Structures Using Program DAMFLO.2

As part of its mission to collect, analyze, and store streamflow data, the U.S. Geological Survey computes flow through several dam structures throughout the country. Flows are computed using hydraulic equations that describe flow through sluice and Tainter gates, crest gates, lock gates, spillways, locks, pumps, and siphons, which are calibrated using flow measurements. The program DAMFLO.2 was written to compute, tabulate, and plot flow through dam structures using data that describe the physical properties of dams and various hydraulic parameters and ratings that use time-varying data, such as lake elevations or gate openings. The program uses electronic computer files of time-varying data, such as lake elevation or gate openings, retrieved from the U.S. Geological Survey Automated Data Processing System. Computed time-varying flow data from DAMFLO.2 are output in flat files, which can be entered into the Automated Data Processing System database. All computations are made in units of feet and seconds. DAMFLO.2 uses the procedures and language developed by the SAS Institute Inc.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2003

Simulation of Temperature, Nutrients, Biochemical Oxygen Demand, and Dissolved Oxygen in the Catawba River, South Carolina, 1996-97

Time-series plots of dissolved-oxygen concentrations were determined for various simulated hydrologic and point-source loading conditions along a free-flowing section of the Catawba River from Lake Wylie Dam to the headwaters of Fishing Creek Reservoir in South Carolina. The U.S. Geological Survey one-dimensional dynamic-flow model, BRANCH, was used to simulate hydrodynamic data for the Branched Lagrangian Transport Model. Waterquality data were used to calibrate the Branched Lagrangian Transport Model and included concentrations of nutrients, chlorophyll a, and biochemical oxygen demand in water samples collected during two synoptic sampling surveys at 10 sites along the main stem of the Catawba River and at 3 tributaries; and continuous water temperature and dissolved-oxygen concentrations measured at 5 locations along the main stem of the Catawba River. A sensitivity analysis of the simulated dissolved-oxygen concentrations to model coefficients and data inputs indicated that the simulated dissolved-oxygen concentrations were most sensitive to watertemperature boundary data due to the effect of temperature on reaction kinetics and the solubility of dissolved oxygen. Of the model coefficients, the simulated dissolved-oxygen concentration was most sensitive to the biological oxidation rate of nitrite to nitrate. To demonstrate the utility of the Branched Lagrangian Transport Model for the Catawba River, the model was used to simulate several water-quality scenarios to evaluate the effect on the 24-hour mean dissolved-oxygen concentrations at selected sites for August 24, 1996, as simulated during the model calibration period of August 23 27, 1996. The first scenario included three loading conditions of the major effluent discharges along the main stem of the Catawba River (1) current load (as sampled in August 1996); (2) no load (all point-source loads were removed from the main stem of the Catawba River; loads from the main tributaries were not removed); and (3) fully loaded (in accordance with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control National Discharge Elimination System permits). Results indicate that the 24-hour mean and minimum dissolved-oxygen concentrations for August 24, 1996, changed from the no-load condition within a range of - 0.33 to 0.02 milligram per liter and - 0.48 to 0.00 milligram per liter, respectively. Fully permitted loading conditions changed the 24-hour mean and minimum dissolved-oxygen concentrations from - 0.88 to 0.04 milligram per liter and - 1.04 to 0.00 milligram per liter, respectively. A second scenario included the addition of a point-source discharge of 25 million gallons per day to the August 1996 calibration conditions. The discharge was added at S.C. Highway 5 or at a location near Culp Island (about 4 miles downstream from S.C. Highway 5) and had no significant effect on the daily mean and minimum dissolved-oxygen concentration. A third scenario evaluated the phosphorus loading into Fishing Creek Reservoir; four loading conditions of phosphorus into Catawba River were simulated. The four conditions included fully permitted and actual loading conditions, removal of all point sources from the Catawba River, and removal of all point and nonpoint sources from Sugar Creek. Removing the point-source inputs on the Catawba River and the point and nonpoint sources in Sugar Creek reduced the organic phosphorus and orthophosphate loadings to Fishing Creek Reservoir by 78 and 85 percent, respectively.

South Carolina↗

USGS2002

User's manual for computer program BASEPLOT

The checking and reviewing of daily records of streamflow within the U.S. Geological Survey is traditionally accomplished by hand-plotting and mentally collating tables of data. The process is time consuming, difficult to standardize, and subject to errors in computation, data entry, and logic. In addition, the presentation of flow data on the internet requires more timely and accurate computation of daily flow records. BASEPLOT was developed for checking and review of primary streamflow records within the U.S. Geological Survey. Use of BASEPLOT enables users to (1) provide efficiencies during the record checking and review process, (2) improve quality control, (3) achieve uniformity of checking and review techniques of simple stage-discharge relations, and (4) provide a tool for teaching streamflow computation techniques. The BASEPLOT program produces tables of quality control checks and produces plots of rating curves and discharge measurements; variable shift (V-shift) diagrams; and V-shifts converted to stage-discharge plots, using data stored in the U.S. Geological Survey Automatic Data Processing System database. In addition, the program plots unit-value hydrographs that show unit-value stages, shifts, and datum corrections; input shifts, datum corrections, and effective dates; discharge measurements; effective dates for rating tables; and numeric quality control checks. Checklist/tutorial forms are provided for reviewers to ensure completeness of review and standardize the review process. The program was written for the U.S. Geological Survey SUN computer using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) software produced by SAS Institute, Incorporated.

Open-File Report↗