USGS QRev Software - Alberta Irrigation Technology …USGS QRev Software A Consistent and ......

19
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS QRev Software A Consistent and Efficient Processing Approach of ADCP Streamflow Measurements Scott Whiteman U.S. Geological Survey Wyoming-Montana Water Science Center

Transcript of USGS QRev Software - Alberta Irrigation Technology …USGS QRev Software A Consistent and ......

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

USGS QRev SoftwareA Consistent and Efficient

Processing Approach of ADCP Streamflow Measurements

Scott WhitemanU.S. Geological Survey

Wyoming-Montana Water Science Center

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

USGS ADCP Inventory

• Below is a breakdown of ADCPs currently in use within the USGS

2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

186

9 2035

149

296 195

107

1

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

The typical ADCP

user will not be an

ADCP expert!

Provide HELP and

GUIDANCE through

SMART SOFTWARE

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

QRev – Goals & Requirements• Process both SonTek and TRDI data

• Logical workflow

• Automated data quality review and feedback

• Consistent algorithms

• Use best available data

• Manual overrides

• Issue specific dialog windows

• Feedback to user on measurement uncertainty

• Tablet friendly

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Automated Review and Feedback

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Workflow• Collect data in field using manufacturer software

– WinRiverII

– RiverSurveyorLive

– Use USGS procedures as before

• Post process data in field using QRev– For current versions of RSL you will need to reprocess the data

in RSL to create the Matlab files.

– Once data are loaded into QRev the manufactures software should not longer be used for processing.

• Office checking

6

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Buttons on the Main Window• Buttons arranged from top to bottom to lead user

through steps loading, reviewing and finalizing a measurement.

• Button look helps guide the user– No quality checks done associated with button, but access to

other functions or windows

– Loaded measurement does not have data associated with feature

– Data checks performed passed all quality checks

– Data quality checks have identified potential issue but likely not critical. Message panel will contain any issues identified

– Data quality checks identified an issue that could have significant impact on measurement

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Red and Yellow Buttons Have Associated Messages

8

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Extrapolation

9

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Inconsistent algorithms

If you could process the same data in both

RiverSurveyor Live and WinRiver II, you would

get different discharges due to the differences

in how various situations are handled.

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Computational Differences

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Best Available Data• To load and review data, the user works

from top to bottom along the buttons on the left. This approach leads the user through the premeasurement steps first. Navigation reference, depth, and water data are needed to compute discharge.

• By working top to bottom the best navigation data are obtained, then the best depth data.

• Finally the best water data, which are dependent on the navigation reference and depth.

• Thus, the final discharge is based on the best available data.

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Example with Invalid Depths

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Example Invalid Water Track Data

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Iowa R. at Wapello, 7/3/2014

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

The QRev DifferenceWinRiver II – Nav, Depth, WT =>

EnsembleQRev – Nav, Depth, WT => Uses All

Data

Q=112,400 ft3/s (3,180 m3/s) Q=95,000 ft3/s (2,690 m3/s)Estimated 95% Uncertainty =14%Estimated 95% Uncertainty =40%

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

QRevMeasurement Quality Assessment

• Random – uses the Q COV and # transects• Invalid – % of the sum % discharge for invalid

cells and ensembles• Edge – Based on % of total discharge in edges• Extrapolation – % difference in Q from

selected extrap to other extrap methods and average of best 4 options

• Moving-Bed –– Bottom track not reference = 0% – bottom track used

• valid moving bed test with no moving bed = 1%. • moving bed present and correction applied = 1.5%. • moving bed test warnings, invalid, or not done = 3%

• Systematic – 1.5% (for biases in ADCPs and beam misalignment)

• User column for adjusting Automatic computed uncertainties

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

https://hydroacoustics.usgs.gov/movingboat/QRev.shtml

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Questions