Friday, September 30, 2011

Flow and load duration curves

By Beth Allen, Ph.D. student

Lately, we have been researching and developing techniques of analyzing continuous water quality and hydrology data in order to explain hydrological and biogeochemical processes controlling stream chemistry in watersheds.  One of the techniques in which we have applied to an entire year of water quality and hydrology data is a method that assesses how relatively reactive nutrient/sediment loading is to flow and the relative flashiness of a watershed.  This method, referred to as load and flow duration curves, determines the percentages of the total load (Mk%) and discharge (Vk%) that occur in a percentage of the total sampling time, termed probability of occurrence.  Mk% and Vk% duration curves can be plotted as a function of the probability of occurrence, which provides an interesting way of demonstrating how loading relates to flow and varies among water quality constituents.  This method can also be applied to individual storm events to assess if there is a first flush response.  We processed all data using R code and provide a sample dataset and code such that all of you may give this method a try!

Calculating and Plotting Flow Duration Curves

First, instantaneous flow rates in the dataset are ranked in descending order.



The cumulative discharge is then calculated by integrating the area under the Q Sorted curve at each data point. 


The cumulative discharge calculated at each instantaneous flow rate can be calculated as a percentage of the total discharge yielding Vk% values corresponding to the kth cumulative probability and the time elapsed at each point can be calculated as a percentage of the total time.  This works because even though flow rates are rearranged, the same amount of data points exist within the dataset with the same time increment occurring between each value. Vk% values can then be plotted as a function of the percentage of the total time.  This is what is referred to as Flow Duration Curves.  This provides a way of demonstrating of how relatively flashy the watershed may be either relatively to other watersheds or to previous years.  

The flashiness of a watershed refers to how rapidly flow is altered as a result of storm events/varying conditions.  More frequent spikes in flow in response to precipitation events, in which flow increases and decreases more greatly and rapidly, are typically indicative of watersheds with predominant portions of streamflow being influenced by surface runoff, a quicker responding contributor of water to streamflow.   

This method allows us to see the percentage of the total discharge that occurs in a fraction of the total time with the lowest probabilities of occurrence corresponding with the highest flow rates associated with event flow.  Therefore, if one watershed produces a majority of the total discharge in 50% of the time versus a watershed that produces a majority of the total discharge in 80% of the time, that watershed may be considered relatively flashier because a greater portion of the total discharge occurs in association with higher flow rates.  In other words, streamflow would be considered more reactive to event water because the event hydrograph rises and recedes more quickly than the other watershed.  This quick rise and recession allows for most flow to occur in a smaller percentage of the time versus the watershed that has a much wider event hydrograph spanning across a greater range of instantaneous flow values over a greater period of time. Visually, this method can provide a relative comparison of the flashiness of multiple watersheds.  In the example above, the shape of the curve in the first watershed would have a greater slope towards the lower percentages/probabilities of occurrence and the curve for the second watershed would be somewhat flatter. 

Calculating and Plotting Load Duration Curves

This part is similar to calculating Vk% except instantaneous flux is calculated (instantaneous flow rate * instantaneous concentration) and ranked in descending order instead.

Instantaneous flux = QC


The cumulative load is then calculated by integrating the area under the QCsort curve at each data point.   


   
Once again, the cumulative load calculated at each instantaneous flux value can be calculated as a percentage of the total load yielding Mk% values and the time elapsed at each point can be calculated as a percentage of the total time.  Mk% and Vk% values can be plotted as functions of the probability of occurrence and multiple Mk% curves for various water quality components can be plotted simultaneously for comparison of loading as a function of probability of occurrence.  For example, 50% of the nitrate load may be exported in 25% of the time whereas 50% of the ammonium load may be exported in only 5% of the time.  The interaction of flow and concentrations could be examined further to explain differences among loading and flashiness of concentrations with event flow.


With the above plot, we see that large changes in Mk% and Vk% occur near the lower probabilities of occurrence.  This demonstrates how crucial continuous water quality data is to understanding loading in watersheds because a large portion of the load can occur within a very small portion of time. We also see that it becomes slightly difficult to examine differences in the curves towards both ends of the x-axis.  Therefore, it is helpful to use the qnorm function in R to zoom in on the very low and high probabilities of occurrence, or on the tails of the normal distribution curve.  Check out the plot below and try the code yourselves! Thanks for reading!





R Code link to produce the last two graphs

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Is measuring flow such an easy thing to do?

This is the title of one of the presentations that were given March 22nd and 23rd, 2011 by our group to illustrate some of the uncertainties associated with measuring flow using rating curves.  The presentation can be found directly here

Several animations were given during the talk, which we think illustrate quite nicely the fact that in some situations, the hypothesis of a unique relationship may not hold.  This is something already well known, but we thought that seeing some real data helps.

The first animation shows data obtained in a low land stream in North Carolina when 'back water conditions' are regularly obtained (slope 0.01%; dates in 1998).  The curves drawn are sometimes called 'looped stage-discharge curves' and show a hysteresis of the stage-discharge relationship.



The second animation was obtained in a more upland stream in Nozay in France (44; dates in 2004).  The hypothesis of a unique relationship between stage and discharge seems to be a lot better verified.


In both cases, however, there are some uncertainties that may have some consequences, particularly on the cumulative flow volumes, as can be seen on the presentation.

The reason for that is that the rating curves that may be drawn from manual gauging and that are used to calculate instantaneous flow depend on:

  1. the presence or not of a hysteresis in the stage-discharge relation
  2. the number of points from which the best fit rating curve is established
  3. the range of stage and discharge covered to establish the rating curve
Below are two animations showing, for 20 gauging points, how different the rating curves can be depending on when they were obtained.  The first animation with the red dots show dramatic differences between consecutive rating curves and correspond to the lowland stream in North Carolina where back water conditions were known to happen.


The second with the green dots show differences in rating curves for the upland stream in France where the unique rating curve was thought to hold quite well.  It becomes obvious that the curves do not vary nearly as much as they do for the lowland stream, although there are some variations despite the fact that the curve was fit extremely well through the points for each (r²>0.98).



The consequences on the cumulative flow volumes can be seen on the presentation.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Lab Assistance, Fresh Projects

We have been very busy in the lab lately, despite the lack of blog posts! We've welcomed Tyler as a new lab assistant for this semester.

A few random updates...

- As you can see on the GaugeCam website, we've installed a new set of fiducials on the water level bench background. We're referring to these as bowtie fiducials, for obvious reasons!

- We recently completed the construction of a seepage tank. The purpose of this tank is to evaluate different methods of measuring upwelling groundwater flow rates. A parallel project is the development of new ways to continuously measure these flow rates.

- As part of several projects, we've been using an interesting apparatus called a Marriote jar (or siphon). Check it out on Wikipedia!

- Several of us in the lab are being trained on spectrophotometry equipment. It's an exciting experience, because absorbance and fluorescence are very useful in determining the chemistry of solutions! But it's also challenging, because photochemistry relies on numerous assumptions and caveats. Many of the measurements are easy to make, but expertise is required to interpret the results.