Laserfiche WebLink
<br />UUll;H~ <br /> <br />Draft-Do Not Cite <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />August 2003 <br /> <br /> <br />Western A <br />- Western 8 <br /> <br />30000 <br /> <br />Figure 16. Percent Exceedance for Mean Daily Flows Between 15,000 and 30,000 cfs at the <br />USGS Gage on the Gunnison River near Grand Junction Under Different Aspinall Unit <br />Release Scenarios-1975 through 2000 Hydrology. ' <br /> <br />3.3 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT <br /> <br />Estimated sediment loads were calculated using the Pitlick et aI. model (Equations 3 <br />and 4) and the Van Steeterand Pitlick model (Equation 2) for the six flow scenarios at the Grand <br />Junction gage, A discussion of the results is given below. The results of these calculations are <br />presented in Tables 7 and 8, respectively. Suspended loads were not calculated for the Delta gage <br />because the transport models were specifically dev'eloped for the Grand Junction gage, and use <br />of the models for other locations could lead to large uncertainties in the results. <br /> <br />For dry and average years, both models predict about the same sediment loads, F~ :rr <br />years (e.g., 1984), the Van Steeter and Pitlick model predicted loads exceed those predicted with <br />the Pitlick et aI_ model by about 20%. This. difference is not unexpected given the difficulty and - <br />