My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00519
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
DayForward
>
WMOD00519
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:40:31 PM
Creation date
4/24/2008 2:51:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Project Name
Weather Modification Programme - Precipitation Enhancement Project
Title
A Review of the Hydrological Aspects of Evaluation of Precipitation Enhancement
Date
5/1/1977
Weather Modification - Doc Type
Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />2 <br /> <br />6. As an alternative to this costly process, designers of evaluatj,on systems <br />for precipitation enhancement projects have considered using comparisons of treated <br />and untreated streamflo~1 response to precipitation, In regions where increased <br />"later supply is frequently desired, car'efully made streamflo", observation:3 may be a <br />long-established part of the 'vater management system. rJ~he streamflo", past a g'auging <br />point is an integrated resultant of the varying conditions over the contributing <br />drainage area, As such it provides, in a single number, a means of characterizing <br />the precipitation experience over what may be a largely inaccessible area without <br />requiring that the point-by-point details of that precipitation experience be kno"m. <br />In addition, as the work of Crawford and Linsley (1963) has shown, a given increase <br />in precipitation may produce a greater percentage increase in streamflo~, thus making <br />detection of the increase easier. <br /> <br />I <br />i <br />f <br />I <br />I , <br />I I <br />I <br /> <br />investment required to provide the large number of gauges required, the job of <br />collecting, processing, and analysing the mass of precipitation data generated by a <br />dense gauging network requires commitments of major amour,ts of timE and money. <br /> <br />7. There are, however, disadvantages to the use of streamflow for evaluation <br />that may ouhleigh the adve.ntages in some circumstances. Inaccuracy of discharge <br />measurement, high variability of natural flo"IS, and time dependence of successive <br />river flo",s have been identified (Thorn, 1957; Harkovic, 1966) as the min disadvant- <br />ages. These win be discussed briefly as an aid to those decision-makers in PEP <br />and elsewhere "Iho may not have been previously concerned vri th hydroloBY' <br /> <br />i I <br /> <br />III BACKGR01JND INFOHHATION ON THE NATURE OF STRE1\.MFLOW AND ITS 11EASUREMENT <br /> <br />8. The accuracy of streamflow measurements has been addressed (DiCkinson, 1967) <br />as part of a comprehensive project to develop techniques for evaluation of precipita- <br />tion enl1ancement projects. His work provides an objective means of evaluating the <br />import of streamflow errors. <br /> <br />9. Streamflo\v volume is computed by integrating a time series of discharge <br />rates. Discharge is usually measured by observing the depth of water flowing past a <br />known cross-section. This cross-section may range from the calibrated notch in a <br />weir, as used in the measurement of small flows, to the entire cross-section of the <br />channel of a major river. Heasurements of depth are converted. to discharge values <br />by entry into a rating curve "Ihich relates discharge to water depth. l!'or the notched <br />",eirs and flumes used to measure discharge in small streams and irrigation canals, <br />the rating curve can be quite precisely determined and remains reasonably stable. <br /> <br />10. For larger streams, the rating curve is the result of sampling the flow <br />rate vrith a current meter at a number of vertical profiles across the width of the <br />channel. Since the flow rate varies in the vertie-al profile due to friction effects <br />and turbulence, sampling errors are possible. The number of profiles taken across <br />the width of the channel also affects the sampling error. In the time required to <br />observe a number of profiles, the stage or depth of the river may change. The dis- <br />charge at a given stage will differ, clepending on "lhether the river is rising or <br />falling. The final accuracy of a ratine curve will be influenced by the condition <br />of the floH meter, the turbulence of flo"l, the sampling procedure, ho\v \'Iell the <br />assumption of steady-state flow during the transect is met, the magnitude of the <br />difference in rising and falling flow (Fread, 1976). In addition, rating curve accu- <br />racy depends on how stable the cross-section formed by the riverbanks and bottom <br />remains during the rating process and for subsequent use of the rating curve. If the <br />channel is formed of sandy banks and bottom, major changes in c:J:'oss-section can occur <br />during the course of a rise, fo110",ed by a return to original conditions after the <br />flow subsides. A rocky channel usually offers acceptable stability, at least unb.l <br />flo\'ls become energetic enough to move the rocks. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.