My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC06972
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
19000-19999
>
WSPC06972
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:08:40 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 6:11:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8283.100
Description
Colorado River Computer Models - Colorado River Simulation System - Reclamation - CORSIM
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
9/1/1973
Author
DOI-BOR
Title
Application of a River Network Model to Water Quality Investigations for the Colorado River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
230
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 />00184~ <br /> <br />(8) Inaccuracies of stream gaging measurements can produce ungaged <br />flow errors of the same order of magnitude as the true ungaged inflows. <br /> <br />(9) Averaging time-dependent hydrologic data over longer and <br />longer time periods reduces the variance for the entire period. <br />Thus mean yearly concentrations will exhibit less variance than <br />mean monthly, while mean weekly, daily, or hourly values will <br />result in a greater variance. <br /> <br />(10) Concentrations contained in the Biennial Report are a hybrid <br />of straight or time-weighted means and flow-weighted ones. For <br />natural streams, mean time-weighted concentrations are higher than <br />mean flow-weighted, while the hybrid method gives intermediate <br />values that are closest to the flow-weighted ones. For reservoirs, <br />differences are insignificant. <br /> <br />(11) Concentrations at a given station are not normally distributed. <br />This is readily apparent when standard deviations are compared to the <br />means since they are often on the same order of magnitude. <br /> <br />(12) Although fluctuations of Lakes Mohave and Havasu are minor, <br />both reservoirs had to be modeled to obtain realistic results. <br /> <br />(13) Identical qualities at Imperial Dam were obtained for the <br />base condition when 0.0 and 0.06 bank storage coefficients were <br />used for Lakes Mohave and Havasu. Thus, results at Imperial are <br />insensitive to reasonable bank storage coefficients for these <br />reservoirs. <br /> <br />(14)' Comparing results of runs in which reservoir storage changes <br />are radically different can be very misleading. <br /> <br />(15) Initial reservoir salinities affect concentrations at Impe- <br />rial Dam during early times, but the effect rapidly diminishes. <br />Salinities are within 5 ppm within 10-14 years using different <br />starting salinities. <br /> <br />(16) l'/hen monthly releases are a large percentage of the current <br />reservoir storage volumes, lagging outflow concentrations can pro- <br />duce unreasonable results. The modified approach described in the <br />report is believed superior. <br /> <br />(17) Use of mean operating plans for various future projects <br />results in minor deficiencies in flows at the upstream bound- <br />aries. They are insignificant in the context of total flows. <br /> <br />(18) Salinities at Imperial Dam will increase under further <br />development, reaching 1,258 ppm for full development. <br /> <br />35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.