My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00018
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:12:23 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:28:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.10
Description
Colorado River-Water Projects-Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powel-Glen Canyon Adaptive Management
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/2003
Author
USGS-GCMRC
Title
Variations in Sand Storage Measured at Monumented Cross Sections in the CO River Between Glen Canyon Dam and Lava Falls Rapid Northern Arizona 1992-99
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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 />used in the change-in-area calculaIion, The Wilcoxon <br />rank-sum test (Devore. 1991: Helsel and Hirsch. 2000) <br />was used to detect statistically significant differences in <br />mean bed elevations, This test was used because it does <br />not require knowledge of the underlying staIistical <br />distribution of the bed-elevation recordings. In this <br />application the lest has Ihe null hypothesis that, at each <br />increment. the mean bed elevation in one measurement <br />is equal to the mean bed elevation in the next <br />measurement. To evaluate the hypothesis. the tesI <br />sIatistic W is computed on the basis of bed-elevation <br />data for the two measurements. and then a two-sided <br />p-value associated with rejecIing the null hypothesis is <br />determined on Ihe basis of the value of Wand the <br />number of depIh recordings for each measurement. <br />For this investigaIion the null hypothesis was rejected <br />for p-values less than or equal 100,05. which means <br />that the null hypothesis is rejected with a 5-percent <br />chance of it being tme, <br />Because of differences in wale I' level or in cross- <br />section geometry. or because of missing records as a <br />result of interference of Ihe depth-sounder signal. the <br />depth at some parts of a cross-sectional transect may <br />not have been recorded; therefore, fewer than 10 depth <br />recordings exist for some 0,25-m increments in some <br />cross-section measurements. For increments at which <br />the number of depth recordings equaled or exceeded <br />eight for both measurements. the p-value was <br />computed from Ihe nonnal approximation for the <br />distribution of W. For increments at which the number <br />of depth recordings for either or both measurements <br />was less than eighI but greater than two, the p-value <br />was detennined from the exact disIribution of W. <br />The test was not applied for increments at which Ihe <br />number of depth recordings for either or both <br />measurements was equal to or less than two, <br />The fraction of the cross section to which the rank-sum <br />tesI was applied and the fraction of the total cross <br />secIion for which bed-elevation differences between <br />measurements were significant were also calculated, <br />Changes in cross-sectional area between <br />measurements were calculated for each incremental <br />distance (0,25 m). using the selected or interpolaIed <br />poim as the center nf Ihe incremem. by lirst computing <br />the incremental area as the difference in mean bed <br />elevations multiplied by 0.25 m, The change in area for <br />the entire cross section then was computed by summing <br />those incremental areas for which the p-value was less <br />than or equal to 0,05, Although the original data from <br />the to transects recorded for cross section p06 on <br /> <br />August 24. 1992. were unrecoverable from the <br />database. the processed mean bed elevations at the <br />0,25-m incremems had been calculated from the <br />original data and stored in the database, Calculations of <br />change in area using these data from this date, <br />Iherefore. did not consider the p-values, The change in <br />area of the bed elevation represcms the change in <br />sediment storage in the cross section. As a consequence <br />of determining changes in cross-sectional area using <br />this method, increases in area indicate sediment <br />deposition and decreases indicate sediment removal. <br />A standard error that can be applied to the <br />com pUled cross-secIional change in area was calculated <br />for an averaged cross secIion, The standard error is a <br />measure of the accuracy with which the computed <br />(mean) change in area estimates the tme mean change <br />in area, A range. in which there is a <br />68,3-percem level of confidence that the tme mean <br />change in area lies within this range. can be calculated <br />by subtracting the standard error from the compuIed <br />mean change in area for the lower end of the range and <br />by adding the sIandard error to the computed mean <br />change in area for the upper end of the range, For a <br />95-percent level of confidence. the range is calculated <br />as previously described. but the standard error is first <br />multiplied by 2 (Barford, 1985), <br />The standard error uses the standard deviation <br />calculated when computing mean bed elevations from <br />the 10 transeCIS collected during a measurement <br />(fig, 9A. step 5). and the number of 0,25-m increments <br />for each transect. which is a function of stream width, <br />The sIandard error must be propagated through the <br />change-in-area calculations (fig, 98) and accumulated <br />change-in-area calculations (summing changes in area <br />for a cross section across many measurements), <br />A representative standard error was eSIimated and <br />propagated through the calculaIions, This representa- <br />tive standard error was calculated using a standard <br />deviation of 0, 15 m for the elevations and a stream <br />width of 131 m, These values were calculated from the <br />transect data from all cross sections in the primary data <br />set (table 4) and represent an average standard <br />deviation and stream width. Table 5 shows the <br />estimated standard error that can be applied to changes <br />in area documented in this report, The table shows the <br />standard error for a single change in area calculated <br />between two measurements (I period) and accumu- <br />lated changes in area over several measurements <br />(periods), for 68,3-percem and 95-percem levels of <br />contidence, For example. if the change in area between <br /> <br />tIl .. ,. <br />20 Variations in Sand Storage MIt1Jsur~EOloradO River Between Glen Canyon Dam and Lava Falls Rapid, Nonhern Arizona. 1992-99 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.