Laserfiche WebLink
COYMOY4TlOM <br />• wino = Viso (230 cfs)'" _ .66 fps (L.I9) = 0.8 fps <br />0 cfs <br />The estimate based on the field observations is somecahat lower <br />(0.5 fps), but it is reasonably close. Therefore, using 0.8 fps <br />average velocity: . <br />4.6 mi (5280 ft/mi) =g hours time of travel. <br />.8 ft/sec 3600 sec/hr <br />Eight hours is approximately the elapsed time between the first <br />and last measurements made each day. This means that measurements <br />were being made on approximately the same water as it moved down- <br />stream. This is desirable because it helps minimize channel stor- <br />e age changes due to varying upstream stages. <br />It is not possible to determine precisely the channel <br />storage changes from the available data. However, it can be <br />• stated that changes, if any, are small. Overnight flew prior <br />to each day's measurement was quite steady as noted above. Some <br />drop in stage did occur during each day, but it is not certain <br />• that this was due. to upstream changes. Specifically, drop in <br />_ stage was at least partly, and possibly primarily, attributable <br />_ to evapotranspirative losses. This would have been occurring <br />. at a fairly uniform rate over the entire river and not just up- <br />stream. Evapotranspiration has been handled separately in this <br />report. <br />i <br />~~ If stage changes at Station 1 were entirely due to up- <br />+ stream conditions, it would be possible to estimate channel <br />storage changes from the gage height record. Since the time of <br />travel over the 4.6 mile reach was approximately eight hours, <br />"one method of estimating could be to use gage heights at four <br />~ ~ hours either side of the start of discharge measurement. For <br />example, on 29 August: <br />• <br />~i <br />4-9 <br />