nlbarber: (Default)
[personal profile] nlbarber
From my dry vantage point 4 states away, I stop to point out a very interesting consequence of Hurricane Ike's move onshore in southeast Texas:
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/tx/nwis/uv/?site_no=08041780&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060
On this stream gage in Beaumont, the storm surge is strong enough to reverse the flow in the river. The gage height graph at the top shows the typical water-level rise of a flood, but the bottom graph shows streamflow (discharge) that went negative when the storm hit. Positive values are flow downstream, negative means the river is flowing upstream. (The negative values will show up on the default graph for 7 days, then you can adjust the plotting period to see them for 60 days before they age off.)

Cool. I didn't know our gages could even record that. (OK, I'm a ground-water hydrologist, not a surface-water one, so I never thought about the problem before). Must be the relatively new equipment that measures velocity as well as gage height. The old-fashioned method of stream gaging was/is that you install a continuous monitor for the gage height, and then you go measure the streamflow over the range of gage heights and construct a stage-discharge curve so you can translate any gage height to a streamflow. Well, any height that's in the range of your curve...thus the desire to go measure the stream anytime the river gets higher or lower than you've measured before, and the reason that field technicians go out to try to measure streams at the peak of a flood. But a gage height monitor wouldn't let you know that the river was running backwards.

I note that this is a gage right at the coast, and it shows flows that are just barely negative regularly (tides). Under Ike's influence, it's flowing at quantities well above the daily maximum recorded there, and upstream. However, it looks like the flow has already reversed and that water will all now go the other way--and the daily average may well come out close to zero. I'll be interested to see...

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-13 06:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mmegaera.livejournal.com
A gage or a gauge? Or is that spelling a hydrologist thing?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-13 11:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mmegaera.livejournal.com
I don't recall ever making ground water into one word, but that may just be me. Mary and I are still "discussing the pronunciation of pika [g].

I figured gage couldn't be a typo, given how many times you used the word in your post.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-17 11:08 pm (UTC)
filkferengi: (Default)
From: [personal profile] filkferengi
It has to be peek-a, because pie-ka is too reminiscent of pica, the old typewriter font.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-18 01:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mmegaera.livejournal.com
It makes a lot more sense to pronounce pika as pie-ka than it does to pronounce pica as pie-ka (which I also do). Besides, it just makes them homonyms.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-13 07:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sunlizzard.livejournal.com
Fascinating! With an oddity like that, will there be some sort of asterisk or footnote in the records denoting what the circumstances were?

I keep watching the radars of the SE (because of Emily being located in Charlotte now), and thinking of y'all, and hoping to see rain to ease your drought. Sadly, it doesn't look like the remnants of Ike will help you much.

Profile

nlbarber: (Default)
nlbarber

November 2016

S M T W T F S
  12345
67891011 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags