Flow, Precipitation, and Turbidity of the Red Cedar River - Lab Report Example

Relationship between flow, Precipitation and turbidity, for the Red Cedar River Turbidity measures the light-scattering properties of water (Jeffrey 32). It is therefore, an index of the total amount of suspended particles (Tran et al, 34). In a stream run off, suspended particles might result from a number of human and natural management related sources that might include road related sediment, stream bank erosion, agriculture or urban runoff and other natural management-related causes (Roulston 45). Discharge, on the other hand, is a terminology that refers to the rate of flow of a volume of water, including dissolved chemical species, any suspended solids that are transported through any given cross-sectional area (Taur 24). This experiment deals with how turgidity, flow or discharge and precipitation of the red Cedar River are related. The objectives of the experiment They include: Seeking to attain a better understanding of how changes in the weather affect discharge in a small river. Gaining an understanding of a river discharge and how it is measured. Gaining an understanding of how to evaluate the dynamic relationship between weather events, the timing, and magnitude of changes in river flow. Comparing the accuracy of two methods of measuring discharge and accounting for the differences. Establishing the relationship between turbidity, discharge and particle load, as well as how to calculate load from the other two measures. Finding out how changes in discharge affect turbidity and load, in order to be able to predict water clarity and particle transport in the river. Apparatus/Tools used The set of tools for turbidity and Particle Load include a sounding line (a rope attached to a concrete weight), a timer, a supply of tongue depressors, and the aerial photo, a bucket to collect samples of river water bottles or jugs for transporting water samples to the lab, and a device for filtering known volumes of water, graduated cylinders, a supply of filters that will retain particles ≥1μm in size, metal dishes for drying and storing the filters, an oven and a desiccator to dry the filters, and a balance for measuring particle mass. Procedure In measuring turgidity and filtration of the river water sample, the procedures included, first the river water sample was collected from a Farm Lane bridge. Secondly, filter papers were obtained from stack and placed on the manifold followed by screwing the filtering cup down tightly in order to avoid leaks. As a third procedure, a vacuum was turned on followed by measuring out 0.5L of water at a time, which was then placed into a graduated cylinder while carefully pouring it into the filter cup. Water was added to the cylinder until when the filter paper turned brown. Water from both flasks was emptied after every use. Thirty filter papers were then placed labeled metal dish. This was followed by placing the metal dish with the filter into a drying oven. It was then that the filters were tried for a period of 24 hours. Finally, with the use of a metal weighing dish, the weight of the dried dirty filter was recorded. Results Table 01 shows Raw Data for the Experiment Date Sample filter After dry Mass of particles Turbidity River depth Volume of water Time Discharge All 10/3/2012 W 1 0.115g 0.117g 0.002g 2.39 x 10-4 1.66m 500ml 822 35.99 Adam Tommy 10/5/2012 F 2 0.115g 0.117g 0.002g 6.22 x 10-4 1.76m 500ml 3210 8.83 Tiffany Tommy 10/10/2012 W 3 0.115g 0.121g 0.006g 4.38 x 10-4 1.71m 500ml 1342 1/4 21.33 Adam Victoria 12/12/2012 F 4 0.115g 0.119g 0.004g 4.80 x10-4 1.58m 500ml 820 38.13 Tiffany Victoria 10/15/2012 M 5 0.115g 0.118g 0.003g 2.39 x 10-4 1.74m 500ml 1232 22.93 Tiffany Tommy 10/17/2012 W 6 0.115g 0.116g 0.001g 1.80 x 10-4 1.775m 500ml 534 50.57 Adam Victoria 10/19/2012 F 7 0.115g 0.118g 0.003g 2.08 x 10-4 1.69m 500ml 1426 20.5 Adam Victoria 10/22/2012 M 8 0.115g 0.122g 0.007g 6.84 x 10-4 1.71m 500ml 1014 28.57 1. Table for Group Discharge measurements and USGS discharge measurements A graph of Group Discharge Data against USGS discharge Data for a period of nine days 2. Table showing precipitation and discharge through Time. Days Precipitation values River Discharge msuhort 0 daily summary 0 0 date pcpn 9/17/2012 0 30 9/18/2012 3.05 30 9/19/2012 0 27 9/20/2012 0.76 26 9/21/2012 4.57 27 9/22/2012 2.79 29 9/23/2012 1.27 28 9/24/2012 0 30 9/25/2012 0 29 9/26/2012 0 28 9/27/2012 0 26 9/28/2012 0 26 9/29/2012 0 26 9/30/2012 0 26 10/1/2012 0 28 10/2/2012 0 29 10/3/2012 0 31 10/4/2012 2.03 32 10/5/2012 0.25 31 10/6/2012 0 26 10/7/2012 0 25 10/8/2012 0 25 10/9/2012 0 25 10/10/2012 3.81 28 10/11/2012 1.02 28 10/12/2012 1.02 30 10/13/2012 21.59 50 10/14/2012 6.35 63 10/15/2012 0 51 10/16/2012 0 46 10/17/2012 6.6 45 10/18/2012 10.41 61 10/19/2012 3.56 53 10/20/2012 1.27 55 10/21/2012 0 51 10/22/2012 20.07 51 10/23/2012 6.6 94 10/24/2012 0.25 79 10/25/2012 0 70 10/26/2012 1.52 63 Variable Ids: pcpn: Precipitation (mm) HYDROGRAPH FOR 9-DAYS PERIOD Where Red graph represent Discharge while blue graph represent precipitation 3. GRAPH OF TURBIDITY ESTIMATES AGAINST DISCHARGE FOR A 9-DAYS PERIOD Turbidity Discharge 2.39 x 10-4 35.99 6.22 x 10-4 8.83 4.38 x 10-4 21.33 4.80 x10-4 38.13 2.39 x 10-4 22.93 1.80 x 10-4 50.57 2.08 x 10-4 20.5 6.84 x 10-4 28.57 4. Table for Load Estimate and USGS Discharge A graph of Load Estimates against USGS Discharge Discussion The hypotheses of this experiment are first, that there is no statistically significance between the Group Discharge data and the USGS data. The second hypothesis is that increase in precipitation leads to an increase in discharge and vice versa. Thirdly, increase in turbidity causes a corresponding increase in river discharge Last but not least, river discharge is inversely related to the load estimate. Basing on the graphs above, it is quite clear that the data support the four hypothesis stated above. Work Cited Jeffrey, Holah. Foundations River erosion. New York: McGraw Hill.2005. Roulston, Johy. River discharge. New York: McGraw Hill.2007. Susan, Agort. Geography behind Rivers. New York: Prentice Hall. 2008. Taur, Ning. Precipitation and River discharge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.2008. Tran, Q, et al. Relationship between River flow and precipitation . New York: Oxford Publishers. 2007. Read More