Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20211064

Instruments, methods, rationale, and derived data used to quantify and compare the trapping efficiencies of four types of pressure-difference bedload samplers

Abstract

Bedload and ancillary data were collected to calculate and compare the bedload trapping efficiencies of four types of pressure-difference bedload samplers as part of episodic, sediment-recirculating flume experiments at the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, in January–March 2006. The bedload-sampler experiments, which were conceived, organized, and led by the U.S. Geological Survey’s Office of Surface Water, were part of a broader suite of experiments performed in the rectangular, concrete-lined, sediment-recirculating Main Channel Facility (“main channel flume”). Collectively referred to as “StreamLab06,” the experiments were conducted under the auspices of the National Center for Earth-Surface Dynamics, University of Minnesota. Four pressure-difference-type bedload samplers—a standard Helley-Smith, US BLH-84, Elwha, and Toutle River-2—were deployed by using hand-held rods in the main flume in a series of trials during steady flows as part of the first two of seven phases of the StreamLab06 experiments. The Phase I flows were released over a sand bed. Gravel composed the bed during the Phase II flows. Bedload samples were collected during flows ranging from 2.0 cubic meters per second (near the incipient motion of bed material) to 5.5 cubic meters per second. A total of 2,030 bedload samples were collected—1,000 as part of 19 sand-bed trials, and 1,030 as part of 27 gravel-bed trials. Bedload was captured in five contiguous weigh drums inside a slot spanning the full width of the main flume channel 8.5 meters downstream from the cross-section in which the bedload samplers were deployed. The contents of each drum were automatically weighed and recorded as a time series about every 1.1 seconds. Each drum automatically, independently, and episodically dumped its contents into the bottom of the slot upon the accumulation of a pre-determined mass of entrapped sediment, after which the drum continued to capture and weigh bedload. An auger at the bottom of the slot evacuated the accumulating sediment to a side-channel pump that piped the captured sediments upstream and discharged them back to the flume. Bedload-transport rates were calculated from measurements of the masses of material trapped by the bedload samplers and from the data produced by the automated bedload capture-and-weigh system of the main channel flume. These data were used to compute at-a-point and mean bedload-transport rates for subsequent use in developing bedload-trapping efficiency (calibration) coefficients for each bedload sampler and for comparing the relative trapping efficiencies of the manually deployed bedload samplers. The data were collected to enable the use of several computational methods for deriving bedload-trapping coefficients. Continuous ancillary data including stage, water discharge, and water temperature were automatically collected and stored. Flow depths were manually measured and recorded concurrent with each at-a-point bedload-sampler deployment. Other information obtained during parts of the experiments included longitudinal water-surface slope, bedload particle-size distributions, and suspended-sediment concentrations and percent sand analyzed from samples collected by depth integration with a US DH-48 isokinetic suspended-sediment sampler. This report describes the types and availability of the bedload and ancillary data derived through the StreamLab06 experiments. The data are available from the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory and the U.S. Geological Survey through a data release. Also included are selected descriptive and historical information as well as the background, experimental design, experimental caveats, and other factors relevant to the production of the bedload-transport and ancillary data produced through Phases I and II of the StreamLab06 experiments.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

John R. Gray, Gregory E. Schwarz, David J. Dean, Jonathan A. Czuba, Joel T. Groten. 2021-07-09. Instruments, methods, rationale, and derived data used to quantify and compare the trapping efficiencies of four types of pressure-difference bedload samplers. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20211064

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona