Water pressure and ground vibrations induced by water guns near Brandon Road Lock and Dam and Lemont, Illinois

Ryan F. Adams; Carolyn M. Koebel; William S. Morrow

doi:10.3133/sir20175153

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20175153

Water pressure and ground vibrations induced by water guns near Brandon Road Lock and Dam and Lemont, Illinois

Ryan F. Adams·Carolyn M. Koebel·William S. Morrow

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multiple geophysical sensors were used to characterize the underwater pressure field and ground vibrations of a seismic water gun and its suitability to deter the movement of Asian carps (particularly the silver [ Hypophthalmichthys molitrix ] and bighead [ Hypophthalmichthys nobilis ] carps) while ensuring the integrity of surrounding structures. The sensors used to collect this information were blast-rated hydrophones, surface- and borehole-mounted geophones, and fixed accelerometers. Results from two separate studies are discussed in this report. The Brandon Road study took place in May 2014, in the Des Plaines River, in a concrete-walled channel downstream of the Brandon Road Lock and Dam near Joliet, Illinois. The Lemont study took place in June 2014, in a segment of the dolomite setblock-lined Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal near Lemont, Illinois. Two criteria were evaluated to assess the potential deterrence to carp migration, and to minimize the expected effect on nearby structures from discharge of the seismic water gun. The first criterion was a 5-pound-per-square-inch (lb/in 2 ) limit for dynamic underwater pressure variations. The second criterion was a maximum velocity and acceleration disturbance of 0.75 inch per second (in/s) for sensitive machinery (such as the lock gates and pumps) and 2.0 in/s adjacent to canal walls, respectively. The criteria were based on previous studies of fish responses to dynamic pressure variations, and effects of vibrations on the structural integrity of concrete walls. The Brandon Road study evaluated the magnitude and extent of the pressure field created by two water gun configurations in the concrete-walled channel downstream of the lock where channel depths ranged from 11 to 14 feet (ft). Data from a single 80-cubic-inch (in³) water gun set at 6 ft below water surface (bws) produced a roughly cylindrical 5-lb/in 2 pressure field 20 ft in radius, oriented vertically, with the radius decreasing to less than 15 ft at the water surface. A combination of two 80-in 3 water guns set at 6 and 8 ft, respectively, produced a similarly shaped 5 lb/in 2 pressure field 30 ft in radius. Neither of the water gun configurations exceeded the given threshold of 5 lb/in 2 above the static pressure along the walls of the canal at the 700 lb/in 2 water gun input pressure. Velocity and acceleration data were collected simultaneously with the underwater pressure data to understand the response of adjacent canal walls to the water gun firings. Maximum velocity and acceleration were 0.239 in/s and 0.0188 feet per second squared (ft/s 2 ), respectively. The Lemont study replicated and expanded upon work done in 2011. The pressure field created by the water gun was evaluated in a deeper environment (about 25 ft of water depth) than that of the Brandon Road study. To replicate the 2011 study, data were collected with the same water gun placements and input pressure, but static underwater pressure monitoring was added. Two 80-in 3 water guns were suspended below a platform at depths of 4 and 14 ft bws. Pressure was lower when the gun suspended at 4 ft bws was fired as compared to firing the single gun suspended at 14 ft bws. Firing both guns simultaneously produced similar pressures to the single gun suspended at 14 ft bws. Data were collected to assess the pressure field produced by two 80-in 3 water guns separated by 80 ft and suspended at a depth of 14 ft bws. The spatial extent of the 5-lb/in 2 threshold varied substantially with gun input air pressure. Firing the water gun with an air pressure of 2,000 lb/in 2 generated a pressure field greater than the threshold at all but one location in the measured region. Additionally, the water gun with an air pressure of 1,000 lb/in 2 did not reach the threshold anywhere in the measured region. Maximum velocity and acceleration were 0.304 in/s and 0.015 ft/s 2 , respectively.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 41.5011° to 41.5033° latitude; -88.1056° to -88.1033° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Ryan F. Adams, Carolyn M. Koebel, William S. Morrow. 2018-02-13. Water pressure and ground vibrations induced by water guns near Brandon Road Lock and Dam and Lemont, Illinois. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175153

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗