Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “EOS Transactions”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2014

Some general observations of physiographic and climatic influences on floods

The magnitude of flood‐runoff and the degree to which it concentrates in river‐channels with respect to time is known to vary within wide limits. To a considerable extent these variations relate to the physiographic and edaphlc features of the drainage‐basins as they have been developed by the geologic and climatic history of the particular province in which they are located. Although storms of high intensity occur throughout the United States, the runoff therefrom has been observed to have certain inherent characteristics in wet or humid areas that are different from those in arid or semiarld regions even though the laws governing the flow of water either over ground or in river‐channels are universal in application. Essential features of flood‐behavior in wet or humid areas where stream‐flow is sustained throughout the year and river‐channels and valleys are comparatively well defined and permanent, differ from those in arid or semiarld regions where stream‐flow is very erratic and flashy and the channels are formed largely by occasional intense runoff rather than the slow and orderly development by the continuous occupancy by flowing water. Moreover the flood‐problem in areas where a part of the precipitation occurs as snow differs from that in areas where all the precipitation occurs as rain. Furthermore, in areas where snow does occur there seems to be a wide range in flood‐runoff characteristics depending upon the temperature in and altitude of the particular zone. Some of the different flood‐characteristics as they relate to total runoff and the concentration thereof are described herein and possible reasons therefor are related to conditions which seem to be more or less inherent in particular physiographic and climatic provinces.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

The measurement and computation of flood‐discharge

The Geological Survey has been engaged for more than 50 years in measuring and publishing the discharge of streams of the United States. Measured discharges have ranged in quantity from a small fraction of a second‐foot measured volumetrically to more than 2,000,000 second‐feet measured by use of the current‐meter equipment recently developed by the Survey and described by the writer in the April 1938 issue of Civil Engineering . In this work, systematic and generally complete records of discharge are being obtained at about 3700 gaging‐stations maintained and operated by the United States Geological Survey. A typical structure at which records of river‐stages are obtained is shown in Figure 1. A discharge‐record at a gaging‐station is usually derived from a record of stage by means of a curve or table showing the stage‐discharge relation as determined by measurements of discharge distributed over the range of stage.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Part I—History and activities of the section of geophysics of the United States Geological Survey

From the beginning of time, all ingenuity of mankind has been concentrated upon the methods of finding gold and unusual deposits in the earth. An illustration (Fig. 1) from the old treatise by Agricola, “De Re Metallica,” published in 1580, will serve to show the implicit faith of that generation in divining methods. However, it was not until 1920 that real progress was made in prospecting by using the latest advances of the physical sciences. The public interest was stimulated by the successes of these methods on the part of commercial operators, and governmental agencies received many requests for information concerning their reliability. There were also, in the late 1920's, high‐pressure mine‐promotion schemes which used geophysical methods in a very questionable manner, symbolized in Figure 2 as of 1928 by an electrified forked stick. Authoritative information concerning such practices for public protection was needed to curb such notorious undertakings. Dr. Scott Turner, then Director of the United States Bureau of Mines, thoroughly understood the situation and was first in the governmental departments to recognize the possible value of a study of modern prospecting methods. The Bureau of Mines began this investigation by employing Drs. A. S. Eve and D. A. Keys of McGill University for short periods in the summer in 1927. Their first publication [see 1 of “References” at end of paper] served to illustrate the fundamental scientific principles which underlie geophysical prospecting. This was followed by a second publication [2] giving the results of field‐tests. In the light of the rapid improvements during the intervening ten years, these two papers take a historical position.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Part II—Geophysical investigations in the Hawaiian Islands

During 1938 and 1939, an extensive series of geophysical surveys, employing both resistivity and magnetic methods, have been carried on in the Hawaiian Islands by the Section of Geophysics of the United States Geological Survey in cooperation with the Division of Ground‐Water of the Survey and the Division of Hydrography of the Territorial Government (see Fig. 1). During this time, surveys have been conducted on the islands of Oahu, Molokai, and Maul. Two distinct types of ground‐water occurrence are being investigated: (1) The basal fresh‐water lens floating on underlying salt water in obedience to the Ghyben‐Herzberg principle (Fig. 2); and (2) perched ground‐water (Fig. 3) .

Hawaii↗
USGS2014

Part III—Fundamental research in geophysics relating to prospecting

In addition to projects such as those reported in parts I and II above, the Section of Geophysics of the Federal Government has undertaken a considerable amount of fundamental research. Two such field‐projects may be mentioned, one a magnetometric study in the Comstock District of Nevada, and the other a resistivity‐study of snow and ice. In addition to the field‐problems, there have been two classes of research of a mathematical type. One of these has been the preparation of tables, scales, and charts for the important geophysical functions already known; the other has been the extension of the relations involved in the resistivity‐problem.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

The possibility of electrical stratification in the Earth as disclosed by surface‐measurements of currents and potentials

Early application of electricity to the ground was of interest particularly to telegraphy especially when it was first commercially applied. There was available at that time the Newtonian analysis of sources and sinks in a semi‐infinite medium which could be applied directly to ground‐contacts. Experiments conducted at that time showed that, while the electrical ground‐resistivity was a factor, it was under engineering control. In computing the resistance of a ground‐contact, Kennelly [see 1 of “References” at end of paper] equated the conducting surface buried in the ground to that of a hemisphere in a medium having a uniform resistivity, and the values so secured were within the safe limits of operation of telegraph‐ and cable‐lines. Later Ollendorf [2] gave a very much more detailed solution of a large number of different types of ground‐contacts for which was computed the current‐ and potential‐distribution in the ground immediately around the ground‐electrode. Wenner [3] also gave a classical solution for the measurement of ground‐resistivity by using separate current‐ and potential‐contacts to the ground which was good practice for measuring the resistivity of metal conductors.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Some features of the Livingston Formation near Nye, Montana

The Livingston Formation is a series of pyroclastic rocks several thousand feet thick cropping out on the north side of the Beartooth Mountains. These pyroclastic rocks grade laterally into the Claggett, Judith River, Bearpaw, and Lennep formations of the Montana Group, according to Stone and Calvert [see 1 of references at end of paper], showing that they were being deposited during much of Montana time; they are therefore of Upper Cretaceous age and antedate the Laramide orogeny. The purpose of this paper is to describe briefly several significant features of the Formation where it is exposed in the Nye No. 2 Quadrangle (Fig. 1) along the southeast edge of its outcrop. It is concluded that much of the Formation was formed by mudflows, and that certain chloritized beds were deposited by hot mudflows.

Montana↗
USGS2014

Volcanic sequence in the Marysvale region in southwest‐central Utah

As a consequence of the detailed investigation of the alunite and other mineral deposits of the Marysvale Region in southwest‐central Utah, opportunity was afforded to map and study the succession of volcanic rocks that underlie most of this area. The Marysvale Region is part of a large area of volcanic rocks, which occupies much of the High Plateaus of Utah (Fig. 1). It is believed that the Marysvale Region covers sufficient area to furnish an adequate sample of this volcanic area, and, though horizontal variations are known to occur, the study may serve as a guide as to what may be expected in other parts of the area. The chemical analyses are the most completely representative of any ever taken in this part of Utah, and they furnish a basis of comparison within the High Plateaus and with other areas in Utah.

Utah↗
USGS2014

Report of committee on glaciers, April 1939

The Committee on Glaciers at present is constituted as follows: Harry Fielding Reid—Professor‐Emeritus of Geology, Johns Hopkins University (former member of the International Glacier Commission), 608 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, Maryland William H. Hobbs—Professor‐Emeritus of Geology, University of Michigan (until recently Vice‐ President of the International Glacier Commission, at present associate member), Ann Arbor, Michigan J. E. Church—Professor of Classics, University of Nevada (President of the International Commission of Snow, and Chairman of the Committee on Snow of the Section of Hydrology, American Geophysical Union), Reno, Nevada Colonel Lawrence Martin—Chief of the Division of Maps, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. Wm. Osgood Field, Jr.—Explorer, 18 West Twelfth Street, New York, N.Y. Earl A. Trager—Chief of the Naturalist Division, National Park Service, Washington, D. C. Glenn L. Parker—District Engineer, Water Resources Branch, United States Geological Survey, 406 Federal Building, Tacoma, Washington Oliver Kehrlein—Chairman, Committee on Glacier Studies, Sierra Club, 1050 Mills Tower, San Francisco, California Kenneth N. Phillips—Associate Hydraulic Engineer, Water Resources Branch, United States Geological Survey, Chairman, Research Committee of the Mazamas, 606 Post‐Office Building, Portland, Oregon William S. Cooper—Professor of Botany, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Gerald FitzGerald, Senior Topographic Engineer, Alaska Branch, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. Laurence M. Gould, Professor of Geology, Carleton College, Northfield, Minnesota François E. Matthes, Chairman , Senior Geologist, Section of Glacial Geology, United States Geological Survey (titular member of the International Glacier Commission), Washington, D.C. In 1938, as in previous years, the Committee devoted its energies primarily to the collecting of data on the variations in length and volume of American glaciers, it being felt that the maintenance of a continuous record of these variations is of prime importance, not only to hydrology and glaciology, but, as has become increasingly evident recently, also to climatology, geomorphology, geography, ecology, history, and archaeology. As the time available for the work of the Committee is limited and does not permit covering the entire field of glaciology, it seems best to devote it before all else to this line of research which yields results of value to so many different sciences. Besides, the gathering of data on glacier‐oscillations is not a one‐man job that can be taken up or dropped at convenience from time to time, but is an organized and far‐flung enterprise whose success depends upon the faithful cooperation of many volunteer workers located in different parts of the country. Such an enterprise, once launched, must be kept running or it will disintegrate and the precious enthusiasm of the field‐workers will be lost.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Report of the committee on underground waters, 1938–39

In preparing the report of the Committee on Underground Waters of the Section of Hydrology for the final year of the triennium, it becomes evident that the collection of fundamental data relating to the hydrology of underground waters continues at a rate comparable to that maintained in the past few years, and perhaps even at an accelerated rate. Almost every extensive practical investigation of ground‐water supplies offers some opportunity for study of fundamental problems, in fact many of them require such fundamental study. With a larger number of investigations in progress, and with fairly liberal appropriations much new and valuable information is being discovered. Some idea of the increase in ground‐water studies since the organization of the Section of Hydrology may be given by a few statistics on the work of the Division of Ground‐Water of the Federal Geological Survey, which does the largest amount of ground‐water work in the United States. In 1932 the Division worked on about 50 projects in 25 States, in 15 of which and in Hawaii the investigations were made in cooperation with States, or other local Governmental agencies. During the current fiscal year work has been completed, or is in progress, on about 100 investigations in 35 States, Hawaii, and the Virgin Islands. The number of States cooperating on the work has increased to 24. During the current fiscal year about \$375,000 will be spent for ground‐water investigations by the Federal Geological Survey and cooperating organizations, as compared to about $175,000 spent during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1932.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Report of the committee on chemistry of natural waters, 1938–39

The membership of this Committee is as follows: C. S. Howard (Chairman), United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. I. A. Denison, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. W. P. Kelley, 119 Hilgard Hall, University of California, Berkeley, California A. C. Lane, 22 Arlington Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts C. S. Scofield, Bureau of Plant Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. D. G. Thompson, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. T. G. Thompson, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington Studies on the corrosion of metals and soils have been continued at the National Bureau of Standards and a report of the recent findings was published under the title “Correlation of the electrolytic corrosion test with the active corrosiveness of soils,” by I. A. Denison and R. B. Darnielle [J. Res., Nation. Bur. Stan., No. 21, pp. 819‐830, December, 1938], Another paper on this subject by Kirk H. Logan was published under the title “Engineering significance of National Bureau of Standards soil corrosion data” [J. Res. Nation. Bur. Stan., pp. 109–125, January. 1939].

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Fluctuations in artesian pressure produced by passing railroad‐trains as shown in a well on Long Island, New York

Perhaps one of the chief interests of ground‐water hydrologists is the study of water‐level fluctuations. Since the beginning of the science of hydrology attempts have been made to interpret these phenomena and determine their significance. On the basis of actual observations and “with special reference to Long Island, New York,” Veatch [see 1 of “References” at end of paper] in 1906 considered in some detail several different causes of water‐level fluctuations. He placed the known causes under two general headings, natural and human. However, considering proximate rather than ultimate causes a further classification might be, and indeed often is, made with regard to the conditions under which the fluctuations are produced by a given agency, natural or human. Thus we speak of ”water‐table conditions“ and ”artesian conditions,“ realizing, however, that the distinction between the two is not always definite. The phenomena peculiar to artesian conditions are usually the result merely of the imperviousness of the confining beds relative to the particular aquifer under consideration. Indeed, it is recognized that perhaps even the most dense clay is not absolutely impervious to the flow of water, given a difference in head, sufficient to produce the flow, though it may be beyond the precision of the means now employed to detect the flow of water through such impervious strata.

New York↗
USGS2014

Discussion of question no. 2 of the International Commission on Subterranean Water: Definitions of the different kinds of subterranean water

The hydrologists who are concerned with the study of the water that occurs below the land‐surface feel strongly the need of better agreement among the different countries as to the fundamental concepts of this branch of hydrology and as to technical terms to designate these concepts. For this reason, the question as to the definitions of different kinds of subterranean water was selected as one of the three questions for discussion by the International Commission on Subterranean Water at the meeting in Edinburgh in 1936 and again (as Question No. 2) at the meeting that is to be held in Washington in September, 1939. The purpose of the International meetings is not only to discuss subjects of mutual interest but also, so far as practicable, to make official decisions. Obviously, decisions on scientific questions should be made only after mature consideration and only on questions as to which there is general agreement. The reports that have been prepared in different countries on the question under consideration and the correspondence and oral discussion appear to show that the way is open for International agreement on some of the basic concepts. A comprehensive paper on the question was prepared for the Edinburgh meeting by Dr. Vasillevskij, of Russia (Internat, Ass. Sci. Hyd., Bull. 22, 1936). Dr. Yasilievskij, in a letter dated January 12, 1939, urges that a beginning be made at the Washington Assembly to adopt new terms on the basis of Latin and Greek roots, these terms to have strict meanings for all countries. The following are tentative suggestions for such a beginning, based especially on information from France, Germany, Great Britain, Holland, Japan, Russia, and the United States.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

A conception of runoff‐phenomena

The problem of transforming observed precipitation into stream‐flow for a natural drainage‐basin can be divided into two parts. The first part requires a procedure for determining the amount and kind of runoff that occurs under various conditions. The second part is concerned with the shaping of the runoff into a discharge‐hydrograph for a particular gaging station. (Rainfall‐eccentricities often provide more difficulties than either of the above.) Considerable investigation has been made and is being continued along both lines of research. The unit‐hydrograph and related methods now provide a means of shaping discharge‐hydrographs as accurately as is required by the practical considerations of most problems. However, it is believed that methods for determining the amount and kind of runoff which occur under various conditions have not been demonstrated to an equivalent refinement. It is with the latter problem that this paper is concerned.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Magnetic studies of the Florida peninsula

This investigation was undertaken primarily as a pilot‐experiment for gaining information concerning the field‐technique and accuracy which is needed for covering large areas in detail and at the same time economically. Owing to the complex nature of magnetic observations, such a pilot‐study serves, in addition, as a basis for determining the best methods of presenting the results of large areal studies in an easily comprehensible form. The State of Florida was chosen for such preliminary study for the following reasons: First, because it is geologically ideal for such an investigation since it comprises a series of unconsolidated, flat‐lying, Tertiary and Cretaceous sediments of low magnetic permeability covering a complex and much‐folded crystalline basement composed largely of rocks carrying strongly paramagnetic materials; secondly, because information concerning the structural trends of the crystalline basement would be of great interest and importance in the study of Appalachian orogeny and the relationship of the Florida Peninsula to both the Appalachian and Antillean tectonic systems.

Florida↗
USGS2014

The evaluation of magnetic anomalies by means of scales

At the 1939 meeting of the Union [Fundamental research in geophysics relating to prospecting, Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, 1939, pp. 302 and 390], the writer described a set of scales for aiding in the evaluation of the magnetic anomaly due to a selected magnetized body. During the past year, these scales have been modified in several minor details. The revised forms are shown by typical scales illustrated in Figure 1.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Committee on chemistry of natural waters, 1939–40

The membership of this Committee is as follows: I. A. Dennison, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C.; C. S. Scofield, Bureau of Plant Industry, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.; D. G. Thompson, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.; Prof. T. G. Thompson, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; and C. S. Howard (Chairman), United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. The Committee arranged for the presentation of the following five papers at the 1940 Spring meeting: (1) Salt‐water intrusion in the Connecticut River, by C. S. Howard, United States Geological Survey; (2) Salinity‐movement and its causes in the Delaware River Estuary, by William D. Mason and Wallace R. Pietsch, Sun Oil Company; (3) Salinity of, lower Savannah River in relation to tidal action and stream‐flow, by William L. Lamar, United States Geological Survey; (4) Corrosion of ferrous and nonferrous metals and the behavior of metallic coatings in tidal marsh, by I. A. Dennison, National Bureau of Standards; (5) The contamination of underground waters by salt water near Parlin, New Jersey, by H. C. Barksdale, United States Geological Survey.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2014

Committee on runoff, 1939–40

The Runoff Committee during the year has consisted of H. K. Barrows, Merrill Bernard, E. S. Callings, R. S. Goodridge, G. A. Hathaway, Joseph Jacobs, Prof. F. T. Mavis, H. S. Riesbol, Waldo E. Smith, F. F. Snyder, and H. G. Wilm. The Committee represents a rather wide geographic distribution, quite a large variety of interests, and most of the agencies interested in runoff‐problems. Throughout the year members of the Committee have shown interest in runoff‐problems of various kinds as evidenced by numerous articles and discussions in technical publications and by their participation in the deliberations of many working or advisory committees dealing with hydrologic problems. As the Chairman views it, the functions of the members of the research committees are not only to keep abreast of, and to make advances in, the technique relating to their particular fields, but also to demonstrate the practicability of the technique in the field of applied hydrology. Members of the Committee on Runoff have kept these aims in view. As in past years, the Committee is indebted to Miss Mary Soroka of New York City, Chairman of the International Committee on Bibliography, for her compilations of references to all articles relating to runoff, and to Mr. Beij for his work in connection therewith.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗