Inter-Laboratory Comparison of Calibration Procedures for Acoustic Doppler Velocity Meters Kirk Thibodeaux (Retired) USGS - HIF

Inter-Laboratory Comparison of Calibration Procedures for Acoustic

Doppler Velocity Meters

Kirk Thibodeaux (Retired)

USGS - HIF

Background

• In March 2013 an Acoustic Workshop was held at the U.S. Geological Survey's Hydrologic Instrumentation Facility to discuss and exchange information on the testing, evaluation, and calibration of acoustic Doppler velocity meters (ADVM) in laboratory settings.

Background (continued)

• Groups representing Laboratory operators that had conducted testing, or expressed a desire to conduct testing, on acoustic instrumentation, manufacturers, and large end users were invited to attend.

• Representatives from 10 Laboratory towing facilities, manufactures, and end users were represented.

Background (continued)

• Representatives from;– Australia (Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines).– Canada (Environment Canada).– Japan (International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management).– New Zealand (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research,

NIWA).– Switzerland (Federal Institute of Metrology, METAS).– The Netherlands (DELTARES).– The United States (USGS).– Ott Hydromet (Germany and US).– Teledyne RDI (US).– Hydro Systems Development, Inc (Japan).

Purpose of Workshop

• Share information on why and how each facility tests/calibrates acoustic instrumentation.– Each participant was required to give a

presentation on what testing they were conducting and/or what testing they planned to conduct in the near future.

Purpose of Workshop

• Why do we need to test Acoustic velocity meters in a Laboratory setting?– We need to verify that the equipment is

working as it should when purchased.– We need to verify that the equipment is

working as it should after being deployed.– We need to track the performance of the

equipment over time.– And we need to catch..

7/28

/200

1

12/2

5/20

01

5/24

/200

2

10/2

1/20

02

3/20

/200

3

8/17

/200

3

1/14

/200

4

6/12

/200

4

11/9

/200

4

4/8/

2005

9/5/

2005

2/2/

2006

7/2/

2006

11/2

9/20

06

4/28

/200

7

9/25

/200

7

2/22

/200

8

7/21

/200

8

12/1

8/20

08

5/17

/200

9

10/1

4/20

09

3/13

/201

0

8/10

/201

0

1/7/

2011

6/6/

2011

11/3

/201

1

4/1/

2012

8/29

/201

2

1/26

/201

3

6/25

/201

3

11/2

2/20

13

4/21

/201

4

9/18

/201

4

-4.00%

-3.00%

-2.00%

-1.00%

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

Percent Error at 1 Second Data(18 cm/s)

18 cps Manufacturer's Cal Limits Accuracy Statement

Matrix Date

% E

rro

r

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0-0.10

-0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

Depth Reading Deviation

Depth (ft)

Dev

iati

on

fro

m C

orr

ect

Dep

th (

ft)

1 2 3 4-3.0%

-2.0%

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

Distance Made Good - Each Transect(2012-04-12) [Large Acoustic Tank]

OSW Limits Equip DMG Limits Beams 1 and 2 Beams 1/3 and 2/4

Beams 4 and 3 Beams 2/3 and 1/4 Mean - All Runs

Run Number

Per

cen

t E

rro

r

Outcome of Workshop

• Proposal to organise a worldwide inter-laboratory comparison which should verify and assess calibration procedures for acoustic Doppler velocity meters (ADVM) in the velocity range from 0.05 m/s to 1.50 m/s.– SonTek FlowTracker (S/N P1515)– Ott ADC (S/N 231360)

Outcome of Workshop

• Laboratories from 8 countries agreed to take part in the comparison.– Australia (NRM),– Austria (BAW),– Canada (CCIW),– Germany (OTT),– New Zealand (NIWA),– Switzerland (METAS),– The Netherlands (DELTARES), and– The United States (USGS)

Comparison Test Procedure

• Developed by Switzerland.– Each participating Laboratory to use standard

(group) protocol and their normal testing procedures, if they had any.

– Group testing data to be compared.


• Group Testing.– Mounting –

• FlowTracker

Attached to a mockup of a USGS standard top setting wading rod with a “J” bracket (supplied by the USGS).



• FlowTracker




• FlowTracker


• ADC

Attached to a 20 mm cylindrical rod (supplied by the testing Laboratory).


• Towing speeds; 0.05 m/s 0.18 m/s 0.385 m/s 0.50 m/s 1.0 m/s 1.5 m/s

Status of Testing

• Shipping problems, or laboratory problems, prevented all Laboratories from conducting the group testing by the scheduled completion date.

• Six of the 8 participating Laboratories have conducted the tests.

• Five have collected a full set of data.• Four have forwarded their collected data

for analysis.

Preliminary Test Results

• Data presented anonymously.• Towing tanks ranged from;

– 1.2 m wide by 1 m deep by 24.4 m long to– 4 m wide by 2.4 m deep to 140 m long.

• Seeding materials;– Glass spheres– Polyamide spheres– Ytong (Cellular concrete)– Bentonite clay


0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

SonTek FlowTracker (S/N P1515)

Tank 1 Tank 2 Tank 3

Tank 4 FlowTracker Limits

Tow Speed (m/s)

Met

er R

ead

ing

Err

or

(%)


0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

Ott ADC (S/N 231360)

Tank 1 Tank 2 Tank 3 Tank 4 ADC Limits

Tow Speed (m/s)

Met

er R

ead

ing

Err

or

(%)

Future Testing

• Continue testing at the Laboratories that have not conducted the testing.

• Retest at the Laboratory that had problems during it’s first round of testing.

• Compile and analyze the collected data from all participating Laboratories and publish the results.

Acknowledgements

• Dr. Marc de Huu and Beat Wüthrich, Switzerland.• Chris Appleby and Andrew Willman, New Zealand• Elizabeth Jamieson and Paul Campbell, Canada• Marinus Schroevers, The Netherlands• Raymond Alford, Australia• Silke Kainz, Austria• Atsuhiro Yorozuya and Tadashi Kitsuta, Japan• Fabian Kratz - OTT Hydromet, Germany• Christel Valentine - HACH Hydromet, US• Ian Cassimatis - Teledyne RDI, US

Questions?

Documents

Inter-Laboratory Comparison of Calibration Procedures for Acoustic Doppler Velocity Meters Kirk Thibodeaux (Retired) USGS - HIF