return flow discussion

25
Return Flow Discussion ESHMC Meeting 6 March 2008 Presented by Stacey Taylor 1

Upload: overton

Post on 25-Feb-2016

43 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Return Flow Discussion. ESHMC Meeting 6 March 2008 Presented by Stacey Taylor. Overview. Bryce Contor’s slides Historical data analysis: IESW007 (Big and Little Wood Rivers) IESW054 (Richfield) Ongoing Snake River return data (groups) General conclusions. Current Calculation Method. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Return Flow Discussion

1

Return Flow Discussion

ESHMC Meeting6 March 2008

Presented by Stacey Taylor

Page 2: Return Flow Discussion

2

Overview

• Bryce Contor’s slides• Historical data analysis:

– IESW007 (Big and Little Wood Rivers)– IESW054 (Richfield)

• Ongoing Snake River return data (groups)• General conclusions

Page 3: Return Flow Discussion

3

Current Calculation Method

Diversions

Retu

rns

Returns = b1 * Diversions(one equation for each entity)

Page 4: Return Flow Discussion

4

Alternate Methods

Diversions

Retu

rns

Returns = bo

(one equation for each entity)

Diversions

Retu

rns

Returns = bo + b1 * Diversions(one equation for each entity)

Diversions

Retu

rns

Returns = -bo + b1 * Diversions)(one equation for each entity)

Diversions

Retu

rns

Returns = logarithmic function(one equation for each entity)

Returns = exponential

function(one equation for

each entity)

OR

Alternate Method (1) Alternate Method (2)

Alternate Method (3) Alternate Methods (4) and (5)

Page 5: Return Flow Discussion

5

Raster Graphics

• Created several raster graphics to represent returns and diversions for IESW007 and IESW054

• Different colors represent different diversions/returns.

Page 6: Return Flow Discussion

6

Example Raster (1)W

ater

Yea

r

MonthOct. Sept.

0

5

10

15

20

Diversion1,000 ac-ft

1928

2004

Page 7: Return Flow Discussion

7

Example Raster (2)W

ater

Yea

r

MonthOct. Sept.

0

5

10

15

20

Diversion1,000 ac-ft

1928

2004

Page 8: Return Flow Discussion

8

Example Raster (3)W

ater

Yea

r

MonthOct. Sept.

0

5

10

15

20

Diversion1,000 ac-ft

1928

2004

Page 9: Return Flow Discussion

9

IESW007 Total Diversions(Big and Little Wood Rivers)

Total Diversions0

1

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

20

21

22

23

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

98

99

Water Year1928

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2004

Month10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Diversion(1,000 ac-ft)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Page 10: Return Flow Discussion

10

Return(1,000 ac-ft)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

1.6

Water Year1928

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2004

Month10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Total Returns<VALUE>

0

0 - 0

0 - 0.1

0.1 - 0.2

0.2 - 0.3

0.3 - 0.4

0.4 - 0.5

0.5 - 0.6

0.6 - 0.7

0.7 - 0.8

0.8 - 0.9

0.9 - 1.0

1.0 - 1.1

1.1 - 1.2

1.2 - 1.3

1.3 - 1.4

1.4 - 1.5

1.5 - 1.6

1.6 - 1.7

0.91.01.11.21.31.41.5

1.7

IESW007 Total Returns(Big and Little Wood Rivers)

Page 11: Return Flow Discussion

11

IESW054 Total Diversions(Richfield) Diversion

(1,000 ac-ft)Water Year1928

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2004

Month10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

0

10

20

30

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Page 12: Return Flow Discussion

12

IESW054 Total Returns(Richfield) Return

(1,000 ac-ft)0

5

20

Water Year1928

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2004

Month10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Total ReturnsValue

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

13

14

16

18

10

Page 13: Return Flow Discussion

13

200 250 300 350 400 450 5000

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

f(x) = 0.0246887721910913 x − 6.65388487462722R² = 0.687215377959056

f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0

Returns vs. Diversions for IESW007 (Wood Rivers)

1928-1950Linear (1928-1950)1951-1970Linear (1951-1970)1971-1980Linear (1971-1980)1981-2004Linear (1981-2004)

Diversion (1000 ac-ft)

Retu

rn (1

000

ac-ft

)

Page 14: Return Flow Discussion

14

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1400

5

10

15

20

25

f(x) = 0.207242892482694 x − 6.30837644666079R² = 0.858000134321785

f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0f(x) = NaN x + NaNR² = 0 Returns vs. Diversions for

IESW054(Richfield) 1928-

1950Linear (1928-1950)

Diversion (1000 ac-ft)

Retu

rn (1

000

ac-ft

)

Page 15: Return Flow Discussion

15

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 400000

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

f(x) = 0.164689038436237 x − 152.034585725503R² = 0.989096451839597

CumulativeLinear (Cumulative)Departure from Linear

Cumulative Diversion (1000 ac-ft)

Cum

ulati

ve R

etur

n (1

000

ac-ft

)

Depa

rtur

es fr

om Li

near

1972 1975

Cumulative Return vs. Cumulative DiversionIESW007 (Wood Rivers)

Page 16: Return Flow Discussion

16

Cumulative Return vs. Cumulative DiversionIESW054 (Richfield)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 90000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

f(x) = 0.116999148341379 x + 99.9176635440656R² = 0.99615611942521

CumulativeLinear (Cumulative)Departure from Linear

Cumulative Diversion (1000 ac-ft)

Cum

ulati

ve R

etur

n (1

000

ac-ft

)

1954 1958

1974 1981

1986

Dep

artu

re fr

om L

inea

r

Page 17: Return Flow Discussion

17

What Caused the Change?

• Change in slope of cumulative plots– Possibly related to conversion to sprinklers– Calibration data shows percentage these increases:

• IESW007 – May 1980 to May 2002 sprinkler % increased from 14.7% to 28.0% (13% increase)

• IESW054 – May 1980 to May 2002 sprinkler % increased from 31.9% to 59.7% (28% increase)

• Aerial photography covering the area encompassed by both entities has been requested for 1969 and 1977

Page 18: Return Flow Discussion

18

Regression Analysis

• A regression analysis was performed on each set of data (1928-1950, 1951-1970, etc)

• P-values were found for each intercept and slope (95% confidence interval)

• Given shared ranges between each set of data, a general equation may describe both entities (IESW007 and IESW054)

Page 19: Return Flow Discussion

19

IESW007 Intercepts and Slopes(Based on 95% CI)

-15.000 -13.000 -11.000 -9.000 -7.000 -5.000 -3.000 -1.000 1.000 3.000

IESW007 Intercept Ranges1928-19501951-19701971-19801981-2004

0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035

IESW007 Slope ranges1928-19501951-19701971-19801981-2004

Shared intercept range: -3.76 to -3.67 Shared slope range: 0.0173 to 0.0235

y = 0.02x – 3.70

Page 20: Return Flow Discussion

20

-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

IESW054 Slope Ranges

1928-19501951-19701971-19801981-2004

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

IESW054 Intercept Ranges1928-19501951-19701971-19801981-2004

IESW054 Intercepts and Slopes(Based on 95% CI)

No shared slope range between all sets; 1981-2004 slope is negative

Shared slope range: 0.170 to 0.177

y = 0.17x - ???

Page 21: Return Flow Discussion

21

Ongoing Snake River Return Data

• Group data for 2002-2006 were compared to IESW007 and IESW054

• Plotted returns vs. diversions • Plotted returns vs. normalized diversion

(Normalized diversion = diversion/max diversion of single entity)

• Plotted normalized returns vs. normalized diversions

Page 22: Return Flow Discussion

22

Returns vs. Diversions for Separate Entities

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

11000000

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000 IESW002IESW010IESW011IESW016IESW028IESW031IESW032IESW036IESW041Linear (IESW041)Linear (IESW041)

Diversion (ac-ft)

Retu

rn (a

c-ft)

Page 23: Return Flow Discussion

23

Returns vs. Normalized Diversion

0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 10.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600IESW002Linear (IESW002)IESW010Linear (IESW010)IESW011Linear (IESW011)IESW016

Diversion (each point divided by max diversion of the entity)

Retu

rn P

erce

nt o

f Div

ersi

on

Page 24: Return Flow Discussion

24

Conclusions

• Current technique of assuming straight line plot with zero intercept may still be best(Returns = b1*Diversions)

• Slope (b1) based on historical data OR lag factors (depends on which is available)

• Slope may be better estimated with inclusion of latest data

Page 25: Return Flow Discussion

25

Discussion