Journal Title : International Journal of Modern Trends in Engineering and Science


Author’s Name : Dr S Sampath | N P Khaparde | B Suresh Kumar

Volume 04 Issue 05 2017

ISSN no:  2348-3121

Page no: 132-136

Abstract – The management of water resources depends, to a considerable degree, on the availability of hydrological and hydraulic data. The operation and maintenance of irrigation systems requires collecting regular data on water levels and discharges. The calibration of canal sections or structures provides information on canal discharges and hence supports the efficient day-to-day water management and regulation of irrigation systems. The Tungabhadra Dam is constructed across the Tungabhadra River, a tributary of the Krishna River. The dam is near the town of Hospet in Karnataka. It is a multipurpose dam serving irrigation, electricity generation, flood control, etc. This is a joint project of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana after its completion in 1953. The water level profiling was done by CWPRS at the CH 28 in mile 1 during August 2014, March 2015 and August 2015 using Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)[8] and Current Meter[1].The measurements were performed simultaneously with the two methods to present a comparison of discharge measurement made by current meter[14] which is the conventional method[2][3] and latest developed technique, ADCP[13]. Results show that the relative error is very small with the ADCP over the conventional method. Besides the total value of discharge, the ADCP method also offers detailed information about velocity distribution over the cross section.


  1. BIS 1192: 1981, “Velocity area methods for measurement of flow in open channels”.
  2. Herschy RW (1985), “Stream flow measurement”, Elsevier Applied Science Publishers
  3. ISO 748: 1997, ”Measurement of liquid flow in open channels – Velocity are methods”
  4. Chen YC, Chiu CL (2002) “An efficient method of discharge measurement in tidal streams”. J Hydrol 265(1– 4):212–224
  5. Chiu CL, Chen YC (2003) “An efficient method of discharge estimation based on probability concept”. J Hydraul Res 41(6):589–596
  6. Lemon, D. D., D. Billenness and J. Lampa, 2002. “Recent advances in estimating uncertainties in discharge measurements with the ASFM”. Proc. Hydro 2002, Kiris, Turkey.
  7. Maidment, D.R., 1992. “Handbook of Hydrology”, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  8. Nihei, Y., Irokawa, Y., Ide, K., and Takamura, T. (2008) “Study on River-Discharge Measurements using Accoustic Doppler Current Profilers”, Journal of Hydraulic, Coastal and Environmental Engineering, vol.64, No.2, pp.99-114.
  9. Oberg, K.A., and Schmidt, A.R., 1994, “Measurements of leakage from Lake Michigan through three control structures near Chicago, Illinois”, April–October 1993: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4112, 48 p.
  10. Operational Hydrology Report No. 13; WMO – No. 519, World Meteorological organization,Geneva.
  11. Rantz, S. E., “Measurement and computation of stream flow”, Volume 1, Measurement of stage and discharge,
  12. Sauer, V. B. and R. W. Meyer, “Determination of error individual discharge measurements”, U.S. Geol. Survey.
  13. Teledyne RD Instruments (2006) “Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Principles of Operation a Practical Primer”.
  14. WMO 1980 Manual on Stream Gauging. Vol I, Fieldwork. Vol II, Computation of Discharge.
  15. Technical Report No 5348, January 2016, CWPRS, Pune