Using inferential sensors for quality control of Everglades Depth Estimation Network water-level data

Matthew D. Petkewich; Ruby C. Daamen; Edwin A. Roehl; Paul Conrads

doi:10.3133/sir20165094

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20165094

Using inferential sensors for quality control of Everglades Depth Estimation Network water-level data

Matthew D. Petkewich·Ruby C. Daamen·Edwin A. Roehl·Paul Conrads

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN), with over 240 real-time gaging stations, provides hydrologic data for freshwater and tidal areas of the Everglades. These data are used to generate daily water-level and water-depth maps of the Everglades that are used to assess biotic responses to hydrologic change resulting from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. The generation of EDEN daily water-level and water-depth maps is dependent on high quality real-time data from water-level stations. Real-time data are automatically checked for outliers by assigning minimum and maximum thresholds for each station. Small errors in the real-time data, such as gradual drift of malfunctioning pressure transducers, are more difficult to immediately identify with visual inspection of time-series plots and may only be identified during on-site inspections of the stations. Correcting these small errors in the data often is time consuming and water-level data may not be finalized for several months. To provide daily water-level and water-depth maps on a near real-time basis, EDEN needed an automated process to identify errors in water-level data and to provide estimates for missing or erroneous water-level data. The Automated Data Assurance and Management (ADAM) software uses inferential sensor technology often used in industrial applications. Rather than installing a redundant sensor to measure a process, such as an additional water-level station, inferential sensors, or virtual sensors, were developed for each station that make accurate estimates of the process measured by the hard sensor (water-level gaging station). The inferential sensors in the ADAM software are empirical models that use inputs from one or more proximal stations. The advantage of ADAM is that it provides a redundant signal to the sensor in the field without the environmental threats associated with field conditions at stations (flood or hurricane, for example). In the event that a station does malfunction, ADAM provides an accurate estimate for the period of missing data. The ADAM software also is used in the quality assurance and quality control of the data. The virtual signals are compared to the real-time data, and if the difference between the two signals exceeds a certain tolerance, corrective action to the data and (or) the gaging station can be taken. The ADAM software is automated so that, each morning, the real-time EDEN data are compared to the inferential sensor signals and digital reports highlighting potential erroneous real-time data are generated for appropriate support personnel. The development and application of inferential sensors is easily transferable to other real-time hydrologic monitoring networks.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 25.227304826281653° to 26.681821407205977° latitude; -81.36749267578125° to -80.2166748046875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Matthew D. Petkewich, Ruby C. Daamen, Edwin A. Roehl, Paul Conrads. 2016-09-29. Using inferential sensors for quality control of Everglades Depth Estimation Network water-level data. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20165094

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Monitoring recreation on federally managed lands and waters—Aspects of visitor use

Federally managed public lands and waters receive around 1 billion recreational visits each year. Data on these visitors can aid in guiding policy decisions, managing resources effectively, and communicating the economic contributions of lands and waters. This report explores the methods used by agencies to collect data on aspects of recreational visitor use to Federal lands and waters (apart from visitation numbers, which are the focus of a companion publication). Aspects of recreational visitor use include visitor demographics, recreational activity participation, visitor satisfaction, visitor attitudes and experiences, trip characteristics, and economic contributions. We review practices used to understand aspects of visitor use across seven Federal agencies, revealing similarities such as the use of visitor intercept surveys and coverage of similar topic areas, and differences in how survey programs are operationalized and how specific questions on visitor surveys are worded. We also evaluate emerging technologies, such as geolocated social media and mobile device location data, for their potential to aid in understanding aspects of visitor use. This report concludes with potential opportunities to enhance data collection and coordination, ensuring cost-effective data collection and informed decision making.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Evaluation of best management practices at an edge-of-field site in the Eagle Creek watershed, Ohio, 2012–20

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey worked in partnership with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to identify farm fields in priority watersheds—watersheds critically important to Great Lake health. Intensive best management practices were implemented in five States to test the efficacy of best management practices, also referred to as agricultural conservation practices, to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff on agricultural fields. These fields were chosen as representatives of the priority watersheds because their farming practices and geographical conditions were common among farms in those watersheds. A farm site located near Findlay, Ohio, in the Eagle Creek watershed used two conservation practices, cover crop (Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 340) and variable rate technology (VRT; Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 590), which represent common practices in the Maumee priority watershed. This study monitored surface runoff and subsurface tile runoff at the Eagle Creek watershed site. The effects of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on sediment and nutrient runoff were assessed from October 2012 to September 2020. Cover crops were applied in fall of 2016, 2017, and 2018, coinciding with VRT applications. The following parameters were analyzed as part of the study: runoff discharge; peak discharge; and concentrations and loads of total phosphorus, particulate phosphorus, dissolved reactive phosphorus, and suspended sediment. High peak runoff events disproportionally affected nutrient concentrations and loads in runoff. A threshold of the 85th percentile of the peak discharge was chosen to assess the effect of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on nutrient mitigation at each gage. Runoff events below the 85th percentile were considered small, and runoff events over the 85th percentile were considered large. Concentrations from collected water-quality samples were used for the analysis; estimated concentrations were excluded from the statistical evaluation. All surface runoff parameters during small runoff events, except surface runoff volume, were significantly lower in the period with cover crops and VRT implementation. Contrarily, subsurface runoff parameters during small events were not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. Surface and subsurface parameters during large events were also not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. These results indicate cover crops and VRT may improve water quality during small runoff events, but additional best management practices that mitigate large runoff events may lead to greater water-quality improvement given the contribution of large events to overall losses.

Ohio↗

USGS2026

Continuous monitoring and temporal variability of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter in karst groundwater of the Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, 2019–24

Widespread urbanization on the Edwards aquifer recharge zone in south-central Texas has prompted the development of new approaches and tools for evaluating the current and future status of water quality in the San Antonio and Barton Springs segments of the Edwards aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System and the City of Austin, applied continuous monitoring of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter (fDOM) to characterize the sources and transport of dissolved organic matter and associated constituents in the Edwards aquifer. Continuous fDOM time-series data were adjusted using empirically derived temperature, turbidity, and inner-filter-effect correction factors prior to analysis and interpretation. Fully corrected fDOM time-series data from the study sites were evaluated for short- and long-term temporal variability in fDOM in the context of the hydrologic and climatic conditions that occurred during the 5-year study period to understand vulnerability of the aquifer to potential contaminants in recharge. Study results indicate that fDOM is an effective proxy for dissolved organic carbon that, in turn, is indicative of the influx of recent surface water and associated contaminants, and thus, aquifer vulnerability to those contaminants. Although other continuously monitored water-quality parameters provide insights into changes in water quality in response to varying hydrologic conditions, the quantitative relation between fDOM and dissolved organic carbon directly indicates the timing and magnitude of pulses of organic constituents derived from the land surface, whereas other water-quality parameters do not.

Texas↗