3954 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

ACOUSTIC DOPPLER VELOCIMETRY (ADV) IN A SMALL

ESTUARINE SYSTEM. FIELD EXPERIENCE AND "DESPIKING"

HUBERT CHANSON1, MARK TREVETHAN1 and SHIN-ICHI AOKI2

1
Dept of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane QLD 4072, Australia
(e-mail: h.chanson@uq.edu.au)
2
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering,
Toyohashi University of Technology, Tempakucho, Toyohashi 441-8580, Japan
(e-mail: aoki@jughead.tutrp.tut.ac.jp)

Abstract
Estuarine mixing and dispersion are turbulent processes. Present understanding of estuary
turbulence remains however limited, partly because long-duration studies of turbulent
properties are difficult and rare. Herein, some long-duration turbulence data recorded at high-
frequency using acoustic Doppler velocimetry (ADV) are analysed. The data sets were
collected in a small sub-tropical estuary. A new ADV data post-processing technique is
developed for turbulence analysis of estuarine flows. The results show that acoustic Doppler
velocimetry data cannot be used without suitable post-processing. Even classical "despiking"
techniques are not simply applicable to natural unsteady estuary flows.

Keywords: Turbulence; Sub-tropical estuary; Acoustic Doppler Velocimetry(ADV); Post-

processing; Despiking.

1. INTRODUCTION
Dispersion of matter in estuarine systems is of considerable importance, for example in
terms of sediment transport, stormwater runoff during floods, and release of nutrient-rich
wastewater into the ecosystem (e.g. treated sewage effluent). Basic literature includes Ippen
(1966), Fischer et al. (1979), Rutherford (1994), Lewis (1997) and Chanson (2004). In Nature,
estuarine flows are turbulent flows, and mixing and dispersion are turbulent processes. Present
understanding of the turbulence field remains limited, partly because long-duration studies of
turbulent properties at high-frequency are extremely limited. Most measurements were
conducted for short-periods or in bursts : e.g. Bowden and Ferguson (1980), Kawanisi and
Yokosi (1997).
Herein long-duration turbulence data were collected continuously at high-frequency using
acoustic Doppler velocimetry (ADV) in a small sub-tropical estuary. The instrumentation is
well-suited to study turbulent velocities in shallow-waters, and the paper focuses on a new
ADV data post-processing technique for turbulence analysis. Field work data were
systematically analysed. Several post-processing techniques were tested and a new method
was developed. The results will show that acoustic Doppler velocimetry data should not be
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3955

used without suitable post-processing and that all turbulent velocity properties are affected by
the post-processing.

1.1 ACOUSTIC DOPPLER VELOCITY METROLOGY

Acoustic Doppler velocimetry (ADV) is designed to record instantaneous velocity
components at a single-point with a relatively high frequency. Measurements are performed
by measuring the velocity of particles in a remote sampling volume based upon the Doppler
shift effect (e.g. Voulgaris and Trowbridge 1998, McLelland and Nicholas 2000). The probe
head includes one transmitter and three receivers. The sampling volume is located either 5 or
10 cm from the tip of the probe, but some studies showed that the distance might change
slightly (e.g. Chanson et al. 2000). Its size is determined by the sampling conditions. In a
standard configuration, the sampling volume is about a cylinder of water with a diameter of 6
mm and a height of 9 mm, although Wahl (2003) argued its exact shape.
An ADV system records simultaneously nine values with each sample: three velocity
components, three signal strength values, and three correlation values. Signal strengths and
correlations are used primarily to determine the quality and accuracy of the velocity data,
although the signal strength (acoustic backscatter intensity) may related to the instantaneous
suspended sediment concentration with proper calibration (e.g. Fugate and Friedrichs 2002,
Nikora and Goring 2002, Voulgaris and Meyers 2004). Herein the study is focused on the
velocity signals. Past and present experiences demonstrated recurrent problems with "raw"
ADV velocity data that are evidenced by high levels of noise and spikes in all velocity
components. In turbulent flows, the ADV velocity fluctuations characterise the combined
effects of the Doppler noise, signal aliasing, velocity fluctuations, installation vibrations and
other disturbances. Lemmin and Lhermitte (1999) and Chanson et al. (2000,2002) discussed
the inherent noise of an ADV system. Spikes may be caused by aliasing of the Doppler signal.
Nikora and Goring (1998) and Goring and Nikora (2002) developed techniques to eliminate
these in steady flow situations.
3956 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

Moreton Bay
North

Tropic
23?27' S
Coastline
QLD
Field Low flow
work channel

40? S Salt marsh

Legend Tree line

Koala sighting on 4/4/03
Sunfish sightings on 24/11/03 Orana Str
eet
1 km Point Halloran
Site 1 Conservation Area

Boat yards

Beveridge Street

d
Clevela

oran Roa
Site 2 Site 2B
nd to R

Riffle Site 3B

Point Hall
edland

Site 4 Site 3
Point Victoria
Eprapah Environmental Sewage Treatment
Ba

Training Centre Plant

y Road

nu e
rn Ave
bu
Col

Fig. 1 Map of Eprapah Creek estuarine zone - Dark blue circles: water quality and fish
sampling sites - Red squares: instantaneous velocity and physio-chemistry
measurement sites

2. CASE STUDY: EPRAPAH CREEK ESTUARY

A series of turbulent velocity measurements were conducted in the estuarine zone of
Eprapah Creek (Australia) in 2003 and 2004. Eprapah Creek (Long. 153.30º, Lat. -27.567º) is
a sub-tropical stream located in the Redlands shire close to Brisbane city. Eprapah Creek
flows directly to the Moreton Bay at Victoria Point. It is 12.6 km long with about 3.8 km of
estuarine zone (Fig. 1). Its catchment area is 39 km2. The most upstream extent of estuary
corresponds to Sites 3B to 4 depending upon the tide conditions (Fig. 1). In the estuarine zone,
the water depth is typically about 1 to 2 m mid-stream, the width is about 20-30 m and the
tides are semi-diurnal with a typical range of about 1.5 to 2 m.
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3957

Field works took place on four different days (Table 1). Tidal conditions are summarised in
Table 1 (2nd line). Acoustic Doppler Velocimetry was performed mid-estuary at locations
AMTD 2 and 2.1 km corresponding to Sites 2 and 2B respectively, where AMTD is the
upstream distance from river mouth. Both sites are shown in Fig. 1. The cross-sectional
surveys are presented in Fig. 3. For each field work, a 3-D Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter
(ADV) SonTek UW ADV (serial No. 0510), equipped with a 5-cm downlooking sensor
mounted on a rigid stem, was deployed and data-logged continuously at 25 Hz. The velocity
range was 0.3 or 1.0 m/s (Table 1). The probe was installed about the middle of the channel in
a moderate bend to the right when looking downstream. The ADV was held by a stiff metallic
frame sliding on two poles (Fig. 2). The poles were driven into the river bed, and the frame
and pole system did not move during the data logging. The probe was installed outside of the
support system to limit the effects of support wake. In the first 3 studies, the sampling volume
was located 0.50 m beneath the free-surface. The probe position was manually adjusted with
the tide, by lowering or raising the frame every 20 to 60 minutes, to maintain the probe sensor
position relative to the free-surface (Fig. 2B). For the last study, the probe sampling volume
was located 0.055 m above the bed. Further details on the experimental procedures are
available in Chanson et al. (2003, 2004) and Brown et al. (2004).

Fig. 2 Acoustic Doppler velocimetry in Eprapah Creek estuary ; (A) Field study E2, Site 2,
looking upstream - Boat passing next to ADV probe (arrow) around 13:30 (early ebb
tide). (B) Field study E1, Site 2B, view from left bank - Vertical probe adjustment near
end of flood tide.

3. VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS
The acoustic Doppler velocimetry system provided instantaneous values of the three
velocity components. It was oriented with the xy-plane being horizontal, the x-direction
aligned with the flow direction and positive downstream, and the z-direction positive upwards.
3958 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

Typical results are shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4 presents the Vx velocity component recorded
during the field study E2 for 7 h 44 min. starting at low tide (t = 24,240 s). The velocity data
are un-processed. In Fig. 4, the right vertical axis corresponds to the sampling volume depth
below the free-surface. The vertical see-saw steps were manual vertical displacements of the
velocimeter (Fig. 2A). Navigation events are also marked with an asterisk (*). For all field
works, present experience demonstrated recurrent problems with the velocity data, including
large numbers of spikes (e.g. Fig. 4, t = 39,000 to 41,000 s). Some problem was also
experienced with the vertical velocity component, possibly because of the effects of the wake
of the stem. Since the probe was mounted vertically down-looking, vertical velocities were
small and these effects were deemed negligible.

Table 1. Field investigations at Eprapah Creek in 2003 and 2004

Field study reference E1 E2 E3 E4
Date 4 April 2003 17 July 2003 24 Nov. 2003 2 Sept. 2004
Tides (Victoria Point) 05:16 (0.67 m) 00:00 (2:63 m) 03:27 (0.21 m) 06:02 (0.40 m)
11:03 (2.22 m) 06:44 (0.60 m) 09:50 (2.74 m) 11:52 (2.21 m)
17:24 (0.57 m) 12:19 (1.92 m) 16:29 (0.46 m) 18:02 (0.56 m)
23:31 (2.41 m) 18:01 (0.59 m) 21:53 (2.11 m) 11:59 (2.29 m)
Study period 06:00-18:00 06:00-14:00 08:00-16:00 06:00-18:00
Study focus Full tidal cycle Flood tide Ebb tide Full tidal cycle
ADV sampling 10:08-10:42 6:26-14:10 8:25-15:35 7:51-13:40
period(s) 10:43-10:44 14:26-17:57
11:45-12:18
11:19-11:57
11:58-12:29
12:29-12:52
12:53-13:11
13:12-13:53
13:53-14:09
ADV velocity range 0.3 / 1.0 / 0.3 / 0.3 1.0 0.3
(m/s) 0.3 / 0.3 / 1.0 /
1.0 / 1.0 / 1.0
Sampling frequency 25 25 25 25
(Hz)
Sampling volume Site 2B, 0.50 m Site 2, 0.50 m Site 2B, 0.50 m Site 2B, 0.0525
location below surface, below surface, below surface, m above bed,
14.2 m from 8.0 m from left 10.8 m from 10.8 m from
left bank bank left bank left bank
Water temperature (ºC) 23.7 16.7 25.5 17.14
(mid-estuary, Site 2) [20.4-28.4] [15.5-18.5] [22.7-28.0] [15.9-18.1]
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3959

Conductivity (mS/cm) 34.5 37.2 50.0 48.6

(mid-estuary, Site 2) [23.9-48.3] [29.8-48.4] [42.7-55.1] [41.0-53.6]
Notes: water temperature and conductivity measured with YSI6600 probe; mean values
[extreme values in square brackets] for the study period.

Practical problems were further experienced. For the first field work, two notebook
computers were used alternately to data log the ADV outputs and to backup the data. The
interchange of computers lasted less than 2 minutes and was carefully recorded. During the
last field study, the computer lost power and it could not be reconnected to the ADV for
nearly 50 minutes. For the other field works (E2 and E3), the velocity data were recorded
continuously into a single data file. Details of data records are given in Table 1. For the first
three field trips, the ADV sampling volume was maintained about 0.5 m below the free-
surface, implying the need to adjust the vertical probe position up to 3 times per hour at mid-
tide (Fig. 2B). Lastly, navigation and aquatic life were observed during all field works (Fig.
2A). They were found to have some impact on the turbulence data. In a few instances, birds
were seen diving and fishing next to the ADV location.

Elevation (m AHD) Right bank

1.5 High tide on 28/8/04
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2 Site 2B 28/8/04
-2.5
Site 2B 27/5/03
-3
-3.5 Site 2 16/7/03
-4
0 5 10 15 from left20
Distance bank (m) 25 30 35

Fig. 3 Surveyed creek cross-sections at Sites 2 and 2B, looking downstream

3960 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

Vx (cm/s)
Sampling volume depth (cm)
40 85
Navigation event
High tide
32 80

24 75

Sampling volume depth (cm)

16 70

8 65
Vx (cm/s)

0 60

-8 55

-16 50

-24 45

-32 40

-40 35
24000 27000 30000 33000 36000 39000 42000 45000 48000 51000
Time (s)

Fig. 4 Instantaneous velocity data before post-processing during the field study E2 (Vx
component) and probe sampling volume depth - Time is expressed in seconds since
midnight

Present experience suggested that turbulence properties could not be extrapolated from the
unprocessed data sets (see Discussion). Classical ADV despiking techniques were tested in-
depth, including acceleration thresholding and phase-space thresholding methods (Goring and
Nikora 2002, Wahl 2003). The results demonstrated systematically that "conventional" ADV
despiking techniques were not suitable for velocimetry data collected in a natural estuarine
system. Indeed, velocity fluctuations might be induced by aquatic life, navigation and
experimental procedure as observed first-hand by the writers. Even in optimum conditions,
natural estuarine systems are characterised by unsteady flows, and the hydrodynamics cannot
be assumed to be quasi-steady over a statistically-meaningful data sample. However the
selection of more appropriate techniques is difficult since no independent data sets are
available. Existing comparisons between despiking techniques are often limited to a
comparison of the number of removed spikes, and of the differences in turbulent velocity
fluctuations and in Reynolds stresses.

4. ADV DATA POST-PROCESSING TECHNIQUE

Turbulent velocity analyses were conducted systematically for all field data. Present
experience yields a new three-stage post-processing method. The post-processing technique
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3961

includes (1) an initial velocity signal check, (2) some "pre-filtering" and (3) some despiking.
Each stage comprises two steps: velocity error detection and data replacement.
(1) Velocity signal check. The ADV velocity data are "cleaned" by removing
communication errors, low signal-to-noise ratio data (< 5 dB) and low correlation samples (<
70%).
(2) "Pre-filtering" (Event detection and removal). The effects of major disturbances are
removed. Such disturbances may include navigation, probe movement, aquatic life activities.
For each velocity component, the signal is filtered with a low-pass/high-pass filter threshold F
(0.001 ≤ F ≤ 1 Hz, Fref = 0.1 Hz). The occurrence of navigation, probe motion and other
events is tested by comparing the ratio of local standard deviation to the event search region
standard deviation of high-pass filtered signal with a threshold value CE (1.2 ≤ CE ≤ 1.8,
CEref = 1.5). Exceeding implies disturbance. Note that local standard deviations are
calculated for WS data points (100 ≤ WS ≤ 5000, WSref = 1000).
(3) Despiking. The phase-space thresholding technique is used. For each velocity
component, the signal is filtered with a low-pass/high-pass filter threshold F (0.001 ≤ F ≤ 1
Hz, Fref = 0.1 Hz). The same frequency threshold F is used for "pre-filtering" and despiking.
The high-pass filtered signal is tested with an 'universal' criterion (Goring and Nikora 2002).
In Stages 1, 2 and 3, all erroneous data are replaced by an overall mean of the signal
between end points. This technique was selected for its simplicity, reliability and suitability to
very-large data sets. Replacement is performed on the velocity signal in Stage 2 and on the
high-pass filtered signal in Stage 3. Stage 3 is iterated until the number of errors converge to
zero. At the end of Stage 3, the low-passed filtered signals are added back in before further
turbulence analysis. Further, all velocity components are considered erroneous if anyone
velocity component is replaced in Stages 1, 2 or 3. The justification is based upon the ADV
transformation of radial velocities into Cartesian coordinates, implying that a corrupted
Cartesian velocity component must derive from corrupted radial components (e.g. McLelland
and Nicholas 2000). In Stage 3, present experience and data analyses suggest that the initial
pre-filtering phase is most important for estuarine data sets. Further the acceleration
thresholding technique was thoroughly tested with acceleration threshold criterion a
between 0.012 and 1.5. The technique seems not suited to the estuarine flow conditions, while
the phase-space thresholding method appears more robust.

5. DISCUSSIONS
The new ADV post-processing method was developed based upon the experience gained
during the study E1, and it was successfully validated with the data sets E2, E3 and E4. A
systematic sensitivity analysis was conducted for all listed parameters within the indicated
ranges (see previous section). For the tested data sets, optimum coefficients are deduced and
they are given with the subscript "ref" (for reference) above. Importantly it was found that the
selection of the low-pass/high-pass filter frequency threshold F has a significant effect on the
pre-filtering, but little impact on the despiking. Frequency thresholds within 0.1 to 0.01 Hz
3962 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

were found most suitable for this small estuarine system. It is likely that the optimum
parameter F is a function of topographic and hydrodynamic characteristics of the estuary.

Vx (cm/s) Post-processed
-2 2
Vx (cm/s) Unprocessed

-5 -1

-8 -4

-11 -7
Vx Unprocessed
-14 Vx Post-processed -10
28100 28200 28300 28400 28500 28600 28700 28800 28900 29000 29100
T ime (s)

Vx Unprocessed
-5 5

Vx (cm/s) Post-processed
Vx Post-processed
Vx (cm/s) Unprocessed

-10 0
-15 -5
-20 -10
-25 -15
-30 -20
-35 -25
-40 -30
33100 33200 33300 33400 33500 33600 33700 33800 33900 34000 34100
T ime (s)

Vx Unprocessed
Vx Post-processed

Vx (cm/s) Post-processed
Vx (cm/s) Unprocessed

30 0
20 -10
10 -20
0 -30
-10 -40
-20 -50
39150 39250 39350 39450 39550 39650 39750 39850 39950 40050 40150
T ime (s)

Fig. 5 Comparison of original and post-processed velocity signals - Field study E2, Vx
velocity component - Time is expressed in seconds since midnight (GPS time)

Fig. 5 illustrates some comparison of the velocity signal for three 1000 seconds segments
before and after post-processing. In each graph, the curves are offset vertically for clarity and
the range of both vertical scales is the same (left axis for un-processed data and right axis for
post-processed data), although the range differs between Figs. 5A, 5B and 5C. Fig. 5A
corresponds to the early flood tide; Fig. 5B, the mid flood tide; Fig. 5C, the end of flood tide
(Fig. 4). For these 1000 seconds samples, about 1%, 2% and 18% of data points were replaced
respectively. However Fig. 5C illustrates a situation corresponding to some problem with the
instrumentation, for which we should have no confidence in all velocity data set, unless they
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3963

are validated with an independent instrument. Table 2 lists the statistical properties of each
velocity component for the same data sets before and after post-processing. The results
illustrate the impact of post-processing on all turbulent flow properties, including on the time-
average velocity components.

Table 2 Turbulent velocity statistics for three time intervals (Field study E2): (1) t = 28,148 to
29,148 s; (2) t = 33,148 to 34,148 s; (3) t = 39,148 to 40,148 s (expressed since
midnight, GPS time)
Un-processed Post-processed Remarks
Vx Vy Vz Vx Vy Vz
(A)Average t = 28148 to 29148
-5.203 0.322 -0.254 -5.210 0.321 -0.255
(cm/s) s
(A) Std dev.
1.388 0.610 0.142 1.374 0.607 0.140 1.1% of data errors
(cm/s)
(A) Skewness -0.909 0.0214 -0.306 -0.965 0.020 -0.342
(A) Kurtosis 0.856 -0.476 0.710 0.809 -0.501 0.620 Excess kurtosis
(B) Average t = 33148 to 34148
-21.21 3.566 -1.499 -21.21 3.567 -1.500
(cm/s) s
(B) Std dev.
3.293 2.234 1.608 3.276 2.220 1.586 2.0% of data errors
(cm/s)
(B) Skewness 0.241 0.0853 -0.191 0.234 0.080 -0.209
(B) Kurtosis -0.196 -0.0431 1.389 -0.270 -0.109 1.151 Excess kurtosis
(C) Average t = 39148 to 40148
-6.066 0.675 -0.982 -4.858 1.191 -0.995
(cm/s) s
(C) Std dev. 18.4% of data
4.99 3.20 1.36 4.729 2.410 0.683
(cm/s) errors, but
99.9% data error on
(C) Skewness 0.421 -4.34 0.423 0.328 -0.341 0.031
Vx
(C) Kurtosis 10.37 162.7 80.2 -0.269 0.104 1.368 Excess kurtosis

Table 3 Post-processing of acoustic Doppler velocity data during the entire field studies E2,
E3 and E4: summary of each post-processing stage
Field study Study E2 Study E3 Study E4
(17/07/2003) (24/11/2003) (2/9/2004)
Total Number of data points 696,129 593,297 841,807 Single data file.
(1) Number data points with 5,580 12,762 441 Using WindADV.
communication errors, low
signal to noise ratio and low
correlation
3964 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

(1)+(2) Number of 83,847 66,820 25,572

removed/replaced data points
after "pre-filtering"
(1)+(2)+(3) Number of 137,181 75,938 86,779 Complete post-
removed/replaced data points processing.
after "pre-filtering" &
despiking
(1)+(3) Number of 56,069 24,248 58,769 Improper post-
removed/replaced data points processing without
after despiking BUT NO "pre- "pre-filtering".
filtering"

The post-processing technique was applied thoroughly to the field studies E2, E3 and E4
using the reference post-processing coefficients. The total number of erroneous data points is
listed in Table 3 for each field study. In Table 3, the first line gives the total number of data
points per velocity component. The second and third lines are respectively the number of data
errors after velocity signal check, and after velocity signal check and "pre-filtering". The
fourth line presents to total number of data errors after the entire three-stages post-processing
method. For comparison, the last line gives the number of data errors after an improper post-
processing, performed without "pre-filtering". For the field trip E2, such an improper post-
processing would accept 81,112 erroneous data points, that would be otherwise rejected by the
new post-processing method. This would represent nearly 12% of erroneous data in the entire
data set !
Comparative turbulence analyses of unprocessed and post-processed signals were
conducted systematically in terms of the first four statistical moments (mean, standard
deviation. skewness and kurtosis) of each velocity component and of the Reynolds stresses.
Statistical quantities were integrated over 5,000 data points corresponding to 3 min. 20 s, and
calculations were repeated along each data set. Systematic comparisons demonstrated that all
turbulence characteristics were affected by the post-processing (e.g. Table 2). In plain words,
turbulent properties including the time-average velocity were improperly estimated from un-
processed data sets. More generally, the results highlighted that turbulent velocities in
unsteady estuarine flows could not be simply deduced from unprocessed acoustic Doppler
velocimetry data.

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

This study is focused on the analysis of turbulent velocity measurements in small estuarine
systems. Past and present experience have shown that acoustic Doppler velocimetry (ADV) is
a well-suited metrology for such shallow-water systems. Long-duration velocity records were
conducted at high frequency in such a small estuary. Herein the data analysis shows
conclusively that turbulence properties cannot be derived from unprocessed ADV signals and
 XXXI IAHR CONGRESS 3965

that even "classical" despiking methods are not directly applicable to unsteady estuary flows.
Instead a detailed post-processing technique is developed and applied.
A new three-stages post-processing method is presented. The technique includes (1) an
initial velocity signal check, (2) some "pre-filtering" and (3) some despiking, while each stage
includes velocity error detection and data replacement. The method is applied to three long-
duration field studies. Reference coefficients are derived for a small subtropical estuary.
Comparative analyses of un-processed, "despiked-only", and post-processed velocity data
highlight the necessity for an advanced post-processing method. While the acoustic Doppler
velocimetry is a relatively simple technique, present results demonstrate that unprocessed
ADV data should not be used, even for a study of time-averaged velocity components.
Importantly, further field data are necessary to validate the post-processing technique, by
comparing post-processed data with independent data acquired simultaneously at the same
location in the natural system. At present, the selection of more appropriate techniques is
intricate since no independent data set (i.e. 'true data set") is available. Comparisons between
post-processing techniques are basically limited to an assessment of the number of removed
spikes, and some subjective evaluation of differences in turbulent velocity properties.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The writers thank Dr Richard Brown (QUT), Dr Ian Ramsay (Qld EPA) and John Ferris
(Qld EPA) for their contributions. They acknowledge the technical assistance of Dave
McIntosh (QUT) and Clive Booth (UQ). Hubert Chanson acknowledges the assistance of all
field work participants, in particular his CIVL4140 and CIVL4120 students and the ECCLA
group.

REFERENCES
Bowden, K.F., and Ferguson, S.R. (1980). "Variations with Height of the Turbulence in a
Tidally-Induced Bottom Boundary Layer." Marine Turbulence, J.C.J. NIHOUL, Ed.,
Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 259-286.
Brown, R., Ferris, J., Warburton, K., and Chanson, H. (2004). "Hydrodynamic, Water Quality
and Ecological Study of Eprapah Creek Estuarine Zone: a Multi-Disciplinary, Cross-
Institutional Approach." Proc. 8th National Conference on Hydraulics in Water Engineering,
IEAust., Gold Coast, Australia, H. Chanson and J. Macintosh Ed., 8 pages (CD-ROM).
Chanson, H. (2004). "Environmental Hydraulics of Open Channel Flows." Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 483 pages (ISBN 0 7506 6165 8).
Chanson, H., Aoki, S., and Maruyama, M. (2000). "Unsteady Two-Dimensional Orifice Flow:
an Experimental Study." Coastal/Ocean Engineering Report, No. COE00-1, Dept. of
Architecture and Civil Eng., Toyohashi University of Technology, Japan, 29 pages.
Chanson, H., Aoki, S., and Maruyama, M. (2002). "Unsteady Two-Dimensional Orifice Flow:
a Large-Size Experimental Investigation." Jl of Hyd. Res., IAHR, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 63-71.
Chanson, H., Brown, R., Ferris, J., and Warburton, K. (2003). "A Hydraulic, Environmental
and Ecological Assessment of a Sub-tropical Stream in Eastern Australia: Eprapah Creek,
3966 September 11~16, 2005, Seoul, Korea

Victoria Point QLD on 4 April 2003." Report No. CH52/03, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, June, 189 pages.
Chanson, H. Brown, R., and Ferris, J. (2004). "Simultaneous Field Measurements of
Turbulence and Water Quality in a Sub-Tropical Estuary in Australia." Proc. 15th
Australasian Fluid Mech. Conf., AFMC, Sydney, Australia, M. Behnia, W. LIN & G.D.
McBain Ed., Paper AFMC00016, 4 pages (CD-ROM).
Fischer, H.B., List, E.J., Koh, R.C.Y., Imberger, J., and Brooks, N.H. (1979). "Mixing in
Inland and Coastal Waters." Academic Press, New York, USA.
Fugate, D.C., and Friedrichs, C.T. (2002). "Determining Concentration and Fall Velocity of
Estuarine Particle Populations using ADV, OBS and LISST." Continental Shelf Research,
Vol. 22, pp. 1867-1886.
Goring, D.G., and Nikora, V.I. (2002). "Despiking Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter Data." Jl of
Hyd. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 128, No. 1, pp. 117-126. Discussion: Vol. 129, No. 6, pp. 484-
489.
Ippen, A.T. (1966). "Estuary and Coastal Hydrodynamics." McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
Kawanisi, K., and Yokosi, S. (1997). "Characteristics of Suspended Sediment and Turbulence
in a Tidal Boundary Layer." Continental Shelf Research, Vol. 17, No. 8, pp. 859-875.
Lemmin, U., and Lhermitte, R. (1999). "ADV Measurements of Turbulence: can we Improve
their Interpretation ? Discussion." Jl of Hyd. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 125, No. 6, pp. 987-988.
Lewis, R. (1997). "Dispersion in Estuaries and Coastal Waters." John Wiley, Chichester, UK,
312 p.
McLelland, S.J., and Nicholas, A.P. (2000). "A New Method for Evaluating Errors in High-
Frequency ADV Measurements." Hydrological Processes, Vol. 14, pp. 351-366.
Nikora, V.I., and Goring, D.G. (1998). "ADV Measurements of Turbulence: can we Improve
their Interpretation ?" Jl of Hyd. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 6, pp. 630-634.
Nikora, V., and Goring, D. (2002). "Fluctuations of Suspended Sediment Concentration and
Turbulent Sediment Fluxes in an Open-Channel Flow." Jl of Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 128,
No. 2, pp. 214-224.
Rutherford, J.C. (1994). "River Mixing." John Wiley, Chichester, USA, 347 pages.
Voulgaris, G., and Trowbridge, J.H. (1998). "Evaluation of the Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter
(ADV) for Turbulence Measurements." Jl Atmosph. and Oceanic Tech., Vol. 15, pp. 272-
289.
Voulgaris, G., and Meyers, S.T. (2004). "Temporal Variability of Hydrodynamics, Sediment
Concentration and Sediment Settling in a Tidal Creek." Continental Shelf Research, Vol.
24, pp. 1659-1683.
Wahl, T.L. (2003). "Despiking Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter Data. Discussion." Jl of Hyd.
Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 129, No. 6, pp. 484-487.