Sample Data

UK Environment Agency Australian BOM USGS NWIS


USGS : Here is the most recent information on the USGS HydroML schemas related to those data sets:

BOM WDTF download package

UK Environment Agency pages providing descriptive and actual rating information for users for flood estimation purposes: Example CEH (UK) pages providing access to daily flow data and associated quality info, currently as text summary (station description):

Uncertainty papers

Here are citations to a couple of recent papers on hydrometric uncertainty. Ultimately, the primary use-case for sharing of ratings gaugings and cross sections is to mitigate for the lack in objective quantification of uncertainty in discharge timeseries. Sophisticated operational and scientific users of discharge data need to inspect how robust the derivation of discharge from stage is in order to establish the confidence with which critical decisions or hypothesis tests can be based. This understanding how the information is of use is germane to design and development of the standard.
  • McMillan , H., Krueger, T. and Freer, J. 2012, Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: rainfall, river discharge and water quality. Hydrol. Process.. doi: 10.1002/hyp.9384
  • Hamilton, AS, Moore, RD. 2012. Quantifying uncertainty in streamflow records. Canadian Water Resources Journal. 37(1):3-21.
  • Beven, K., Buytaert, W., & Smith, L. A. (2012). On virtual observatories and modelled realities (or why discharge must be treated as a virtual variable). Hydrological Processes, 26(12), 1905-1908.
  • Beven, K., & Westerberg, I. (2011). On red herrings and real herrings: disinformation and information in hydrological inference. Hydrological Processes, 25(10), 1676-1680.
  • G. Di Baldassarre and A. Montanari (2009), Uncertainty in river discharge observations: a quantitative analysis. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences.
  • José-Luis Guerrero, Ida K. Westerberg, Sven Halldin, Chong-Yu Xu, Lars-Christer Lundin, Temporal variability in stage–discharge relationships, Journal of Hydrology, Volumes 446–447, 26 June 2012, Pages 90-102, ISSN 0022-1694, 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.04.031
  • Tomkins, Kerrie M. "Uncertainty in streamflow rating curves: methods, controls and consequences." Hydrological Processes (2012). (this is a CSIRO paper. I'm looking into using this as a case study for RGS encodings).
-- PeterTaylor - 08 Jun 2012
Topic attachments
I Attachment Action Size Date Who Comment
410777_-_sections.xmlxml 410777_-_sections.xml manage 23 K 10 Aug 2012 - 03:03 PaulSheahan  
410777_gaugings_and_ratings.xmlxml 410777_gaugings_and_ratings.xml manage 315 K 10 Aug 2012 - 03:04 PaulSheahan  
EA_44810_GSDQ_summary.xlsxxlsx EA_44810_GSDQ_summary.xlsx manage 46 K 07 Aug 2012 - 21:53 PaulSheahan  
RatingsGaugingsModelOverview.pdfpdf RatingsGaugingsModelOverview.pdf manage 351 K 13 Jun 2012 - 22:42 PaulSheahan preliminary work - Ratings Gaugings Model Overview
River_Gauging_Station_Data_Quality_Classification.pdfpdf River_Gauging_Station_Data_Quality_Classification.pdf manage 2 MB 08 Jun 2012 - 05:35 PeterTaylor GSDQ report
WDTS_2.2_RatingGaugingExchange.pdfpdf WDTS_2.2_RatingGaugingExchange.pdf manage 2 MB 13 Jun 2012 - 22:45 PaulSheahan Rating curve and gauging information - Report on data exchange formats
Topic revision: r13 - 08 Feb 2013, PeterTaylor
This site is powered by FoswikiThe information you supply is used for OGC purposes only. We will never pass your contact details to any third party without your prior consent.
If you enter content here you are agreeing to the OGC privacy policy.

Copyright &© by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding OGC Public Wiki? Send feedback