When it comes to accuracy – you can count on Van Walt Ltd
September 15, 2014
But on this occasion we need the help of all you professionals working out in the field. Please read on…
A question that has been keeping me awake at night: Is your manual dip correct?
This has come about In the light of higher accuracy water level sensors we have recently launched from Instrumentation North West (INW) – AquiStar® Smart Sensors. These vented sensors have a “typical” accuracy of 3mm making them one of the most accurate transducer now available for environmental research. They are particularly appropriate for measuring surface water fluctuations.
However, before deployment they require a manual dip to water to establish a reference point from which to analyse the data. Currently this is done with a water level dip meter but this is prone to a number of problems:
1. The measurement is only as good as the operator on the day
2. Often the tape measure is a little bowed and this affects the readings
3. Sensors are frequently deployed within a stilling well at an angle from the lake or river shore. In the absence of an accurate inclinometer (and the application of Pythagoras’ theorem) this manual water level will throw up some inaccuracies.
4. In measurements of elevation of land a differential GPS system is used. This is a skilled job and the equipment is very expensive so probably not an option?
2. Often the tape measure is a little bowed and this affects the readings
3. Sensors are frequently deployed within a stilling well at an angle from the lake or river shore. In the absence of an accurate inclinometer (and the application of Pythagoras’ theorem) this manual water level will throw up some inaccuracies.
4. In measurements of elevation of land a differential GPS system is used. This is a skilled job and the equipment is very expensive so probably not an option?
Contrary to absolute loggers (like Diver Level Loggers), INW sensors require a manual dip at the start of the deployment but using a poor manual dip will substantially increase the measurement inaccuracy.
So how do we get this datum? In my opinion it may be best to enter a “0” manual dip and insert the datum at a later point but of course we’d still be left with the value of the datum, but this could be obtained anytime in the deployment time sequence.
The question remains: How do we get the (accurate) datum? Can we work without it? (This may be the best route). I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this conundrum – post a reply below or email me on vincent@vanwalt.com.
Vincent van Walt
You might also be interested in...
Van Walt Guidelines for sampling for PFAS in Groundwater
November 13, 2024We need to make clear, that at the time of writing, there are no ISO or EN standards which deal with the sampling of groundwater for PFAS.
Read MoreSpot measurement v. continuous environmental monitoring
August 25, 2023Environmental monitoring has developed considerably over the years. From the time when a consultant went out monthly or quarterly with a dip tape to monitor the groundwater level in a borehole, wind forward...
Read MoreMeasuring Nitrates (NO3, NO3-N) in the field
June 20, 2023The interest in Nitrates is nothing new. One way or another we have been measuring them for half a century.
Read MoreVan Walt Environmental Equipment
A small selection of our environmental equipment