Figure 2. Location of data-collection sites and recorded maximum surge elevation. Figure 1. Path of Hurricane Rita, September 22-24, 2005, and monitored area in southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas. TEXAS LOUISIANA ARKANSAS MISSISSIPPI ALABAMA Gulf of Mexico Monitored Area 09-22-05 4 a.m. 09-23-05 1 a.m. 09-23-05 10 p.m. 09-24-05 10 a.m. FLORIDA N Hurricane Rita satellite imagery obtained from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2006). TEXAS LOUISIANA Lake Charles Lafayette Port Arthur Beaumont - Water-level sensor (9.4) (7.5) (10.6) (14.9) (13.8) (13.3) (11.2) (5.0) (6.9) (7.4) (10.8) (14.8) (14.7) (8.9) (8.0) (9.4) B15b B12 B10 B19a B20 LC4 LC3 B19b B1 LC12 LC13 LC11 LC9 LC7 LC6a LC5 LC8b LA3 LA12 LA11 LC2a LC2b LC6b Gulf of Mexico - Barometric-pressure sensor - Maximum surge elevation (feet above NAVD 88) LC10 LC8a - Co-located barometric and water-level sensor Abbeville (3.9) (4.2) (4.5) LA8 LA7 LA2 (8.7) LA10 (6.6) (10.7) LA9 LA9b (10.1) (9.5) LF5 LF3 Sabine Pass 165 167 96 90 49 27 10 82 82 14 27 27 Cameron Intracoastal City 10 Orange Sabine Lake Calcasieu Lake Grand Lake White Lake Vermilion Lake - Land-surface elevation (feet above NAVD 88) >30 0 N 20 Kilometers 0 10 0 20 Miles 10 93 0 00’ 94 0 00’ 29 0 50’ U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2006–3136 December 2006 Monitoring Inland Storm Surge and Flooding from Hurricane Rita Printed on recycled paper P reventing flood hazards from becoming human disasters requires an understanding of the relative risks floods pose to specific communities and knowledge of the processes by which flood waters arise, converge, and abate. Such understanding can lead to improvements in the design of levees, dams, bridges, and other infrastructure; aid the delineation of flood plain boundaries and evacuation routes; and serve as the basis for wise land-use planning. Historically, study of coastal storm-induced surge was based on analysis of flood evidence such as structural damage, vegetative damage, debris piles, high-water marks, and eye-witness accounts. However, these sources rarely provide useful information about the timing of the inundation, nor do they facilitate reconstruction of the various flow paths by which surge waters penetrate inland areas, or provide information to assess natural or man-made factors, which may affect flooding. In response to these needs, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) designed and developed an experimental monitoring network of pressure transducers (sensors) to document the timing, extent, and magnitude of hurricane storm surge. The network was deployed to areas of southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas (figs. 1 and 2) in the hours preceding landfall of Hurricane Rita in September 2005.
Transcript
Figure 2. Location of data-collection sites and recorded maximum surge elevation.
Figure 1. Path of Hurricane Rita, September 22-24, 2005, and monitored area in southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas.
TEXAS
LOUISIANA
ARKANSAS
MISSISSIPPI
ALABAMA
Gulf of Mexico
Monitored Area
09-22-05 4 a.m.
09-23-05 1 a.m.
09-23-05 10 p.m.
09-24-05 10 a.m.
FLORIDA
N
Hurricane Rita satellite imagery obtained from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2006).
TEXASLOUISIANA
Lake CharlesLafayette
PortArthur
Beaumont
- Water-level sensor
(9.4)
(7.5)
(10.6) (14.9)(13.8) (13.3)
(11.2)
(5.0) (6.9)
(7.4)
(10.8)
(14.8) (14.7)
(8.9)
(8.0)
(9.4)
B15b
B12
B10B19a B20
LC4LC3
B19bB1
LC12
LC13 LC11LC9
LC7
LC6aLC5
LC8b
LA3
LA12 LA11
LC2a
LC2b
LC6b
G u l f o f M e x i c o- Barometric-pressure sensor
- Maximum surge elevation (feet above NAVD 88)
LC10 LC8a
- Co-located barometric and water-level sensor
Abbeville(3.9) (4.2)
(4.5)LA8 LA7
LA2
(8.7)LA10 (6.6)
(10.7)LA9LA9b(10.1)
(9.5)LF5
LF3
SabinePass
165
167
96
90
49
27
10
82
82
14
27
27
Cameron
IntracoastalCity
10
Orange
SabineLake
CalcasieuLake Grand
Lake
White Lake
VermilionLake
- Land-surface elevation (feet above NAVD 88)>300
N
20 Kilometers0 10
0 20 Miles10
930 00’ 940 00’
290 5
0’
U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey
Fact Sheet 2006–3136December 2006
Monitoring Inland Storm Surge and Flooding from Hurricane Rita
Printed on recycled paper
Preventing flood hazards from becoming human disasters requires an understanding of the relative risks floods pose to specific communities and knowledge of the processes by which flood waters arise, converge, and abate. Such understanding can lead to improvements in the design of levees, dams, bridges, and other infrastructure; aid the delineation of flood plain boundaries and evacuation routes; and serve as the basis for wise land-use planning.
Historically, study of coastal storm-induced surge was based on analysis of flood evidence such as structural damage, vegetative damage, debris piles, high-water marks, and eye-witness accounts. However, these sources rarely provide useful information about the timing of the inundation, nor do they facilitate reconstruction of the various flow paths by which surge waters penetrate inland areas, or provide information to assess natural or man-made factors, which may affect flooding.
In response to these needs, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
designed and developed an experimental monitoring network of pressure transducers (sensors) to document the timing, extent, and magnitude of hurricane storm
surge. The network was deployed to areas of southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas (figs. 1 and 2) in the hours preceding landfall of Hurricane Rita in September 2005.
Figure 3. Sensor used to collect water-level and barometric-pressure data.
ab Water-level sensor (a) placed near USGS coastal-stream-gage (b) track together during surge inundation
WAT
ER-L
EVEL
ELEV
ATI
ON
,IN
FEET
AB
OVE
NAV
D88
Figure 5. Hurricane Rita surge data at site LA2 west of Lafayette, Louisiana.
The resulting water-level/barometric-pressure and related high-water mark data are described in USGS Data Series 220 and are available on the Internet at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2006/220/
the coast, sensor sites were selected based on storm-surge forecasts, the location and accessibility of piers and bridges, and local topography. Sensors were deployed at 33 sites from September 22-23, 2005, along selected waterways and in coastal marshes from Sabine Pass, Tex., to Lafayette, La., at distances ranging from a few hundred feet from the coast to approximately 30 miles inland. Sensors (fig. 3) were programmed to measure and record date and time, temperature, and pressure every 30 seconds during the storm and for several days afterward. Sensor housings were fabricated of 1.25-inch diameter by 18-inch-long metal pipes and were deployed by strapping to permanent objects, such as piers and power poles (fig. 4A). Co-located sensors recorded water level and barometric pressure at 7 selected sites, and individual sen-sors recorded water levels at 17 sites and barometric pressure at 9 sites.
Figure 4. U.S. Geological Survey employees: (A) documenting site conditions during sensor recovery, (B) establishing a reference mark during sensor deployment, and (C) measuring the distance between the temporary reference mark and the sensor measuring point.
After the storm, the sensors (minus one that was destroyed) were recovered and the data downloaded and processed. Water-level data were corrected for changes in barometric pressure using data from a co-located
or nearby barometric-pressure sensor. Water-level data also were corrected for salinity (water density). Correc-tions for salinity were based upon the location of the sensor in proximity to
B C
A
the coast, as either saltwater (density of 64.0 lbs/ft3 [pounds per cubic foot]), brackish water (density of 63.1, lbs/ft3), or freshwater (density of 62.4, lbs/ft3).
To convert the water-level data from all the sensor sites to a common datum, temporary reference marks (fig. 4B) were established on permanent objects near each water-level sensor. Differential levels and graduated tapes (fig. 4C) were then used to relate the relative elevation of the temporary reference marks to that of the sensors, available high-water marks, and to the level of the water at the time the sensor was removed.
Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and techniques were used to determine the elevation of the temporary benchmarks. The
23 24 25 26 27 28 29September, 2005
-1.0
0.00.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
13.0
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14.0
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.8
15.0
Barometric pressure
Lowest recordable elevation
Water-level elevationHigh-water mark elevation
16.0
15.0
14.0
13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
-1.0
14.4
15.0
14.8
14.6
14.0
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
13.023 24 25 26 27 28 29
SEPTEMBER 2005
High-water mark
BA
ROM
ETRICPRESSU
RE,INPO
UN
DS
PERSQ
UA
REIN
CH
14.2
WAT
ER-L
EVEL
ELEV
ATI
ON
,IN
FEET
AB
OVE
NAV
D88
Figure 6. Hurricane Rita surge data at site LA9b near Intracoastal City, Louisiana.
23 24 25 26 27 28 29September, 2005
-1.0
0.00.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
13.0
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14.0
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.8
15.0
Barometric pressure
Lowest recordable elevation
Water-level elevationHigh-water mark elevation
BA
ROM
ETRICPRESSU
RE,INPO
UN
DS
PERSQ
UA
REIN
CH
WAT
ER-L
EVEL
ELEV
ATI
ON
,IN
FEET
AB
OVE
NAV
D88
16.0
15.0
14.0
13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
-1.0
14.4
15.0
14.8
14.6
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
13.023 24 25 26 27 28 29
SEPTEMBER 2005
High-water mark
Figure 7. Hurricane Rita surge data at site LC8a in Cameron, Louisiana.
GPS data were processed using 2 first-order benchmarks and 6 National Geodetic Survey continuously operating reference stations (CORS) (National Geodetic Survey, 2006a) with Ashtech Solutions software (Ashtech Precision Products, 1999).
Quality AssuranceQuality-assurance procedures
were used at selected sites to assess the variability and confirm the accuracy of the recorded water-level data. These procedures consisted of comparing water levels recorded by sensors to (1) water levels recorded by co-located sensors, (2) water levels recorded by nearby established USGS streamgages, (3) water-surface elevation of the water from which the sensor was recovered, and (4) field observed high-water mark elevations. Water levels recorded by the sensors at sites LF3 and LA7 were similar to water levels recorded by co-located sensors, and water levels recorded by the sensors at sites LA2 (fig. 5) and LA8 closely matched water levels recorded by USGS streamgages.
Water-level data were compared to the water-surface elevations of the water from which the sensors were recovered at seven sites: LA2 (fig. 5), LA3, LA9, LC2a, LF3, LC5, and LC8b. The data from the sensors matched the water-surface elevations within + 0.1 foot at all seven sites.
The highest water levels recorded at seven sites, including LA9b (fig. 6), LA12, LC2b, LC5, LC7, LC8a (fig. 7), and LF5, were compared to the elevation of the nearest high-water mark. In general, the highest water levels recorded by sensors were similar to nearby high-water marks rated as excellent; however, the highest water levels recorded consistently were higher than high-water marks rated as good, fair, or poor. For example, the highest recorded water level near site LA9b (fig. 6) was approximately 0.2 foot higher than the nearby high-water mark rated as excellent, and the highest recorded water level near site LC8a (fig. 7) was approximately 1 foot higher than the nearby high-water mark rated as good.
Storm Surge And FloodingIn general, the highest surge
elevations were recorded near the coast, and lower elevations were
in excess of 5 feet per hour at many locations. Flooding at some locations near Interstate 10, such as sites LA3 and LA2, was increased by river flows in addition to storm surge.
The storm-surge data indicate the timing of flood waters as Hurricane Rita moved across the coast and inland. Approximate visualizations of these events can be created by interpolating water-level data between sensor locations and overlaying the results onto a digital-elevation model. For example, on September 24, 2005, 3:00 a.m., a flood wave (dark red
recorded inland through the approxi-mate latitude of Interstate 10 (fig. 2). Figures 5, 6, and 7 show water-level and barometric-pressure data before, during, and after landfall of Hurricane Rita. Analysis of these and the remaining data indicate that peak water levels over 14 feet above North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) occurred at Constance Beach (LC11), Creole (LA12), and Grand Chenier (LA11), La., about 20, 48, and 54 miles respectively, east of Sabine Pass, Tex. (fig. 2). During the storm surge, water levels rose
B15b
B12
B10B19a B20
LC4 LC3
B19bB1
LC12
LC13 LC11LC9
LC7
LC6aLC5
LC8b
LA3
LA12 LA11
LC2a
LC2b
LC6b LA8 LA7
LA2
LA10LA9
LA9b
LF5
LF3
TEXASLOUISIANA
Lake CharlesLafayette
PortArthur
Beaumont
- Water-level sensorGulf of Mexico - Barometric-pressure sensor
LC8a
- Co-located barometric-pressure and water-level sensors
Figure 8. Simulation of surge from Hurricane Rita on September 24, 2005, 3:00 a.m., using water-level and barometric-pressure data from sensors (Dean Gesch, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2006).
930 00’ 940 00’
290 5
0’
area in fig. 8) is shown inland of the coast and along Louisiana Highway 82 from sites LC11, LC9, LC8a, LA12, and LA11 (Dean Gesch, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2006).
Maps also can be generated to display flood duration, times of surge arrival and retreat, and maximum depths. Overlaying that information on other visualizations of hurricane impact, such as beach erosion and housing damage, could ultimately enable scientists and engineers to better understand surge mechanisms and design more robust infrastructure. Future deployments may feature monitoring of salinity and may include real-time telemetry to help emergency officials respond when storm surge threatens coastal communities.
AcknowledgmentsThe authors wish to thank the
following USGS personnel for their dedication and diligence in collecting, processing, and publishing data for this study: Wade H. Kress, Joe G. Beauchamp, Christopher L. Braun, Marcus O. Gary, Robin H. Gary, and Joseph Vrabel, Texas Water Science Center; Brenda K. Woodward, Nebraska Water Science Center; Christopher J. Rowden and Paul H. Rydlund, Missouri Water Science Center; and the employees of the Ruston Program Office, Louisiana Water Science Center.
Selected References
Ashtech Precision Products, 1999, Ashtech solution user’s guide: Santa Clara, Calif., Magellan Corporation, 170 p.
McGee, B.D., Goree, B.B., Tollett, R.W., Woodward, B.K., and Kress, W.H., 2006, Hurricane Rita surge data, southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas, September to November 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 220.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2006, Life on Earth-Looking at Earth: accessed May 16, 2006, at URL http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/h2005_rita.html
National Geodetic Survey, 2006a, National Geodetic Survey continuously operating reference stations (CORS): accessed May 16, 2006, at URL http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/
National Geodetic Survey, 2006b, National Geodetic Survey datasheet retrieval page: accessed May 16, 2006, at URL http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/datasheet.prl
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2006, National Hurricane Center: Hurricane Preparedness, SLOSH model: accessed September 21, 2005, at URL http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/surge/slosh.shtml
Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).
Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
By Benton D. McGee, Roland W. Tollett, and Robert R. Mason, Jr.
For additional information contact:DirectorU.S. Geological SurveyLouisiana Water Science Center3535 S. Sherwood Forest Blvd., Suite 120Baton Rouge, LA 70816Telephone: (225) 298-5481Fax: (225) 298-5490Email: [email protected] Home Page: http://la.water.usgs.gov
![2SMPB-02E Digital Barometric Pressure Sensor - mouser.com · [2SMPB-02E] Datasheet Rev.05(Jun.,2017) Omron. . . . ...](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5b3de1077f8b9a9a098c0f53/2smpb-02e-digital-barometric-pressure-sensor-2smpb-02e-datasheet-rev05jun2017.jpg)
