July 2004
Environmental Technology
Verification Report
AANDERAA INSTRUMENTS, INC.
RCMMKllWITH
OPTODE 3830 MULTI-PARAMETER
WATER QUALITY PROBE/SONDE
Prepared by
Battelle
Banene
Uw Business o/ Innovation
In cooperation with the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
_T^^y*
^^ -
''v^H ^^r*
Under a cooperative agreement with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
July 2004
Environmental Technology Verification
Report
ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center
AANDERAA Instruments, Inc.
ROM MkllwithOptode3830
Multi-Parameter Water Quality Probe/Sonde
by
Jeffrey Myers
Amy Dindal
Zachary Willenberg
Karen Riggs
Battelle
Columbus, Ohio 43201
and
Paul Pennington
Michael Fulton
Geoffrey Scott
NOAA CCEHBR
Charleston, South Carolina 29412
-------
Notice
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its Office of Research and
Development, has financially supported and collaborated in the extramural program described
here. This document has been peer reviewed by the Agency and recommended for public release.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation by the EPA for use.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) does not approve, recommend,
or endorse any proprietary product or material mentioned in this publication. No reference shall
be made to NOAA in any advertising or sales promotion which would indicate or imply that
NOAA approves, recommends, or endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material
mentioned herein.
11
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the
nation's air, water, and land resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the
Agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between
human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this
mandate, the EPA's Office of Research and Development provides data and science support that
can be used to solve environmental problems and to build the scientific knowledge base needed
to manage our ecological resources wisely, to understand how pollutants affect our health, and to
prevent or reduce environmental risks.
The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program has been established by the EPA to
verify the performance characteristics of innovative environmental technology across all media
and to report this objective information to permitters, buyers, and users of the technology, thus
substantially accelerating the entrance of new environmental technologies into the marketplace.
Verification organizations oversee and report verification activities based on testing and quality
assurance protocols developed with input from major stakeholders and customer groups
associated with the technology area. ETV consists of seven environmental technology centers.
Information about each of these centers can be found on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/etv/.
Effective verifications of monitoring technologies are needed to assess environmental quality
and to supply cost and performance data to select the most appropriate technology for that
assessment. Under a cooperative agreement, Battelle has received EPA funding to plan,
coordinate, and conduct such verification tests for "Advanced Monitoring Systems for Air,
Water, and Soil" and report the results to the community at large. Information concerning this
specific environmental technology area can be found on the Internet at
http ://www. epa.gov/etv/centers/center 1 .html.
in
-------
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of all those who helped plan and conduct the
verification test, analyze the data, and prepare this report. We would like to thank the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Ocean Service, National Centers
for Coastal Ocean Science staff at the Center for Coastal Environmental Health and
Biomolecular Research. In addition, NOAA's Coastal Service Center is acknowledged for
providing access to dock facilities on a tributary of Charleston Harbor for the saltwater testing,
as well as the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources for the use of its land and pier.
We also acknowledge the assistance of the ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center
stakeholders Christine Kolbe of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and
Paul Pennington and Geoff Scott of NOAA, as well as James O'Dell and Linda Sheldon of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
IV
-------
Contents
Page
Notice ii
Foreword iii
Acknowledgments iv
List of Abbreviations viii
1 Background 1
2 Technology Description 2
3 Test Design and Procedures 3
3.1 Introduction 3
3.2 Test Site Characteristics 3
3.3 Test Design 4
3.3.1 Saltwater Testing 7
3.3.2 Freshwater Testing 8
3.3.3 Mesocosm Testing 9
3.4 Reference Measurements 9
4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 11
4.1 Instrument Calibration 11
4.2 Field Quality Control 11
4.3 Sample Custody 11
4.4 Audits 12
4.4.1 Performance Evaluation Audit 12
4.4.2 Technical Systems Audit 12
4.4.3 Audit of Data Quality 13
4.5 QA/QC Reporting 13
4.6 Data Review 13
5 Statistical Methods 15
5.1 Calibration Check Accuracy 15
5.2 Relative Bias 15
5.3 Precision 16
5.4 Linearity 16
5.5 Inter-UnitReproducibility 16
-------
6 Test Results 17
6.1 Calibration Check Accuracy 20
6.2 Relative Bias 20
6.3 Precision 24
6.4 Linearity 25
6.5 Inter-Unit Reproducibility 29
6.6 Other Factors 39
6.6.1 Ease of Use 39
6.6.2 Data Completeness 39
7 Performance Summary 40
8 References 41
Appendix A Sample Printout, Data Reading Program 5059 A-l
Figures
Figure 2-1. AANDERAA Oxygen Optode 3830 2
Figure 3-1. Saltwater Site 5
Figure 3-2. Freshwater Site 5
Figure 3-3. Mesocosm Tank 6
Figure 3-4. Saltwater Deployment 7
Figure 6-1. Mk n with Optode 3830 Prior to Deployment 17
Figure 6-2. Mk H with Optode 3830 After Saltwater Deployment 18
Figure 6-3. Cleaned and Reconditioned Mk n with Optode 3830s in Storage Tank Used
Between Deployments 19
Figure 6-4. Mkllwith Optode 3830 After Freshwater Deployment 19
Figure 6-5a. Relative Bias Data for DO (Saltwater) 21
Figure 6-5b. Relative Bias Data for DO (Mesocosm) 21
Figure 6-5c. Relative Bias Data for Temperature (Saltwater) 22
Figure 6-5d. Relative Bias Data for Temperature (Mesocosm) 22
Figure 6-5e. Relative Bias Data for Turbidity (Saltwater) 23
Figure 6-5f. Relative Bias Data for Turbidity (Mesocosm) 23
Figure 6-6a. Linearity Data for DO (Saltwater) 26
Figure 6-6b. Linearity Data for DO (Mesocosm) 26
Figure 6-6c. Linearity Data for Temperature (Saltwater) 27
Figure 6-6d. Linearity Data for Temperature (Mesocosm) 27
Figure 6-6e. Linearity Data for Turbidity (Saltwater) 28
Figure 6-6f. Linearity Data for Turbidity (Mesocosm) 28
Figure 6-7a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Saltwater Tests 30
Figure 6-7b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Freshwater Tests 31
Figure 6-7c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Mesocosm Tests 32
Figure 6-8a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Saltwater Tests 33
Figure 6-8b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Freshwater Tests .... 34
VI
-------
Figure 6-8c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Mesocosm Tests .... 35
Figure 6-9a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Saltwater Tests 36
Figure 6-9b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Freshwater Tests 37
Figure 6-9c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Mesocosm Tests 38
Tables
Table 2-1. Mk n with Optode 3830 Range, Resolution, and Accuracy
as Provided by the Vendor 2
Table 3-1. Water Characteristics at the Test Sites 4
Table 3-2. Verification Test Schedule 6
Table 3-3. Schedule for Saltwater Sample Collection—Tributary of Charleston Harbor .... 8
Table 3-4. Schedule for Freshwater Sample Collection—Rollings Wetlands 8
Table 3-5. Schedule for Mesocosm Sample Collection 9
Table 3-6. Maximum Sample Holding Times 10
Table 4-1. Replicate Analysis QC Criteria 12
Table 4-2. Expected Values for Field Blanks 12
Table 4-3. Summary of Performance Evaluation Audits 12
Table 4-4. Summary of Data Recording Process 14
Table 6-1. Calibration Check Accuracy 20
Table 6-2. Average Relative Bias Results for 1103 and 1104 24
Table 6-3. Measurements and Percent Relative Standard Deviations for
1103 and 1104 During Stable Mesocosm Operation 24
Table 6-4. Average Absolute Difference Between 1103 and 1104 Readings for
Each Parameter at Each Deployment Location 29
Table 6-5. Installation, Operation, and Maintenance Activities 39
Table 7-1. Summary of Performance 40
vn
-------
List of Abbreviations
AMS
CCEHBR
DAS
DO
DSU
EPA
ETV
L
mg
mm
NIST
NOAA
NTU
PE
QA
QA/QC
QMP
RSD
ISA
Advanced Monitoring Systems
Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research
data acquisition system
dissolved oxygen
data storage unit
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Technology Verification
liter
microMolar
milligram
millimeter
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
nephelometric turbidity unit
performance evaluation
quality assurance
quality assurance/quality control
Quality Management Plan
relative standard deviation
technical systems audit
Vlll
-------
Chapter 1
Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative environmental tech-
nologies through performance verification and dissemination of information. The goal of the
ETV Program is to further environmental protection by substantially accelerating the acceptance
and use of improved and cost-effective technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by provid-
ing high-quality, peer-reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in the design,
distribution, financing, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental technologies.
ETV works in partnership with recognized testing organizations; with stakeholder groups
consisting of buyers, vendor organizations, and permitters; and with the full participation of
individual technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of innovative tech-
nologies by developing test plans that are responsive to the needs of stakeholders, conducting
field or laboratory tests (as appropriate), collecting and analyzing data, and preparing peer-
reviewed reports. All evaluations are conducted in accordance with rigorous quality assurance
(QA) protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are generated and that the
results are defensible.
The EPA's National Exposure Research Laboratory and its verification organization partner,
Battelle, operate the Advanced Monitoring Systems (AMS) Center under ETV. The AMS Center
recently evaluated the performance of the AANDERAA Instruments, Inc. RCM Mk n, housing
theOptode3830.
-------
Chapter 2
Technology Description
The objective of the ETV AMS Center is to verify the performance characteristics of
environmental monitoring technologies for air, water, and soil. This verification report provides
results for the verification testing of the Mk n with Optode 3830 by AANDERAA Instruments,
Inc. Following is a description of the Optode 3830, based on information provided by the
vendor. The information provided below was not verified in this test.
The Optode 3830 (Figure 2-1) uses a platinum porphyrin complex as a
dynamic fluorescence quencher to monitor oxygen in water. The
porphyrin complex is embedded in a gas-permeable foil that is
exposed to the surrounding water. A black optical isolation coating
protects the complex from sunlight and fluorescent particles in the
water. This sensing foil is attached to a sapphire window, providing
optical access for the measuring system from inside a watertight
titanium housing. The foil is excited by modulated blue light, and the
phase of a returned red light is measured. By linearizing and
temperature compensating with an incorporated temperature sensor,
the absolute oxygen concentration can be determined. The diameter of
the Optode 3830 is 36 millimeters (mm) (1.42 inches). It is 86 mm
(3.39 inches) long and weighs 0.23 kilograms (8.11 ounces). Pricing
information is available from the vendor.
The Mk n with Optode 3830 was verified for temperature, dissolved
Figure 2-1. AANDERAA oxygen (DO), and turbidity. The range, resolution, and accuracy, as
Oxygen Optode 3830 indicated by the vendor, for those parameters are listed below.
Table 2-1. Mk II with Optode 3830 Range, Resolution, and Accuracy as Provided by the
Vendor
Parameter
Air saturation
Oxygen
concentration
Temperature
Turbidity
Range
Oto 120%
0 to 500 ^Molar (nM)
-2.7 to 36.6°C
0 to 20 nephelometric
turbidity units (NTU)
Resolution
Accuracy
<0.4% <5%
<
0.
0.
1 (iM
1 % of range
1% of full scale
<8 nM or
±0.05°C
2% of full
5%, whichever
scale
is greater
-------
Chapter 3
Test Design and Procedures
3.1 Introduction
This verification test was conducted according to procedures specified in the Test/QA Plan for
Long-Term Deployment of Multi-Parameter Water Quality Probes/Sondesm The purpose of the
verification test was to evaluate the performance of the Mk n with Optode 3830 under realistic
operating conditions. The Mk n with Optode 3830 was evaluated by determining calibration
check accuracy and by comparing Mk n with Optode 3830 measurements with standard
reference measurements and measurements from handheld calibrated probes. Two Mk n with
Optode 3830s were deployed in saltwater, freshwater, and laboratory environments near
Charleston, South Carolina, during a 3 /^-month verification test. Water quality parameters were
measured both by the Mk n with Optode 3830 and by reference methods consisting of
collocated field-portable instrumentation and analyses of collected water samples. During each
phase, performance was assessed in terms of calibration check accuracy, relative bias, precision,
linearity, and inter-unit reproducibility.
The performance of the Mk n with Optode 3830 was verified in terms of the following
parameters:
• DO
• Temperature
• Turbidity.
3.2 Test Site Characteristics
The three test sites used for this verification were selected in an attempt to expose the Mk n with
Optode 3830 to the widest possible range of conditions while conducting an efficient test. The
three sites included one saltwater, one freshwater, and one controlled location. Approximate
ranges for the target parameters at each of the test sites as determined by reference
measurements are given in Table 3-1.
-------
Table 3-1. Water Characteristics at the Test Sites
Saltwater
Parameter
DO
Temperature
Turbidity
Low
3 milligrams/
liter (mg/L)
20°C
8NTU
High
6 mg/L
28°C
37NTU
Freshwater
Low
6.8 mg/L
ire
1.7NTU
High
11. 2 mg/L
27°C
3.6NTU
Mesocosm
Low
9.3 mg/L
9°C
0.4NTU
High
12.1 mg/L
16°C
15NTU
3.3 Test Design
The verification test was designed to assess the performance of multi-parameter water probes
and was closely coordinated with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) through the Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research
(CCEHBR). The test was conducted in three phases at a saltwater site in a tributary of
Charleston Harbor; a freshwater site at the Hollings wetland on the CCEHBR campus; and a
controlled site at the CCEHBR mesocosm facility in Charleston, South Carolina. At each test
site, two Mk n with Optode 3830s were deployed as close to each other as possible to assess
inter-unit reproducibility. The first phase of the test was conducted at the saltwater site (Figure
3-1). The CCEHBR campus has access to the tributary of Charleston Harbor site, which is a
predominantly tidal body of water that receives some riverine input; its salinities range from 20
to 35 parts per thousand. The second phase of the test was conducted at the freshwater site
(Figure 3-2). The freshwater site was a wetlands area near the Hollings Marine Research
Laboratory, located on the CCHEBR campus. The third phase was conducted at the CCEHBR's
mesocosm facility (Figure 3-3). This facility contains modular mesocosms that can be classified
as "tidal" or "estuarine." The mesocosm phase included both saltwater and freshwater
conditions.
The precision measurements were performed before the Mk n with Optode 3830 was deployed
into the saltwater environment. The Mk n with Optode 3830 was placed in a tank of saline water
inside the NOAA laboratory. While in this stable environment, the Mk n with Optode 3830
sampled at a rate of once per minute for approximately 30 minutes to collect data used in the
percent relative standard deviation (RSD).
The schedule for the various testing activities is given in Table 3-2.
-------
Figure 3-1. Saltwater Site
Figure 3-2. Freshwater Site
-------
Figure 3-3. Mesocosm Tank
Table 3-2. Verification Test Schedule
Activity
Date
Vendor setup for saltwater phase
Begin saltwater phase
End saltwater phase
Set up freshwater phase
Begin freshwater phase
End freshwater phase
Vendor setup for mesocosm phase
Begin mesocosm phase
End mesocosm phase
Return all equipment
October 1, 2003
October 2, 2003
October 30, 2003
October 31,2003
November 4, 2003
December 8, 2003
December 9, 2003
December 10, 2003
January 5, 2004
January 8, 2004
-------
3.3.1 Saltwater Testing
The saltwater phase lasted for 28 days, during which time the Mk n with Optode 3830
monitored the naturally occurring range of the target parameters 24 hours per day at 10-minute
measurement intervals. Dockside reference measurements were made for DO and temperature,
while reference samples for turbidity were collected and returned to the laboratory for analysis.
Figure 3-4 shows the Mk n with Optode 3830s at the pier. The Mk n with Optode 3830s were
mounted on iron posts that were driven into the river bed. The Mk n with Optode 3830s were
approximately 0.5 meters apart in the shallows of the tidal river. Reference samples were
collected throughout the day during the test. For the duration of this phase, the Mk n with
Optode 3830s were deployed at depths between approximately one and 10 feet, varying
according to the tide. Table 3-3 shows the times and numbers of samples taken throughout the
saltwater test phase.
Figure 3-4. Saltwater Deployment
-------
Table 3-3. Schedule for Saltwater Sample Collection—Tributary of Charleston Harbor
Test Day
1
7
8
14
15
22
26
27
28
29
Date
10/2/2003
10/8/2003
10/9/2003
10/15/2003
10/16/2003
10/23/2003
10/27/2003
10/28/2003
10/29/2003
10/30/2003
# Reference Samples
2
4
4
4
6
9
6
6
Activities
Deploy Mk II with Optode 3830s
Retrieve Mk II with Optode 3830s
3.3.2 Freshwater Testing
Freshwater testing was conducted at the wetlands on the CCEHBR campus and lasted 35 days.
As in the saltwater portion of the verification test, the Mk n with Optode 3830 monitored the
naturally occurring target parameters 24 hours per day, while reference measurements were
made and turbidity reference samples collected, again rotating among collection times. Table 3-4
shows the sampling times and number of samples collected throughout the freshwater test phase.
The Mk n with Optode 3830s were hung from a large post suspended several feet from the
bottom of the pond.
During this portion of the deployment, the salinity and stratification of the freshwater pond
increased. Natural weather and extreme tidal events caused the freshwater pond to become
brackish and highly stratified. Reference measurements taken at varying depths along the water
column during the first week of December showed significant stratification between the top and
bottom of the freshwater pond. As a result, the freshwater phase at the Rollings wetlands was
discontinued on December 8. The mesocosm deployment (Section 3.3.3) was extended to collect
data using a freshwater deployment.
Table 3-4. Schedule for Freshwater Sample Collection—Hollings Wetlands
Test Day
1
2
o
J
4
17
30
36
Date
11/4/2003
11/5/2003
11/6/2003
11/7/2003
11/20/2003
12/03/2003
12/08/2003
# Reference Samples
6
9
6
9
9
16
Activities
Deploy Mk II with Optode 3830s
Retrieve Mk II with Optode 3830s
-------
3.3.3 Mesocosm Testing
Mesocosm testing was performed over 27 days according to the schedule shown in Table 3-5.
Reference measurements were made and water samples were collected during each test day
throughout the normal operating hours of the facility (nominally 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.). During this
phase, the mesocosm was manipulated to introduce variations in the measured parameters. The
turbidity of the system was varied by operating a pump near the sediment trays to suspend
additional solids in the water. During the last three weeks of testing, saltwater was drained and
replaced with freshwater. These activities are detailed in Table 3-5.
Table 3-5. Schedule for Mesocosm Sample Collection
Test Day
Date
# Reference Samples
Activities
1
4
6
9
24
27
12/10/2003
12/12/2003
12/13/2003
12/15/2003
12/16/2003
12/17/2003
12/18/2003
1/2/2004
1/5/2004
4
6
Deploy Mk II with Optode 3830s in saltwater
10:00 - Transition to freshwater (to change
conductivity)
Begin freshwater portion of deployment
11:05 - Turn off air bubblers and turn off
circulation pump
10:40 - Turn on circulation pump
10:50 - Add mud slurry (to change turbidity)
13:00 - Add additional mud slurry
15:11 - Turn off circulation pump
10:20 - Turn on air bubblers (to change DO)
Retrieve Mk II with Optode 3830s
Variations in temperature and DO were driven by natural forces. Parameters over the ranges
specified in Table 3-1 were monitored by the Mk n with Optode 3830. Samples were collected
and analyzed using a reference method for comparison.
3.4 Reference Measurements
The reference measurements made in this verification test and the equipment used for these
measurements were as follows:
• DO—National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-traceable, commercially
available probe (Orion 830A)
• Temperature—NIST-traceable, handheld thermocouple and readout (Orion 830A)
• Turbidity—Hach Ratio XR turbidity meter (Hach 43900).
-------
Reagents were distilled deionized water (for field blanks) and a Hach Ratio XR turbidity
standard from Advanced Polymer Systems. Sampling equipment consisted of 0.5- to 1.0-L glass
bottles, a Niskin sampling device provided by CCEHBR, and provisions for sample storage. The
maximum sample holding times are given in Table 3-6. All sample holding time requirements
were met.
Table 3-6. Maximum Sample Holding Times
Parameter Holding Time
DO none(a)
Temperature none
Turbidity 24 hours
(^ "None" indicates that the sample analyses must be performed immediately after sample collection or in the water
column at the site.
10
-------
Chapter 4
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures were performed in accordance with the
quality management plan (QMP) for the AMS Center(2) and the test/QA plan for this verification
test.(1)
4.1 Instrument Calibration
Both the portable and laboratory reference instruments were calibrated by CCEHBR according
to the procedures and schedules in place at the test facility, and documentation was provided to
Battelle.
4.2 Field Quality Control
Replicate samples were taken during field sampling for assessment of the reference methods.
The replicate samples were collected once each week during a regular sampling period by
splitting field samples into two separate samples (containers) and analyzing both by the same
laboratory reference methods. The results from the replicate analysis and the field blanks met the
criteria listed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2, respectively. A container of deionized water (field blank)
was taken to the field, brought back to the laboratory, and analyzed in the same manner as the
collected samples.
4.3 Sample Custody
Samples collected at the saltwater, freshwater, and mesocosm sites were transported by the
scientist performing the sampling at CCEHBR to the laboratory in an ice-filled cooler and
analyzed immediately; therefore, no chain-of-custody forms were required.
11
-------
Table 4-1. Replicate Analysis QC Criteria
Parameter
Observed Agreement
DO
Temperature
Turbidity
±5%
±1°C
±5NTU
Table 4-2. Expected Values for Field Blanks
Parameter
Observed Maximum Difference
Turbidity
1NTU
4.4 Audits
4.4.1 Performance Evaluation Audit
A performance evaluation (PE) audit was conducted by the Battelle Test Coordinator once
during the verification test to assess the quality of the reference measurements. For the PE audit,
independent standards were used. Table 4-3 shows the procedures used for the PE audit and
associated results.
Table 4-3. Summary of Performance Evaluation Audits
Audited
Parameter
DO
Temperature
Turbidity
Audit Procedure
Oakton 100 monitor
Orion 230 thermometer
Advanced Polymer Systems
turbidity standard
Acceptable
Tolerance
±5%
±rc
±10%
Actual
Difference
1.1%
0.0 °C
0.72%
Passed
Audit
Yes
Yes
Yes
The DO measurement made by the Orion 830A was compared with that from a handheld DO
Oakton 100 monitor. Agreement within 1.1% was achieved. The comparison was made with a
sample of collected water, and agreement was within 0.0°C. A NIST-traceable Orion 230
thermometer was used for the temperature performance audit. The Hach turbidity meter
measurements were compared with an independent turbidity standard. Agreement within 0.72%
was observed.
4.4.2 Technical Systems Audit
The Battelle Quality Manager conducted a technical systems audit (TSA) on October 28, 2003,
to ensure that the verification test was performed in accordance with the test/QA plan(1) and the
AMS Center QMP(2) As part of the audit, the Battelle Quality Manager reviewed the reference
12
-------
methods used, compared actual test procedures to those specified in the test/QA plan, and
reviewed data acquisition and handling procedures. Observations and findings from this audit
were documented and submitted to the Battelle Verification Test Coordinator for response. The
records concerning the TSA are permanently stored with the Battelle Quality Manager.
During the verification test, two deviations from the test/QA plan were necessary. The first
occurred when natural weather events caused the freshwater pond to become brackish and
highly stratified, resulting in reference measurements that were not representative of the water
the Mk n with 3830 measured. An extended freshwater period, beginning on December 13,
2003, was added to the end of mesocosm deployment to provide data from a freshwater
deployment. Therefore, relative bias and linearity data were not collected at the freshwater site.
The data were collected from the mesocosm extension instead. The second deviation occurred
when a problem with the Niskin sampler developed. The sampler broke after several uses at the
beginning of the saltwater period and was replaced as soon as possible. However, this
malfunction resulted in fewer reference samples. The deviations had no impact on the results of
the test.
4.4.3 Audit of Data Quality
At least 10% of the data acquired during the verification test was audited. Battelle's Quality
Manager traced the data from the initial acquisition, through reduction and statistical analysis,
to final reporting, to ensure the integrity of the reported results. All calculations performed on
the data undergoing the audit were checked.
4.5 QA/QC Reporting
Each assessment and audit was documented in accordance with Sections 3.3.4 and 3.3.5 of the
QMP for the ETV AMS Center.(2) Once the assessment report was prepared, the Verification
Test Coordinator ensured that a response was provided for each adverse finding or potential
problem and implemented any necessary follow-up corrective action. The Battelle Quality
Manager ensured that follow-up corrective action was taken. The results of the TSA were sent to
the EPA.
4.6 Data Review
Records generated in the verification test were reviewed within two weeks of generation before
these records were used to calculate, evaluate, or report verification results. Table 4-4 sum-
marizes the types of data recorded. The review was performed by a Battelle technical staff
member involved in the verification test, but not the staff member who originally generated the
record. The person performing the review added his/her initials and the date to a hard copy of
the record being reviewed.
13
-------
Table 4-4. Summary of Data Recording Process
Data to be
Recorded
Responsible
Party
Where Recorded
How Often
Recorded
Disposition of Data(a)
Dates, times of test CCEHBR
events
Test parameters
Battelle/
CCEHBR
Mk II with Optode
3830 data CCEHBR
- digital display CCEHBR
- electronic
output
Reference monitor CCEHBR
readings/reference
analytical results
Reference
calibration data
PE audit results
CCEHBR
Battelle
Laboratory record
books/data sheets
Laboratory record
books/data sheets
Data sheets
Probe data acquisition
system (DAS); data
stored on probe down-
loaded to personal
computer
Laboratory record
book/data sheets or
data management
system, as appropriate
Laboratory record
books/data sheets/DAS
Laboratory record
books/data sheets/DAS
Start/end of test; at
each change of a test
parameter; at sample
collection
Each sample
collection
Continuous
10-minute sampling;
data downloaded to
personal computer
After each batch
sample collection;
data recorded after
reference method
performed
Whenever zero and
calibration checks are
done
At times of PE audits
Used to organize/check
test results; manually
incorporated data into
spreadsheets - stored in
test binder
Used to organize/check
test results; manually
incorporated data into
spreadsheets - stored in
test binder
Used to organize/check
test results; incorporated
data into electronic
spreadsheets - stored in
test binder
Used to organize/check
test results; manually
incorporated data into
spreadsheets - stored in
test binder
Documented correct
performance of reference
methods - stored in test
binder
Test reference methods
with independent
standards/measurements -
stored in test binder
1 All activities subsequent to data recording were carried out by Battelle.
14
-------
Chapter 5
Statistical Methods
The statistical methods presented in this chapter were used to verify the performance parameters
listed in Section 3.1.
5.1 Calibration Check Accuracy
The Mk n with Optode 3830 was calibrated for each measured parameter at the beginning and
end of each deployment period according to the vendor's instruction manual. The results from
the calibration checks were summarized, and accuracy was determined each time the calibration
check was conducted. Calibration check accuracy (A) is reported as a percentage, calculated
using the following equation:
A=l-(Cs-Cp)/CsxWO (1)
where Cs is the value of the reference standard, and Cp is the value measured by the Mk n with
Optode 3830. The closer^ is to 100, the more consistent the calibration check accuracy.
5.2 Relative Bias
Water samples were analyzed by both the reference method and the Mk n with Optode 3830,
and the results were compared. The results for each sample were recorded, and the accuracy was
expressed in terms of the average relative bias (B), as calculated from the following equation:
where CP is a measurement taken from the Mk n with Optode 3830 being verified at the same
time as the reference measurement was taken, and CR is the reference measurement. This
calculation was performed for each reference sample analysis for each of the three target water
parameters. In addition, relative bias was assessed independently for each Mk n with Optode
3830 to determine inter-unit reproducibility.
15
-------
5.3 Precision
The standard deviation (S) of the measurements made during a period of stable operation at the
mesocosm was calculated and used as a measure of probe precision:
S =
n-1
(Ck-C)2
k '
1/2
(3)
where n is the number of replicate measurements, Ck is the concentration reported for the kth
measurement, and C is the average concentration of the replicate measurements.
Precision was calculated for each of the three target water parameters. Probe precision was
reported in terms of the percent RSD of the series of measurements.
S
%RSD = =xlOO (4)
C y '
5.4 Linearity
For target water parameters, linearity was assessed by linear regression, with the analyte
concentration measured by the reference method as an independent variable and the reading
from the analyzer verified as a dependent variable. Linearity is expressed in terms of the slope,
intercept, and coefficient of determination (R2). Linearity was assessed separately for each Mk n
with Optode 3830.
5.5 Inter-Unit Reproducibility
The results obtained from the two Mk n with Optode 3830s were compiled independently and
compared to assess inter-unit reproducibility. Inter-unit reproducibility was determined by
calculating the average absolute difference between the two Mk n with Optode 3830s. In
addition, the two Mk n with Optode 3830s were compared by evaluating the relative bias of
each.
16
-------
Chapter 6
Test Results
The results of the verification of the two Mk n with Optode 3830s (identified as 1103 and 1104
in this report) are presented in this section. The Mk n with Optode 3830 data were recorded at
10-minute intervals throughout the verification test. First, a visual record of the condition of the
Mk n with Optode 3830s pre- and post-deployment is discussed, then the statistical comparisons
are made. Finally, a record of the activities involved in servicing and maintenance of the Mk n
with Optode 3830s is presented.
Prior to the initial saltwater deployment, the Mk n with Optode 3830s were in "like-new"
condition. That is, they arrived from the vendor crated and ready for installation. Figure 6-1
shows one of the two Mk n with Optode 3830s in its pre-deployment condition. As deployed,
the end where the individual probes are placed is exposed and oriented on top of the probe.
(5)
(4)
Figure 6-1. Mk II with Optode 3830 Prior to Deployment. Starting at the top
center and proceeding clockwise: (1) close-up of clean Mk n with housing
removed, (2) close-up of Optode 3830, (3) clean turbidity probe, (4) data storage
unit, (5) Mk n dock with housing and protective side bars.
17
-------
Following the saltwater deployment, the Mk n with Optode 3830s were retrieved from the water
and immediately returned to the laboratory to record the post-deployment condition. Figure 6-2
shows the post-deployment condition of the Mk n with Optode 3830s. The Mk n with Optode
3830s were covered with a combination of green algae, silt, and some shell growth.
Figure 6-2. Mk II with Optode 3830 After Saltwater Deployment. Both Mk H
with Optode 3830s after being removed from the saltwater deployment (top), with
close-ups of Mk n with Optode 3830 (left) and turbidity probe (right).
Prior to redeployment at the freshwater location, the Mk n with Optode 3830s were cleaned.
This consisted of gently rubbing the optical windows of the turbidity and oxygen probes with a
towel and 10% acetic acid solution. Then the Mk n with Optode 3830s were placed overnight in
a tank of oxygen-saturated water before deployment. Figure 6-3 shows the cleaned and
reconditioned Mk n with Optode 3830s in this tank.
18
-------
Figure 6-3. Cleaned and Reconditioned Mk II with
Optode 3830 in Storage Tank Used Between Deployments
Finally, the condition of the Mk n with Optode 3830s after the freshwater deployment was
recorded and is shown in Figure 6-4. As can be seen from the photos, the Mk n with Optode
3830s appeared more fouled after the saltwater deployment than after the freshwater
deployment, both from biofouling and small marine life.
Figure 6-4. Mk II with Optode 3830 After Freshwater
Deployment, with Close-up of Mk n with Optode 3830 (right)
19
-------
6.1 Calibration Check Accuracy
The Mk n with Optode 3830s were calibrated only at the beginning of the test. The calibrations
were checked at the end of each deployment as instructed by the vendor. No check was
performed for temperature. Table 6-1 shows the results from these calibration checks for the
saltwater, freshwater, and mesocosm tests.
Table 6-1. Calibration Check Accuracy
Deployment
Location Date
Saltwater 10/29/2003
Freshwater 12/9/2003
Mesocosm 1/13/2004
Calibration Check Accuracy (%)
1103
DO
98.9
98.9
99.7
Turbidity
30
1,500
NA(a)
1104
DO
97.3
95.6
83.9
Turbidity
18
800
520
^ Saturated; no data reported.
The accuracy shown in Table 6-1 is the comparison of how well the Mk n with Optode 3830s
held their calibration throughout the verification test. The Mk n with Optode 3830s were factory
calibrated; and, therefore, no adjustments to the calibrations were made during the verification
test. As shown in the table, the turbidity calibration check did not correlate well with the initial
calibration values. The Mk n with Optode 3830, as tested, used a turbidity probe that had a
maximum range of 20 NTU, which is designed for the most common use of these probes—open
ocean waters.
The calibration check accuracy for DO was consistently greater than 98.9% for the 1103. The
1104 measurements were consistently lower than the 1103 from the first day of deployment and
had a calibration check accuracy ranging from 83.9 to 97.3%.
6.2 Relative Bias
Relative bias (the percent difference between the Mk n with Optode 3830 measurements and the
reference measurements) was assessed by comparing the reference measurements with the 1103
and 1104 readings. The Mk n with Optode 3830 reading that was closest in time to the reference
sample was used. Plots of the 1103 and 1104 data, along with the corresponding reference
measurements that were used for the relative bias calculations, are shown in Figures 6-5a-f
No data are reported for the freshwater period because of the stratification that occurred. The
relative bias results are summarized in Table 6-2. The temperature measurements resulted in a
relative bias that was below 2% throughout the test. The oxygen relative accuracy was below
20% throughout the saltwater deployment and below 10% throughout the mesocosm
deployment. During saltwater deployment, the turbidity probe exhibited higher bias because the
deployment conditions sometimes exceeded the Mk n with Optode 3830 range. These results
20
-------
« Reference
1103
Saltwater
a | t
n &
10/6/20030:00
10/11/20030:00
10/16/20030:00 10/21/20030:00
Date and Time
10/26/20030:00
10/31/20030:00
Figure 6-5a. Relative Bias Data for DO (Saltwater)
£ 10
* Reference
• 1104
41103
I
5
Mesocosm
12/10/20030:00 12/15/20030:00 12/20/20030:00
12/25/20030:00
Date and Time
12/30/20030:00 1/4/20040:00 1/9/20040:00
Figure 6-5b. Relative Bias Data for DO (Mesocosm)
21
-------
• Reference
1103
a 1104
Saltwater
10/6/2003 0:00
10/11/20030:00 10/16/20030:00 10/21/20030:00
Date and Time
10/26/20030:00
10/31/20030:00
Figure 6-5c. Relative Bias Data for Temperature (Saltwater)
* Reference
1104
A 1103
Mesocosm
12/10/20030:00 12/15/20030:00 12/20/20030:00 12/25/20030:00 12/30/20030:00
Date and Time
1/4/20040:00 1/9/20040:00
Figure 6-5d. Relative Bias Data for Temperature (Mesocosm)
22
-------
* Reference
• 1103
A1104
Saltwater
10/6/20030:00 10/11/20030:00 10/16/20030:00 10/21/20030:00
Date and Time
10/26/20030:00
10/31/20030:00
Figure 6-5e. Relative Bias Data for Turbidity (Saltwater)
• Reference
1104
41103
n
n
£
A 9
Mesocosm
12/10/20030:00 12/15/20030:00 12/20/20030:00
12/25/20030:00
Date and Time
Figure 6-5f. Relative Bias Data for Turbidity (Mesocosm)
12/30/20030:00 1/4/20040:00 1/9/20040:00
23
-------
Table 6-2. Average Relative Bias Results for 1103 and 1104
Parameter
DO
Temperature
Turbidity
Saltwater
1103 (%) 1104 (%)
-19.7 -13.8
-0.99 -1.76
54.2 69.0
Mesocosm
1103 (%)
-6.79
-1.76
-521
1104 (%)
6.61
-1.51
-452
occurred during deployments where the parameter being measured changed throughout the day.
Since the Mkn with Optode 3830 recorded at intervals of 10 minutes, there could have been as
much as 5 minutes' difference between the time of the reference sample and the nearest recorded
Mk n with Optode 3830 data. Because of this temporal effect, between 1% and 3% of the
relative bias calculations may be attributable to the differences seen between the two
measurements. In addition, when combined with the manufacturer's specifications for the
accuracy of the reference measurements of 2%, a total of up to 5% difference may be due to the
combined temporal effects and inherent accuracy of the reference measurements.
6.3 Precision
Table 6-3 shows the results of calculations taken from measurements performed before the
saltwater deployment. The precision, reported as %RSD, was less than 3% for temperature and
DO. Data from turbidity resulted in higher %RSDs (24.4 and 26.8) possibly as a result of the
fact that measurements were near the zero point and particles moving into the detector's view
would cause a measurement to spike, despite all attempts to keep the test conditions constant.
Table 6-3. Measurements and Percent Relative Standard Deviations for 1103 and 1104
During Stable Mesocosm Operation
Maximum
Minimum
Standard
Deviation
Average
%RSD
1103
DO
(mg/L)
308
294
3.99
303
1.32
Temperature
(°C)
17.8
16.4
0.377
17.1
2.20
Turbidity
(NTU)
2.3
0.387
0.38
1.41
26.8
1104
DO
(mg/L)
314
305
2.32
311
0.73
Temperature
(°C)
17.7
16.2
0.474
16.9
2.80
Turbidity
(NTU)
2.5
0.387
0.35
1.45
24.4
24
-------
6.4 Linearity
Linearity was assessed by comparing probe readings against the reference values for each of the
parameters at each deployment location. Figures 6-6a-f give the results of this comparison by
showing the slope, intercept, and coefficient of determination (R2) for each parameter. Linearity
and regression coefficients indicated the best agreement between the Mk n with Optode 3830
readings and reference values for temperature. During the saltwater deployment, the DO
measurements resulted in slopes between 0.70 and 0.74 and regression coefficients between 0.76
and 0.79 over a range of 3 to 6 mg/L. During the mesocosm deployment, the Mk n with Optode
3830 demonstrated less linear behavior, with the slopes and regression coefficients both
decreasing for DO. Finally, when the turbidity sensor was within its working range and not
obstructed (as was 1103 during the mesocosm deployment), the measurements resulted in a
slope of 0.99 and a regression coefficient of 0.93 over a range of 0.4 to 15 NTU.
25
-------
Reference DO (mg/L)
Figure 6-6a. Linearity Data for DO (Saltwater)
1103 Linear Regression
_ 18
y=0.3634x +7.0959
R2 = 0.2757
1104 Linear Regression
y= 1.2668X + 2.1114
R2 = 0.0663
D 10.5 1
Reference DO (mg/L)
Figure 6-6b. Linearity Data for DO (Mesocosm)
26
-------
• 1103
A 1104
1103
- - 1104
1103 Linear Regression
y= 1.0459X-0.7295
R2 = 0.9809
1104 Linear Regression
y= 1.0368X-0.3761
R2 = 0.9787
22 24
Reference Temperature (C)
Figure 6-6c. Linearity Data for Temperature (Saltwater)
Reference Temperature (C)
Figure 6-6d. Linearity Data for Temperature (Mesocosm)
27
-------
1103 Linear Regression
y=0.5485x-2.2404
R2 = 0.6367
5. 15
1104 Linear Regression
y=0.4721x-3.5261
R2 = 0.5378
15 20 25 30
Reference Turbidity (NTU)
Figure 6-6e. Linearity Data for Turbidity (Saltwater)
1103 Linear Regression
y=0.5485x-2.2404
R2 = 0.6367
1104 Linear Regression
y=0.4721x-3.5261
R2 = 0.5378
15 20 25
Reference Turbidity (NTU)
Figure 6-6f. Linearity Data for Turbidity (Mesocosm)
28
-------
6.5 Inter-Unit Reproducibility
Inter-unit reproducibility was assessed both by comparing the relative bias of the two Mk n with
Optode 3830s (Section 6.2) and by comparing the average absolute differences between the two
Mk n with Optode 3830 readings for each parameter at each deployment location. Freshwater
results are included because the two Mk n with Optode 3830s were deployed to the same depth.
Figures 6-7 through 6-9 show the data used for these calculations. These calculations were made
for the readings where there was an analogous reference measurement only. The results of
average difference comparisons are shown in Table 6-4, where "n" is the number of
measurements.
Table 6-4. Average Absolute Difference Between 1103 and 1104 Readings for Each
Parameter at Each Deployment Location
Location
Saltwater
Freshwater
Mesocosm
Average
Average
DO
(mg/L)
1.02
1.42
1.78
1.41
3,
5,
3,
Absolute Difference Between 1103
n
328
188
888
Temperature
TO
0.16
0.04
0.03
0.08
4,
5,
3,
n
192
188
888
and 1104 Readings
Turbidity
(NTU)
3.12
10.9
7.26
7.08
4,
5,
3,
n
192
188
888
The DO difference between the two Mk n with Optode 3830s tested averaged 1.41 mg/L
(Figures 6-7a-c). The average difference in temperature readings was 0.08°C. The average
difference in turbidity readings was 7.08 NTU.
The magnitude of the inter-unit reproducibility results for turbidity was affected by the apparent
saturation of the 1103 sensor during the freshwater test.
29
-------
B>
O
Q
9/26/2003 10/1/2003 10/6/2003 10/11/2003 10/16/2003 10/21/2003 10/26/2003 10/31/2003 11/5/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-7a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Saltwater Tests (Between October 20 and October
26, 2003, extremely low tides caused the equipment to come out of the water.)
-------
14
12
10/26/2003 10/31/2003 11/5/2003 11/10/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
11/15/2003
12:00 AM
11/20/2003
12:00 AM
11/25/2003 11/30/2003 12/5/2003 12/10/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-7b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Freshwater Tests
-------
to
12/5/200312:00 12/10/200312:00 12/15/200312:00 12/20/200312:00 12/25/200312:00 12/30/200312:00 1/4/200412:00 1/9/200412:00
AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-7c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for DO During Mesocosm Tests
-------
9/26/2003
12:00 AM
10/1/2003
12:00 AM
10/6/2003
12:00 AM
10/11/2003
12:00 AM
10/16/2003
12:00 AM
Date and Time
10/21/2003
12:00 AM
10/26/2003
12:00 AM
10/31/2003
12:00 AM
11/5/2003
12:00 AM
Figure 6-8a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Saltwater Tests
-------
26.0
24.0
12.0
10/26/2003 10/31/2003 11/5/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
11/10/2003 11/15/2003 11/20/2003 11/25/2003 11/30/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Date and Time
12/5/2003 12/10/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Figure 6-8b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Freshwater Tests
-------
12/5/200312:00 12/10/200312:00 12/15/200312:00 12/20/200312:00 12/25/200312:00 12/30/200312:00 1/4/200412:00 1/9/200412:00
AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-8c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Temperature During Mesocosm Tests
-------
40
-1103
1104
35 -H • Reference
30
klkllllIllkl
9/26/2003 10/1/2003 10/6/2003 10/11/2003 10/16/2003 10/21/2003 10/26/2003 10/31/2003 11/5/2003
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-9a. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Saltwater Tests
-------
25 -i
20
10/26/2003 10/31/2003 11/5/2003 11/10/2003 11/15/2003 11/20/2003 11/25/2003 11/30/2003 12/5/2003 1
12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 12:00 AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-9b. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Freshwater Tests
-------
oo
12/5/200312:00 12/10/200312:00 12/15/200312:00 12/20/200312:00 12/25/200312:00 12/30/200312:00 1/4/200412:00 1/9/200412:00
AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM
Date and Time
Figure 6-9c. Inter-Unit Reproducibility Data for Turbidity During Mesocosm Tests
-------
6.6 Other Factors
6.6.1 Ease of Use
The Mk n with Optode 3830 was installed and deployed by CCHEBR staff with the oversight of
AAKDERAA during installation and Battelle during deployment. Once the Mk n with Optode
3830s were deployed, the vendor adopted a "hands off' approach for the remainder of the test.
No maintenance was required. Data were collected to a personal computer by removing the data
storage unit (DSU) from the Mk n with Optode 3830 and plugging it into a serial cable supplied
by the vendor. AANDERAA-supplied software (Data Reading Program 5059, Version 1.00
build 84) was used to communicate with the DSU, which performed without a problem. The
software allowed the data to be converted to ASCII format for inclusion in external data
processing software. A sample printout from the software is shown in Appendix A. The Mk n
with Optode 3830 required minimal interaction by operators during the test. Those interactions
that did occur are described in Table 6-5.
Table 6-5. Installation, Operation, and Maintenance Activities
Date
10/1/2003
10/2/2003
10/30/2003
10/31/2003
11/4/2003
12/8/2003
12/8/2003
12/10/2003
1/5/2004
1/5/2004
1/5/2004
Total
Service Time Activity
— Vendor representatives arrived on site.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 deployed.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 collected.
60 minutes Data downloaded.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 deployed.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 collected.
60 minutes Data downloaded.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 deployed.
— Mk II with Optode 3830 collected.
15 minutes Data downloaded.
— End of test.
135 minutes
6.6.2 Data Completeness
All of the required data were recorded during this verification. The two Mk n with Optode
3830s submitted for this test collected data at 10-minute intervals from October 1, 2003, until
January 5, 2004, without any interruption in data collection. One hundred percent of the
required data was collected by the Mk n with Optode 3830.
39
-------
Chapter 7
Performance Summary
Two Mk n with Optode 3830s were evaluated in saltwater, freshwater, and mesocosm
environments between October 2, 2003, and January 5, 2004. These Mk U with Optode 3830s
measured DO, temperature, and turbidity in water at 10-minute intervals throughout these
deployments. Table 7-1 summarizes the performance of the Mk U with Optode 3830s.
Table 7-1. Summary of Performance
Statistical
Measure
Calibration
check
accuracy1-3'
Average relative
bias(c)
Average
precision
Parameter
DO (%)
Turbidity (%)
DO (%)
Temperature (%)
Turbidity (%)
DO (%RSD)
Temperature
(%RSD)
Turbidity (%RSD)
Linearity
Inter-unit
reproducibility
DO (mg/L)
Temperature (°C)
Turbidity (NTU)
1103
Saltwater Freshwater Mesocosm
98.9 98.9 99.7
30 1,500 NA®
-19.7 -(d) -6.79
-0.99 -(d) -1.76
54.2 -(d) -521
1103
1.32
2.20
26.8
1104
Saltwater Freshwater Mesocosm
97.3 95.6 83.9
18 800 520
-13.8 -(d) 6.61
-1.76 -(d) -1.51
69.0 -(d) -452
1104
0.73
2.80
24.4
Best agreement between readings and reference values was for temperature.
During the saltwater deployment, the DO measurements resulted in slopes
between 0.70 and 0.74 and regression coefficients between 0.76 and 0.79 over
a range of 3 to 6 mg/L. During the mesocosm deployment, slopes and
regression coefficients both decreased. Finally, when the Mk II was within its
range, the turbidity measurements resulted in a slope of 0.99 and a regression
coefficient of 0.93 over a range of 0.4 to 15 NTU.
Average Difference Between 1103 and 1104 Readings
Saltwater Freshwater Mesocosm
1.02 1.42 1.78
0.16 0.04 0.03
3.12 10.9 7.26
B' The closer the percentage is to 100, the better.
^ Saturated; no data reported.
^ The closer the percentage is to zero, the better
^ Stratification; no data reported.
40
-------
Chapter 8
References
Test/QA Plan for Long-Term Deployment of Multi-Parameter Water Quality
Probes/Sondes, Battelle, Columbus, Ohio, Version 1.0, May 2002.
Quality Management Plan (QMP) for the ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center.,
Version 4.0, U.S. EPA Environmental Technology Verification Program, Battelle,
Columbus, Ohio, December 2002.
41
-------
Appendix A
Sample Printout
Data Reading Program 5059
A-l
-------
Fife Edit Library View Window Help
1
y
Save
B
Clock
A
Station
Si n?
Help About
S Raw Data List [III Engineering List |
Record iDate&Time j 1. Reference | :. Current Speed
D 01.
01,
01,
01.
01,
01,
01.
01,
01,
0 01,
1 01,
2 01,
3 01,
4 01,
5 01,
6 01,
7 01,
8 01,
9 01,
20 01,
21 01,
22 01,
23 01,
24 01,
25 01,
26 01,
27 01,
26 01,
29 01,
30 01,
.51 01.
32 01,
33 01,
34 01,
35 01,
36 01,
37 01,
38 01.
39 01,
0 01,
1 01,
2 01.
3 01,
4 01.
5 01,
46 01,
47 01,
48 01.
49 01,
50 01,
51 01,
52 01,
53 01.
54 01,
55 01.
56 01.
57 01,
58 01.
0.200307:27... 42
0.200=107:37... 42
0.200307:47... 42
U..200-3 07:57.., 42
0.200:i 03:07... 42
0.200308:17... 42
0.200308:27... 42
0,200308:37... 42
0.200308:47... 42
0.200308:57... 42
0.200309:07... 42
0.2003 09! 17... 42
0.200309:27... 42
0.200309:37... 42
Li. 200309:47.., 42
0.200309:57... 42
0.2003
0.2003
0.200:;
Q.2Q03
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-3
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
9.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-3
0.200-3
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-::
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-3
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-3
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.2003
0.200-3
0.2003
0:07... 42
0(17... 42
0:27... 42
0:37... 42
0:47... 42
0:57... 42
H07... 42
1:17... 42
1:27... 42
1:37... 42
1(47... 42
1:57... 42
2;07.,, 42
2:17... 42
2:27... 42
2:37... 42
2:47... 42
2:57... 42
3:07... 42
3;17... 42
3i27... 42
3:37... 42
3:47... 42
3:57,. , 42
4:07... 42
4:17... 42
4:27... 42
4:37... 42
4:47... 42
4:57... 42
5:07.,, 42
5:17... 42
5:27... 42
5;37.,, 42
5:47... 42
5:57... 42
6:07.., 42
6:17... 42
6:27... 42
6:37... 42
6:47... 42
6:57... 42
7:07... 42
0
12.0253
2.0531
13.4918
27.5702
J. Current Direct, ,, | 4. Temperature 5. Conduct rvstv 1 6, Oxygen | 7, Turbidity 8. Signal strenqht 1 9. Tilt J *]
21,1926 0 269.053 0.344464 0 0
58.984 21.4837 0 267,1 1,89015 -39.9993 44...,
47.029 20.1941 0 268.565 1,36102 -39.9993 38...,
04.425 19,7132 0 271,495 1,30789 -39.9993 39...,
20,453 19.2017 0 273.448 22,4703 -39.8:32 36.,,,
19.9444 93.5256 18.9783 0 274,913 22,4703 -39.9993 36....
6.4525
5,866
9.9722
12.9052
14.3717
14.9583
14.9583
17.3047
16,7181
18.7712
18.7712
21.1176
22.5841
26.6903
27.2769
28.7434
27.8635
28.1568
26.9836
24.9305
24.0506
21.9975
21.9975
22.2908
22.2903
26.9836
23.7573
19.0645
13.4913
7.9191
7.3325
3.8129
1.7598
1,7598
4.6928
7,0392
8.799
8,799
7.0392
7.9191
6,4526
9.3856
11.1454
7.9191
11.732
10.5588
12.9052
15.8382
17.3047
20.531
24,9305
29.0367
32.5563
06.389 13.2778 U 84,9642 22.5013 -24.4766 4.0...
43,513 18,5323 0 92,2387 22,5013
44.92 18.7233 0 89,8472 22,5013
53.006 18.7552 0 91 ,8004 22.5013
50.545 13.7552 0 96,6834 19,939
49,49 18.8826 0 03,031 16,9213
47.381 18.9783 0 08,403 16,7003
48.084 19.1697 0 14,751 7,4216
47,732 19,4573 0 22,563 9,7925
44.216 19.7773 0 28,911 8,6076
43.513 20.0337 0 35,747 9,4718
45,974 20.2584 0 42,095 8,7506
47,381 20.419 0 49,42 8,522
54.413 20.5799 0 57,721 8,2093
50.194 20.7409 0 63.5S1 8.2093
55,116 20,8375 0 68,464 9,9097
51.952 20.9665 0 70,905 9,7633
56.171 20.9665 0 74.811 20.5294
50.194 20.9343 0 32.136 20,7373
J45.271 2 .1926 0 91,902 20,2924
47.029 2 .3866 0 200,203 21,7634
43.513 2 .516 0 200,691 22,5323
347,381 2 .5608 0 200,691 22,5323
38.591 2 .8078 0 203,621 22,5323
42.107 2 .7105 0 208.504 22,5323
55,116 2 .9377 0 209,969 22,5633
J58.28 22,1002 0 2 4,364 22,5633
56.171 22.1978 0 2 6.317 22,5633
51.248 22.3606 0 2 8,27 22.5633
37.688 22.5563 0 2 7,293 22.5633
40,349 22.6216 0 2 6,317 22,5633
1.9544 22.6869 0 2 4,364 22.5633
9.772 22,7196 0 201 ,668 22,5633
73.339 22.7196 0 187,019 18,2376
77.206 22.0352 0 209,969 13.714
31.35 22.3002 0 206,551 12,3822
46.375 22.491 0 220,223 1 1 ,0173
33.608 22.5563 0 222,665 0,4551
44.156 22.5889 0 222,665 0,9917
45,562 22.5869 0 223, 153 0,0221
31.85 22.5563 0 220,712 ,74237
46.617 22.5889 0 221 ,688 ,5133
35.718 22.6216 0 223,641 ,56457
52,946 22.6542 0 226,083 0,3276
47.32 22.6542 0 227,06 ,81861
45.914 22.6542 0 229,013 ,48842
25.521 22,6216 0 228,036 0,787
40.288 22.5563 0 228,036 0,6338
39.234 22.5563 0 227,548 1 ,5813
31,35 22.5237 0 226,571 12,1492
32.202 22.491 0 224,618 13,793
31,85 22.491 0 223,641 15,1228
32.905 22.5237 0 221 .683 16.4254
.7595 4.0,,,
.7595 4.0...
.7595 4.0...
.7986 4.0...
.7966 4.0,,,
.7986 4.0...
.7986 4.0...
.7986 3,9,,,
.7986 3.9...
.7986 3.9...
.7986 3.9...
.7966 3,9,,,
.7595 3.9...
.7595 3.8...
.7595 3,8,.,
.7595 3.8...
.7595 3.8...
.7595 3.8...
,7966 3.8,,,
.7986 3.8...
.7986 3.8...
.7595 3,8,,,
.7986 3.8...
.7986 3.8...
.7595 3.8..,
.7595 3.8.,,
.7595 3.8...
.7936 3.0...
.7986 3,8,,,
.7986 3.8..:
.7956 3.7...
.7966 3,7,,,
,7595 3.7...
.7595 3.8...
.7204 3.0...
.7595 3.8,,,
.7204 3.8...
.7204 3.3...
.7595 3.8...
.7595 3,8...
.7595 3.8...
.7204 3.8...
.7595 3.8,,,
,7204 3.8...
.7595 3.8...
.7204 3.8..,
.7204 3.8...
.7204 3.8...
.6813 3.0...
,6813 3.8.,,
,6813 3.8...
.6813 3.8... _^J
m
if
a
n
El
H
A-2
------- |