Observed longitudinal water-surface profiles are commonly used to calibrate river hydrodynamic models, relying on assumptions of lateral uniformity in water surface elevation and velocity distribution. While suitable for 1D models, this approach has limitations in regard to 2D model calibration. When 2D flow measurements are available, a more robust quantitative evaluation is necessary to assess model accuracy. This study introduces a novel methodology to improve 2D model calibration and evaluate performance. High-resolution bathymetric and hydrodynamic data collected with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) were aligned to compare observed and simulated flow velocities at matching spatial locations. Statistical metrics, including relative mean absolute error and root-mean-square error, were employed to assess hydrodynamic modeling. The methodology was tested using MBES and ADCP measurements alongside TELEMAC-2D simulations of a dynamic neck cutoff on the White River, Arkansas, USA. This approach provides a 2D calibration process, enhancing model accuracy and informing parameter selection, such as channel boundary roughness and downstream boundary water surface elevation.

Flow discharge and hydrodynamic field measurements are essential data for understanding aquatic ecosystems. The objective of this study was to compare the use of three Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) in measuring flow discharge and hydrodynamics in the Carrizal River located in southeastern Mexico. The evaluated ADCPs operate on frequencies of 2 000 kHz, 1 500 kHz and 600 kHz. The measurements were carried out in a 100-m-wide cross section, five times each for each ADCP, within an estimated time of 5 min. The obtained data were: 1) flow velocity components; 2) depth; 3) transversal distance between each vector; 4) total distance of the cross section and; 5) geographic position of each vector. Tecplot® graphics were made with the collected information.The results showed that velocity magnitudes were low in bank areas, while high in the center. For a 5-m depth range, the 2 000-kHz ADCP keeps a more homogenous velocity distribution in comparison with the other equipment. The results showed that discharge measurements varied by no more than 5% among ADCPs. It is concluded that the most important variable in choosing an ADCP for a hydrodynamic study is its operating frequency