IWA Publishing

Table 6

Relative performance of springs based on rainfall spring flow lag

S. no	Spring no.	June 01 to May 05	June 05 to May 13	June 01 to May 13	June 01 to May 05	June 05 to May 13	June 01 to May 13
1	01	7.63	−0.69	5.55	Good	Bad	Good
2	02	9.55	−2.93	4.78	Good	Bad	Good
3	03	4.19	3.99	7.44	Good	Good	Good
4	4A	−3.02	10.94	7.21	Bad	Good	Good
5	4B	NA	1.62	1.62	NA	Good	Good
6	05	6.75	2.90	8.97	Good	Good	Good
7	06	−0.06	0.03	−0.35	Bad	Good	Bad
8	07	2.34	−0.55	0.93	Good	Bad	Good
9	08	1.63	1.97	3.40	Good	Good	Good
10	09	10.71	−4.08	4.73	Good	Bad	Good
11	11	8.64	−3.43	4.02	Good	Bad	Good
12	13	4.05	0.08	3.43	Good	Good	Good
13	15	3.18	−0.27	2.42	Good	Bad	Good
14	16	3.75	−1.29	2.12	Good	Bad	Good
15	20	8.35	−0.29	6.48	Good	Bad	Good
16	28	17.19	1.27	16.07	Good	Good	Good

S. no	Spring no.	June 01 to May 05	June 05 to May 13	June 01 to May 13	June 01 to May 05	June 05 to May 13	June 01 to May 13
1	01	7.63	−0.69	5.55	Good	Bad	Good
2	02	9.55	−2.93	4.78	Good	Bad	Good
3	03	4.19	3.99	7.44	Good	Good	Good
4	4A	−3.02	10.94	7.21	Bad	Good	Good
5	4B	NA	1.62	1.62	NA	Good	Good
6	05	6.75	2.90	8.97	Good	Good	Good
7	06	−0.06	0.03	−0.35	Bad	Good	Bad
8	07	2.34	−0.55	0.93	Good	Bad	Good
9	08	1.63	1.97	3.40	Good	Good	Good
10	09	10.71	−4.08	4.73	Good	Bad	Good
11	11	8.64	−3.43	4.02	Good	Bad	Good
12	13	4.05	0.08	3.43	Good	Good	Good
13	15	3.18	−0.27	2.42	Good	Bad	Good
14	16	3.75	−1.29	2.12	Good	Bad	Good
15	20	8.35	−0.29	6.48	Good	Bad	Good
16	28	17.19	1.27	16.07	Good	Good	Good