One can therefore measure seepage rates of two locations, with distance limited to the length of the cables to the flow tubes. In order to obtain seepage rates for more than one location using the drum method, other devices are needed and subsequently other workers to achieve the same accuracy as the ultrasonic seepage meter. Data are also easily accessible from the data logger of the ultrasonic seepage meter for spreadsheet analysis. The cost of the two units differs substantially. The drum seepage device is quite cost effective.
Cost is the one major disadvantage of the ultrasonic seepage meter.
However, the meters are quite durable and if properly taken care of can last for an indefinite period of time. Research is currently being conducted for additional applications of the ultrasonic seepage meter. These additional features include continuous measurements of pH, salinity, and temperature to occur simultaneously with seepage measurements. These, when completed, pose additional advantages the ultrasonic seepage meter has over the drum method. Therefore, due to the factors discussed above, the ultrasonic seepage meter is preferred.