Application of Distributed Temperature Sensing for coupled mapping of sedimentation processes and spatio-temporal variability of groundwater discharge in soft-bedded streams

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (15) ◽  
pp. 3408-3422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Sebok ◽  
Carlos Duque ◽  
Peter Engesgaard ◽  
Eva Boegh
2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 7929-7944 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Blume ◽  
Stefan Krause ◽  
Karin Meinikmann ◽  
Jörg Lewandowski

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 2312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troy E. Gilmore ◽  
Mason Johnson ◽  
Jesse Korus ◽  
Aaron Mittelstet ◽  
Marty A. Briggs ◽  
...  

Groundwater discharge though streambeds is often focused toward discrete zones, indicating that preliminary reconnaissance may be useful for capturing the full spectrum of groundwater discharge rates using point-scale quantitative methods. However, many direct-contact reconnaissance techniques can be time-consuming, and remote sensing (e.g., thermal infrared) typically does not penetrate the water column to locate submerged seepages. In this study, we tested whether dozens of groundwater discharge measurements made at “uninformed” (i.e., selected without knowledge on high-resolution temperature variations at the streambed) point locations along a reach would yield significantly different Darcy-based groundwater discharge rates when compared with “informed” measurements, focused at streambed thermal anomalies that were identified a priori using fiber-optic distributed temperature sensing (FO-DTS). A non-parametric U-test showed a significant difference between median discharge rates for uninformed (0.05 m·day−1; n = 30) and informed (0.17 m·day−1; n = 20) measurement locations. Mean values followed a similar pattern (0.12 versus 0.27 m·day−1), and frequency distributions for uninformed and informed measurements were also significantly different based on a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Results suggest that even using a quick “snapshot-in-time” field analysis of FO-DTS data can be useful in streambeds with groundwater discharge rates <0.2 m·day−1, a lower threshold than proposed in a previous study. Collectively, study results highlight that FO-DTS is a powerful technique for identifying higher-discharge zones in streambeds, but the pros and cons of informed and uninformed sampling depend in part on groundwater/surface water exchange study goals. For example, studies focused on measuring representative groundwater and solute fluxes may be biased if high-discharge locations are preferentially sampled. However, identification of high-discharge locations may complement more randomized sampling plans and lead to improvements in interpolating streambed fluxes and upscaling point measurements to the stream reach scale.


2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 8167-8190 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Roshan ◽  
M. Young ◽  
M. S. Andersen ◽  
R. I. Acworth

Abstract. Studies of surface water–groundwater interactions using fiber optic distributed temperature sensing (FO-DTS) has increased in recent years. However, only a few studies to date have explored the limitations of FO-DTS in detecting groundwater discharge to streams. A FO_DTS system was therefore tested in a flume under controlled laboratory conditions for its ability to accurately measure the discharge of hot or cold groundwater into a simulated surface water flow. In the experiment the surface water (SW) and groundwater (GW) velocities, expressed as ratios (vgw/vsw), were varied from 0.21% to 61.7%; temperature difference between SW-GW were varied from 2 to 10 °C; the direction of temperature gradient were varied with both cold and-hot water injection; and two different bed materials were used to investigate their effects on FO_DTS's detection limit of groundwater discharge. The ability of the FO_DTS system to detect the discharge of groundwater of a different temperature in the laboratory environment was found to be mainly dependent upon the surface and groundwater flow velocities and their temperature difference. A correlation was proposed to estimate the groundwater discharge from temperature. The correlation is valid when the ratio of the apparent temperature response to the source temperature difference is above 0.02.


2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (9) ◽  
pp. 5355-5368 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Sebok ◽  
C. Duque ◽  
J. Kazmierczak ◽  
P. Engesgaard ◽  
B. Nilsson ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document