TY - JOUR
T1 - Variations on thermal transport modelling of subsurface temperatures using high resolution data
AU - Shanafield, Margaret
AU - McCallum, James L.
AU - Cook, Peter G.
AU - Noorduijn, Saskia
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding for this research was provided by the National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training , an Australian Government initiative, supported by the Australian Research Council and the National Water Commission , and the Goyder Institute for Water Research of South Australia . The authors would like to acknowledge Australian Blue Gums for allowing us access and use of their land. This work could not have been done without the field assistance of Nick White, Eddie Banks, Lawrence Burk, Yueqing Xie, Valentin Cirasa, and Sam England. Special thanks to the staff from Penola, DfW office, who let the water flow in the name of science. Additional thanks goes to John Hutson for his patient assistance with soil properties sampling, and to John Doherty for his help with the optimization process. Luk Peeters and Matthew Knowling provided helpful reviews of early versions of the manuscript. Please contact the corresponding author with any data questions.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2016/3/1
Y1 - 2016/3/1
N2 - Although streambed dynamics are known to be complex and three-dimensional, flux within the subsurface is often estimated with simplified models for convenience, despite the errors this incurs. While three-dimensional (3D) models have the advantage of being able to capture complex flow paths within the subsurface, they are also more data intensive, requiring a detailed knowledge of both thermal and hydraulic streambed properties. Temperature data are relatively easy to acquire at a high resolution within a natural stream environment; however, it is typically more difficult to capture hydraulic head measurements at this same resolution, making it difficult to apply appropriate boundary conditions to 3D models in order to estimate streambed fluxes from heat tracer techniques alone. In this study, we examine the consequences of the lack of detailed head data for parameterizing boundary conditions. We tested the abilities of three 3D heat and water transport models with increasingly complex boundary conditions to match observed thermal patterns and predict streambed fluxes. All three models showed similar spatial patterns of high and low fluxes. The amplitude of predicted daily temperature variation at a depth of 0.25 m and 0.5 m below the streambed was generally within 0.1 °C (i.e. within sensor error) of observed, while all three models typically underestimated daily temperature variation in advective areas at a depth of 0.1 m. The results of this study suggest that 3D heat transport models of streambeds may be more limited by the low sensitivity of hydraulic conductivity to small temperature variations than by the lack of detailed hydraulic head data for parameterizing boundary conditions.
AB - Although streambed dynamics are known to be complex and three-dimensional, flux within the subsurface is often estimated with simplified models for convenience, despite the errors this incurs. While three-dimensional (3D) models have the advantage of being able to capture complex flow paths within the subsurface, they are also more data intensive, requiring a detailed knowledge of both thermal and hydraulic streambed properties. Temperature data are relatively easy to acquire at a high resolution within a natural stream environment; however, it is typically more difficult to capture hydraulic head measurements at this same resolution, making it difficult to apply appropriate boundary conditions to 3D models in order to estimate streambed fluxes from heat tracer techniques alone. In this study, we examine the consequences of the lack of detailed head data for parameterizing boundary conditions. We tested the abilities of three 3D heat and water transport models with increasingly complex boundary conditions to match observed thermal patterns and predict streambed fluxes. All three models showed similar spatial patterns of high and low fluxes. The amplitude of predicted daily temperature variation at a depth of 0.25 m and 0.5 m below the streambed was generally within 0.1 °C (i.e. within sensor error) of observed, while all three models typically underestimated daily temperature variation in advective areas at a depth of 0.1 m. The results of this study suggest that 3D heat transport models of streambeds may be more limited by the low sensitivity of hydraulic conductivity to small temperature variations than by the lack of detailed hydraulic head data for parameterizing boundary conditions.
KW - Fiber optic DTS
KW - Heat tracer
KW - Heterogeneity
KW - Infiltration
KW - Pilot points
KW - Surface water groundwater interaction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84955096875&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.12.018
DO - 10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.12.018
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84955096875
SN - 0309-1708
VL - 89
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - Advances in Water Resources
JF - Advances in Water Resources
ER -