% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Irvine:21351,
author = {Irvine, D.J. and Brunner, P. and Hendricks-Franssen, H.J.
and Simmons, C.T.},
title = {{H}eterogeneous or homogeneous? {I}mplications of
simplifying heterogeneous streambeds in models of losing
streams},
journal = {Journal of hydrology},
volume = {424-425},
issn = {0022-1694},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier},
reportid = {PreJuSER-21351},
pages = {16 - 23},
year = {2012},
note = {This work was funded by the Australian Research Council and
the National Water Commission through the National Centre
for Groundwater Research and Training and the Swiss National
Foundation $(PZ00P2_126415).$ We would like to thank the
editor, the associate editor, and the anonymous reviewers
for their constructive comments.},
abstract = {A common approach in modeling surface water-groundwater
interaction is to represent the streambed as a homogeneous
geological structure with hydraulic properties obtained by
means of model calibration. In reality, streambeds are
highly heterogeneous, and there are currently no methodical
investigations to justify the simplification of this
geologic complexity. Using a physically based numerical
model, synthetic surface water-groundwater infiltration flux
data were generated using heterogeneous streambeds for
losing connected, losing transitional and losing
disconnected streams. Homogeneous streambed hydraulic
conductivities were calibrated to reproduce these fluxes.
The homogeneous equivalents were used for predicting
infiltration fluxes between streams and the aquifer under
different hydrological conditions (i.e. for different states
of connection). Homogeneous equivalents are shown to only
accurately reproduce infiltration fluxes if both the
calibration and prediction are made for a connected flow
regime, or if both the calibration and prediction are made
for a disconnected flow regime. The greatest errors in flux
(+/- $34\%)$ using homogeneous equivalents occurred when
there was a mismatch between the flow regime of the
observation data and the prediction. These errors are
comparatively small when compared with field measurement
errors for hydraulic conductivity, however over long river
reaches these errors can amount to significant volumes of
water. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {IBG-3},
ddc = {690},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
pnm = {Terrestrische Umwelt},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK407},
shelfmark = {Engineering, Civil / Geosciences, Multidisciplinary / Water
Resources},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000301326600002},
doi = {10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.11.051},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/21351},
}