Reshaping of the hyporheic zone beneath river restoration structures: Flume and hydrodynamic experiments

Zhou, Tian; Endreny, Theodore A.

doi:10.1002/wrcr.20384

Cited by 42 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The HEF dynamics are controlled by channel geometry, catchment geology, and hydrology in both space and time [11][12][13], and the HEF rates are essentially governed by the permeability of the sediments and local hydraulic gradients. While the overall permeability of the river bed sediment is a physical property that is relatively stable (if not considering the sediment clogging/colmation at the river bed surface), the hydraulic gradient across the river bed is a time-varying variable that is highly dependent on the river stage variations.…”

Section: Hydrologic Exchange and River Regulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Approach to Quantify Shallow Water Hydrologic Exchanges in a Large Regulated River Reach

Zhou

Huang

Bao

et al. 2017

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrologic exchange is a crucial component of the water cycle. The strength of the exchange directly affects the biogeochemical and ecological processes that occur in the hyporheic zone and aquifer from micro to reach scales. Hydrologic exchange fluxes (HEFs) can be quantified using many field measurement approaches, however, in a relatively large river (scale > 10 3 m), these approaches are limited by site accessibility, the difficulty of performing representative sampling, and the complexity of geomorphologic features and subsurface properties. In rivers regulated by hydroelectric dams, quantifying HEF rates becomes more challenging because of frequent hydropeaking events, featuring hourly to daily variations in flow and river stages created by dam operations. In this study, we developed and validated a new approach based on field measurements to estimate shallow water HEF rates across the river bed along the shoreline of the Columbia River, USA. Vertical thermal profiles measured by self-recording thermistors were combined with time series of hydraulic gradients derived from river stages and inland water levels to estimate the HEF rates. The results suggest that the HEF rates had high spatial and temporal heterogeneities over the riverbed, with predicted flux rates varied from +1 × 10 −6 m s −1 to −1.5 × 10 −6 m s −1 under different flow conditions.

show abstract

Section: Hydrologic Exchange and River Regulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Approach to Quantify Shallow Water Hydrologic Exchanges in a Large Regulated River Reach

Zhou

Huang

Bao

et al. 2017

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on a combination of flume experiments and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations, Zhou and Endreny [] find that in‐stream restoration structures alter both surface water hydraulics and subsurface hyporheic flow. They indicate that restoration structures create backwater effects which increase upwelling and downwelling forces, relatively high vertical fluxes across the sediment‐water interface and decrease both the depth of hyporheic flow and reverse subsurface flow.…”

Section: Novel Concepts Based On Innovative Experimental and Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding process dynamics at aquifer-surface water interfaces: An introduction to the special section on new modeling approaches and novel experimental technologies

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces the special section on “new modeling approaches and novel experimental technologies for improved understanding of process dynamics at aquifer‐surface water interfaces.” It is contextualizing the framework for the 27 research papers of the special section by firth identifying research gaps and imminent challenges for ecohydrological research at aquifer‐surface water interfaces and then discussing the specific paper contributions on (i) new developments in temperature/heat tracing at GW‐SW interfaces, (ii) new methods to capture the temporal and spatial variability of groundwater—surface water exchange, (iii) new approaches in modeling aquifer‐river exchange flow, and (iv) new concepts and advanced theory of groundwater—surface water exchange.

show abstract

“…Therefore, using numerical modeling to estimate the hyporheic flux became popular in the past few decades because of its flexibility on domain configurations and reduction in measurement and computational expenses (Hester et al, 2017). Numerical modeling has been proven in many studies as a robust tool for investigating hyporheic flow dynamics at various spatiotemporal scales from small bedform (Cardenas & Wilson, 2007;Janssen et al, 2012) to flume (Tonina & Buffington, 2007;Zhou & Endreny, 2013) and river reach (Hester & Doyle, 2008;Lautz & Siegel, 2006). These studies explored the river processes by either reducing the spatial dimension and scales (e.g., 2-D modeling, flume studies) or focusing on short-term or steady state simulations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Riverbed Hydrologic Exchange Dynamics in a Large Regulated River Reach

Zhou

Bao

Huang

et al. 2018

Water Resources Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrologic exchange flux (HEF) is an important hydrologic component in river corridors that includes both bidirectional (hyporheic) and unidirectional (gaining/losing) surface water‐groundwater exchanges. Quantifying HEF rates in a large regulated river is difficult due to the large spatial domains, complexity of geomorphologic features and subsurface properties, and the great stage variations created by dam operations at multiple time scales. In this study, we developed a method that combined numerical modeling and field measurements for estimating HEF rates across the riverbed in a 7 km long reach of the highly regulated Columbia River. A high‐resolution computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling framework was developed and validated by field measurements and other modeling results to characterize the HEF dynamics across the riverbed. We found that about 85% of the time from 2008 to 2014 the river was losing water with an annual average net HEF rates across the riverbed (Qz) of −2.3 m3 s−1 (negative indicating downwelling). June was the only month that the river gained water, with monthly averaged Qz of 0.8 m3 s−1. We also found that the daily dam operations increased the hourly gross gaining and losing rate over an average year of 8% and 2%, respectively. By investigating the HEF feedbacks at various time scales, we suggest that the dam operations could reduce the HEF at seasonal time scale by decreasing the seasonal flow variations, while also enhance the HEF at subdaily time scale by generating high‐frequency discharge variations. These changes could generate significant impacts on biogeochemical processes in the hyporheic zone.

show abstract

Reshaping of the hyporheic zone beneath river restoration structures: Flume and hydrodynamic experiments

Cited by 42 publications

References 38 publications

A New Approach to Quantify Shallow Water Hydrologic Exchanges in a Large Regulated River Reach

A New Approach to Quantify Shallow Water Hydrologic Exchanges in a Large Regulated River Reach

Understanding process dynamics at aquifer-surface water interfaces: An introduction to the special section on new modeling approaches and novel experimental technologies

Riverbed Hydrologic Exchange Dynamics in a Large Regulated River Reach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About