Surface-Water and Groundwater Interactions along the Withlacoochee River, West-Central Florida

Trommer, J.T.; Yobbi, D.K.; McBride, W. Scott

doi:10.3133/sir20095124

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This includes a significant part of the initial flush of “old water” that contributes to storm flow under the rising limb of a storm hydrograph (Pinder and Jones 1969; Nakamura 1971; Sklash and Farvolden 1979; Cey et al 1998; Kish et al 2010). Many studies in recent years have applied base flow separation techniques to determine the base flow contribution to stream flow (Olmsted and Hely 1962; Kunkle 1968; Lee and Risley 2002; Wittenberg 2003; Trommer et al 2009). Many of these studies have used analytical base flow separation methods such as HYSEP (Sloto and Cruse 1997), BFI (Wahl and Wahl 1995), WHAT1 (Lim et al 2005), digital filters (Nathan and McMahon 1990; Eckhardt 2005) or recession curve methods (Rutledge and Daniel 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Power Function Method for Estimating Base Flow

Lott

Stewart

2012

Groundwater

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analytical base flow separation techniques are often used to determine the base flow contribution to total stream flow. Most analytical methods derive base flow from discharge records alone without using basin-specific variables other than basin area. This paper derives a power function for estimating base flow, the form being aQ(b) + cQ, an analytical method calibrated against an integrated basin variable, specific conductance, relating base flow to total discharge, and is consistent with observed mathematical behavior of dissolved solids in stream flow with varying discharge. Advantages of the method are being uncomplicated, reproducible, and applicable to hydrograph separation in basins with limited specific conductance data. The power function relationship between base flow and discharge holds over a wide range of basin areas. It better replicates base flow determined by mass balance methods than analytical methods such as filters or smoothing routines that are not calibrated to natural tracers or empirical basin and gauge-specific variables. Also, it can be used with discharge during periods without specific conductance values, including separating base flow from quick flow for single events. However, it may overestimate base flow during very high flow events. Application of geochemical mass balance and power function base flow separation methods to stream flow and specific conductance records from multiple gauges in the same basin suggests that analytical base flow separation methods must be calibrated at each gauge. Using average values of coefficients introduces a potentially significant and unknown error in base flow as compared with mass balance methods.

show abstract