Options
Brunner, Philip
Nom
Brunner, Philip
Affiliation principale
Fonction
Professeur ordinaire
Email
philip.brunner@unine.ch
Identifiants
Résultat de la recherche
2 Résultats
Voici les éléments 1 - 2 sur 2
- PublicationAccès libreAn analysis of river bank slope and unsaturated flow effects on bank storage(2012-5-26)
;Doble, R.; ;McCallum, J.Cook, Peter GRecognizing the underlying mechanisms of bank storage and return flow is important for understanding streamflow hydrographs. Analytical models have been widely used to estimate the impacts of bank storage, but are often based on assumptions of conditions that are rarely found in the field, such as vertical river banks and saturated flow. Numerical simulations of bank storage and return flow in river-aquifer cross sections with vertical and sloping banks were undertaken using a fully-coupled, surface-subsurface flow model. Sloping river banks were found to increase the bank infiltration rates by 98% and storage volume by 40% for a bank slope of 3.4 degrees from horizontal, and for a slope of 8.5 degrees , delay bank return flow by more than four times compared with vertical river banks and saturated flow. The results suggested that conventional analytical approximations cannot adequately be used to quantify bank storage when bank slope is less than 60 degrees from horizontal. Additionally, in the unconfined aquifers modeled, the analytical solutions did not accurately model bank storage and return flow even in rivers with vertical banks due to a violation of the dupuit assumption. Bank storage and return flow were also modeled for more realistic cross sections and river hydrograph from the Fitzroy River, Western Australia, to indicate the importance of accurately modeling sloping river banks at a field scale. Following a single wet season flood event of 12 m, results showed that it may take over 3.5 years for 50% of the bank storage volume to return to the river. - PublicationAccès libreDisconnected surface water and groundwater: from theory to practice(2011-5-26)
; ;Cook, Peter G.Simmons, Craig TrevorWhen describing the hydraulic relationship between rivers and aquifers, the term disconnected is frequently misunderstood or used in an incorrect way. The problem is compounded by the fact that there is no definitive literature on the topic of disconnected surface water and groundwater. We aim at closing this gap and begin the discussion with a short introduction to the historical background of the terminology. Even though a conceptual illustration of a disconnected system was published by Meinzer (1923), it is only within the last few years that the underlying physics of the disconnection process has been described. The importance of disconnected systems, however, is not widely appreciated. Although rarely explicitly stated, many approaches for predicting the impacts of groundwater development on surface water resources assume full connection. Furthermore, management policies often suggest that surface water and groundwater should only be managed jointly if they are connected. However, although lowering the water table beneath a disconnected section of a river will not change the infiltration rate at that point, it can increase the length of stream that is disconnected. Because knowing the state of connection is of fundamental importance for sustainable water management, robust field methods that allow the identification of the state of connection are required. Currently, disconnection is identified by showing that the infiltration rate from a stream to an underlying aquifer is independent of the water table position or by identifying an unsaturated zone under the stream. More field studies are required to develop better methods for the identification of disconnection and to quantify the implications of heterogeneity and clogging processes in the streambed on disconnection.