Error in hydraulic head and gradient time-series measurements: a quantitative appraisal

Abstract

Abstract. Hydraulic head and gradient measurements underpin practically all investigations in hydrogeology. There is sufficient information in the literature to suggest that head measurement errors can impede the reliable detection of flow directions and significantly increase the uncertainty of groundwater flow rate calculations. Yet educational textbooks contain limited content regarding measurement techniques, and studies rarely report on measurement errors. The objective of our study is to review currently accepted standard operating procedures in hydrological research and to determine the smallest head gradients that can be resolved. To this aim, we first systematically investigate the systematic and random measurement errors involved in collecting time-series information on hydraulic head at a given location: (1) geospatial position, (2) point of head, (3) depth to water, and (4) water level time series. Then, by propagating the random errors, we find that with current standard practice, horizontal head gradients <10-4 are resolvable at distances ⪆170 m. Further, it takes extraordinary effort to measure hydraulic head gradients <10-3 over distances <10 m. In reality, accuracy will be worse than our theoretical estimates because of the many possible systematic errors. Regional flow on a scale of kilometres or more can be inferred with current best-practice methods, but processes such as vertical flow within an aquifer cannot be determined until more accurate and precise measurement methods are developed. Finally, we offer a concise set of recommendations for water level, hydraulic head and gradient time-series measurements. We anticipate that our work contributes to progressing the quality of head time-series data in the hydrogeological sciences and provides a starting point for the development of universal measurement protocols for water level data collection.

Implications of Peat Soil Conceptualization for Groundwater Exfiltration in Numerical Modeling: A Study on a Hypothetical Peatland Hillslope

“…The overall low sensitivity of groundwater levels in peat soils to the variables investigated here indicates that the current practice of monitoring groundwater levels may not be a sufficient proxy for modeling GW‐SW exchange fluxes in peatlands. Highly spatially variable peat properties, small measurement errors in hydraulic head (Post & von Asmuth, 2013; Rau et al, 2019), and inaccurate numerical solutions add to parameter nonuniqueness and may further complicate distinguishing between probable and impossible simulated flow regimes. In previous studies, the information content of classical observations such as hydraulic head and streamflow discharge has been demonstrated to be insufficient for calibration of complex hydrological models (reviewed by Schilling et al, 2019).…”

A Low-Cost, Multi-Sensor System to Monitor Temporary Stream Dynamics in Mountainous Headwater Catchments

“…The RTC drift, on the other hand, was considerable. The average RTC drift for both field seasons was more than three times higher than the average clock drift measured for commercial pressure transducers in a study by Rau et al (2019) [63]. Accumulating RTC drift over a relatively long period could be problematic when comparing the sensor data to data from other instruments with significantly smaller clock drifts.…”

Groundwater level observations in 250,000 coastal US wells reveal scope of potential seawater intrusion

“…We acknowledge well water elevation data from both monitoring wells and constructed wells have substantial limitations (see ref. 62 ).…”