Search

We utilized 251 measurements from a recently developed automated seepage meter (ASM) in streambeds in the Nebraska Sand Hills, USA to investigate the small‐scale spatial variability of groundwater seepage flux (q) and the ability of the ASM to estimate mean q at larger scales. Small‐scale spatial variability of q was analyzed in five dense arrays, each covering an area of 13.5–28.0 m2 (169 total point measurements). Streambed vertical hydraulic conductivity (K) was also measured. Results provided: (a) high‐resolution contour plots of q and K, (b) anisotropic semi‐variograms demonstrating greater correlation scales of q and K along the stream length than across the stream width, and (c) the number of rows of points (perpendicular to streamflow) needed to represent the groundwater flux of areas up to 28.0 m2. The findings suggest that representative streambed measurements are best conducted perpendicular to streamflow to accommodate larger seepage flux heterogeneity in this direction and minimize sampling redundancy. To investigate the ASM's ability to produce accurate mean q at larger scales, seepage meters were deployed in four stream reaches (170–890 m), arranged in three to six transects (three to eight points each) per reach across the channel. In each reach, the mean seepage flux from ASMs was compared to the seepage flux from bromide tracer dilution. Agreement between the two methods indicates the viability of a modest number of seepage meter measurements to determine the overall groundwater flux to the stream and can guide sampling for solutes and environmental tracers. Plain Language Summary: Surface waters can be windows into groundwater aquifers. When conditions are right, groundwater is pushed up through the streambed and into the stream bringing with it natural and artificial solutes that are used as tracers for aquifer evaluation. Therefore, measurements of groundwater seepage fluxes are important. Utilizing a new tool (Solomon et al., 2020, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026983) for point measurements of groundwater flux (over an area of about 10 cm2), this study makes an unprecedented number of direct discharge measurements in the Sand Hills, Nebraska, USA in both (a) small areas (13.5–28.0 m2) of streambed and (b) along a much larger (170–890 m) stream segments. The results indicate that a modest number of discharge measurements in transects perpendicular to streamflow may accurately represent the groundwater flux in both small sections of stream and even in larger stream sections up to 890 m long. This means that if groundwater is discharging into the stream, the average seepage flux from the groundwater aquifer over the entire stream segment can be obtained through sampling a relatively small number of streambed locations. This potentially provides water resource managers valuable information on fluxes of both groundwater contaminants and age‐dating tracers without installing resource‐demanding wells. Key Points: A recently developed seepage meter produced high‐resolution maps of groundwater flux through streambeds in the Nebraska Sand Hills, USAAnisotropic semi‐variograms suggest representative point sampling is best conducted in rows of evenly spaced points across the stream widthGroundwater flux measured at 3–6 channel transects of seepage meters (3–8 points each) estimated total flux in reaches up to 890 m long [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We designed and evaluated a 'tube seepage meter' for point measurements of vertical seepage rates ( q), collecting groundwater samples, and estimating vertical hydraulic conductivity ( K) in streambeds. Laboratory testing in artificial streambeds show that seepage rates from the tube seepage meter agreed well with expected values. Results of field testing of the tube seepage meter in a sandy-bottom stream with a mean seepage rate of about 0.5 m/day agreed well with Darcian estimates (vertical hydraulic conductivity times head gradient) when averaged over multiple measurements. The uncertainties in q and K were evaluated with a Monte Carlo method and are typically 20% and 60%, respectively, for field data, and depend on the magnitude of the hydraulic gradient and the uncertainty in head measurements. The primary advantages of the tube seepage meter are its small footprint, concurrent and colocated assessments of q and K, and that it can also be configured as a self-purging groundwater-sampling device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]