@article{JingHesseKumaretal.2019, author = {Jing, Miao and Hesse, Falk and Kumar, Rohini and Kolditz, Olaf and Kalbacher, Thomas and Attinger, Sabine}, title = {Influence of input and parameter uncertainty on the prediction of catchment-scale groundwater travel time distributions}, series = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, volume = {23}, journal = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, number = {1}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1027-5606}, doi = {10.5194/hess-23-171-2019}, pages = {171 -- 190}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Groundwater travel time distributions (TTDs) provide a robust description of the subsurface mixing behavior and hydrological response of a subsurface system. Lagrangian particle tracking is often used to derive the groundwater TTDs. The reliability of this approach is subjected to the uncertainty of external forcings, internal hydraulic properties, and the interplay between them. Here, we evaluate the uncertainty of catchment groundwater TTDs in an agricultural catchment using a 3-D groundwater model with an overall focus on revealing the relationship between external forcing, internal hydraulic properties, and TTD predictions. Eight recharge realizations are sampled from a high-resolution dataset of land surface fluxes and states. Calibration-constrained hydraulic conductivity fields (Ks fields) are stochastically generated using the null-space Monte Carlo (NSMC) method for each recharge realization. The random walk particle tracking (RWPT) method is used to track the pathways of particles and compute travel times. Moreover, an analytical model under the random sampling (RS) assumption is fit against the numerical solutions, serving as a reference for the mixing behavior of the model domain. The StorAge Selection (SAS) function is used to interpret the results in terms of quantifying the systematic preference for discharging young/old water. The simulation results reveal the primary effect of recharge on the predicted mean travel time (MTT). The different realizations of calibration-constrained Ks fields moderately magnify or attenuate the predicted MTTs. The analytical model does not properly replicate the numerical solution, and it underestimates the mean travel time. Simulated SAS functions indicate an overall preference for young water for all realizations. The spatial pattern of recharge controls the shape and breadth of simulated TTDs and SAS functions by changing the spatial distribution of particles' pathways. In conclusion, overlooking the spatial nonuniformity and uncertainty of input (forcing) will result in biased travel time predictions. We also highlight the worth of reliable observations in reducing predictive uncertainty and the good interpretability of SAS functions in terms of understanding catchment transport processes.}, language = {en} } @article{BaroniSchalgeRakovecetal.2019, author = {Baroni, Gabriele and Schalge, Bernd and Rakovec, Oldrich and Kumar, Rohini and Sch{\"u}ler, Lennart and Samaniego, Luis and Simmer, Clemens and Attinger, Sabine}, title = {A Comprehensive Distributed Hydrological Modeling Intercomparison to Support Process Representation and Data Collection Strategies}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {55}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {2}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1029/2018WR023941}, pages = {990 -- 1010}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The improvement of process representations in hydrological models is often only driven by the modelers' knowledge and data availability. We present a comprehensive comparison between two hydrological models of different complexity that is developed to support (1) the understanding of the differences between model structures and (2) the identification of the observations needed for model assessment and improvement. The comparison is conducted on both space and time and by aggregating the outputs at different spatiotemporal scales. In the present study, mHM, a process-based hydrological model, and ParFlow-CLM, an integrated subsurface-surface hydrological model, are used. The models are applied in a mesoscale catchment in Germany. Both models agree in the simulated river discharge at the outlet and the surface soil moisture dynamics, lending their supports for some model applications (drought monitoring). Different model sensitivities are, however, found when comparing evapotranspiration and soil moisture at different soil depths. The analysis supports the need of observations within the catchment for model assessment, but it indicates that different strategies should be considered for the different variables. Evapotranspiration measurements are needed at daily resolution across several locations, while highly resolved spatially distributed observations with lower temporal frequency are required for soil moisture. Finally, the results show the impact of the shallow groundwater system simulated by ParFlow-CLM and the need to account for the related soil moisture redistribution. Our comparison strategy can be applied to other models types and environmental conditions to strengthen the dialog between modelers and experimentalists for improving process representations in Earth system models.}, language = {en} } @article{ZechAttingerBellinetal.2019, author = {Zech, Alraune and Attinger, Sabine and Bellin, Alberto and Cvetkovic, Vladimir and Dietrich, Peter and Fiori, Aldo and Teutsch, Georg and Dagan, Gedeon}, title = {A Critical Analysis of Transverse Dispersivity Field Data}, series = {Groundwater : journal of the Association of Ground-Water Scientists and Engineers, a division of the National Ground Water Association}, volume = {57}, journal = {Groundwater : journal of the Association of Ground-Water Scientists and Engineers, a division of the National Ground Water Association}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {0017-467X}, doi = {10.1111/gwat.12838}, pages = {632 -- 639}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Transverse dispersion, or tracer spreading orthogonal to the mean flow direction, which is relevant e.g, for quantifying bio-degradation of contaminant plumes or mixing of reactive solutes, has been studied in the literature less than the longitudinal one. Inferring transverse dispersion coefficients from field experiments is a difficult and error-prone task, requiring a spatial resolution of solute plumes which is not easily achievable in applications. In absence of field data, it is a questionable common practice to set transverse dispersivities as a fraction of the longitudinal one, with the ratio 1/10 being the most prevalent. We collected estimates of field-scale transverse dispersivities from existing publications and explored possible scale relationships as guidance criteria for applications. Our investigation showed that a large number of estimates available in the literature are of low reliability and should be discarded from further analysis. The remaining reliable estimates are formation-specific, span three orders of magnitude and do not show any clear scale-dependence on the plume traveled distance. The ratios with the longitudinal dispersivity are also site specific and vary widely. The reliability of transverse dispersivities depends significantly on the type of field experiment and method of data analysis. In applications where transverse dispersion plays a significant role, inference of transverse dispersivities should be part of site characterization with the transverse dispersivity estimated as an independent parameter rather than related heuristically to longitudinal dispersivity.}, language = {en} } @misc{HesseComunianAttinger2019, author = {Heße, Falk and Comunian, Alessandro and Attinger, Sabine}, title = {What We Talk About When We Talk About Uncertainty}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {754}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43658}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-436582}, pages = {20}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{HesseComunianAttinger2019, author = {Heße, Falk and Comunian, Alessandro and Attinger, Sabine}, title = {What We Talk About When We Talk About Uncertainty}, series = {Frontiers in Earth Science}, volume = {7}, journal = {Frontiers in Earth Science}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2296-6463}, doi = {10.3389/feart.2019.00118}, pages = {20}, year = {2019}, language = {en} }