Abstract
Groundwater recharge rates were estimated and compared in a headwater catchment at the Gwangneung Supersite using three different methods: water-table fluctuation (WTF), mass balance, and hydrograph separation techniques. Data were obtained during the rainy season from June to September 2005. Two different WTF methods estimated the groundwater recharge rate as 25.9% and 23.6%. The mass balance calculation of chloride ions indicated recharge rates of 13.4% on average. Baseflow separation using chloride ion as a tracer from six storm hydrographs produced a 14.0% net baseflow rate on average. Because of the implicit assumption of a long-term steady state without storage change, recharge rates calculated by mass balance and hydrograph separation were smaller than those done with WTF methods, which include the amount of increased storage due to the water-level rise. Subsequently, the WTF method is superior to others in the estimation of groundwater recharge rate to comprehend the dynamic characteristics of the hydrologic cycle.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
