Advertisement

The Superconducting Gravimeter as a Field Instrument Applied to Hydrology

  • C. R. WilsonEmail author
  • H. Wu
  • L. Longuevergne
  • B. Scanlon
  • J. Sharp
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 136)

Abstract

We describe development of a transportable version of the Superconducting Gravimeter (SG) and its test in a field experiment to monitor storage in a karst (limestone) aquifer in central Texas. The SG is contained within two aluminum enclosures, one holding the SG in its 35 l helium dewar, plus electronics; and the second for refrigerator and power supply. In the field test, the SG was supported on threaded steel rods cemented into limestone, and surrounded by weather-protecting sheds. The steel rod design was not completely satisfactory, and in most field settings a concrete floor will probably be required. Field operation requires wired electric power, but is managed remotely using wireless internet. The experiment south of Austin Texas was designed to monitor ground water level, precipitation, and other variables, and observe mass variations associated with storage changes in the aquifer. Drought conditions prevailed, limiting conclusions about the aquifer, but the experiment demonstrated the feasibility of remote unattended operation for periods of many months.

Keywords

Proof Mass Concrete Floor Superconducting Gravimeter Absolute Gravimeter Subsurface Fluid 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by National Science Foundation Instrumentation and Facilities grant EAR03-45864. Additional support provided by the Geology Foundation of the University of Texas at Austin.

References

  1. Boy J-P, Hinderer J (2006) Study of the seasonal gravity signal in superconducting gravimeter data. J Geodyn 41:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Crossley DJ, Hinderer G, Casula O, Francis H-T, Hsu Y, Imanishi B, Meurers J, Neumeyer B, Richter K, Shibuya TS, Van Dam T (1999) Network of superconducting gravimeters benefits a number of disciplines: EOS, Transactions. Am Geophys Union 80(121):125–126Google Scholar
  3. Goodkind JM (1999) The superconducting gravimeter. Rev Sci Instrum 70(11):4131–4152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hinderrer J, Crossley D, Warburton R (2007) Superconducting gravimeter, book chapter 9. In: Herring T, Schubert G (eds) Treatise on geophysics, vol 3. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. Kroner C, Jahr T (2006) Hydrological experiments around the superconducting gravimeter at Moxa Observatory. J Geodyn 41:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Naujoks MA, Weise C, Kroner, and Jahr T (2007). Detection of small hydrologic variations in gravity by repeated observations with relative gravimeters. J Geodesy, December 2007, doi:10.1007/s00190-007-0202-9Google Scholar
  7. Pool D, Eychaner J (1995) Measurements of aquifer storage change and specific yield using gravity surveys. Ground Water 33(3):425–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Prothero W, Goodkind JM (1968) A superconducting gravimeter. Rev Sci Instrum 39:1257–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Prothero W, Goodkind JM (1972) Earth-tide measurements with a superconducting gravimeter. J Geophys Res 77:926–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Van Camp M, Wenzel H, Schott P, Vauterin P, Francis O (2000) Accurate transfer function determination for superconducting gravimeters. Geophys Res Lett 27:37–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. R. Wilson
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • H. Wu
    • 1
  • L. Longuevergne
    • 1
    • 2
  • B. Scanlon
    • 2
  • J. Sharp
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geological Sciences, Jackson School of GeosciencesUniversity of TexasAustinUSA
  2. 2.Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of GeosciencesUniversity of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations