A Model to Simulate Pesticide Movement Into Drain Tiles A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ADAPT - A MODEL TO SIMULATE PESTICIDE MOVEMENT INTO DRAIN TILES A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University by Cathy Ann Alexander, B.S. ***** The Ohio State University 1988 Master's Examination Committee: Approved by Andrew D. Ward E. Scott Bair jvisor Norman R. Fausey Department/of Agricultural Engineering Acknowledgements I express sincere appreciation to my advisor Dr. Andy Ward for his guidance and assistance in this research. Thanks also go to the other members of my committee, Dr. Norm Fausey and Dr. Scott Bair, for their input into this project. For providing me with the background information on the GLEAMS model, and for their ever helpful attitudes, I thank Dr. Walt Knisel, Dr. Ralph Leonard, and Frank Davis of the USDA-ARS in Tifton, Georgia. The technical assistance of Eric Desmond and the helpful suggestions of the other graduate students, especially Lou Seich and Leonard Ndlovu1, is much appreciated. Thank you. And to my husband, Walter, I offer a sincere thank you for the love and support you've given me, and the patience you've had in seeing me through this endeavor. VITA July 30, 1963 Born - Mt. Vernon, Ohio 1985-1986 Laboratory Technician, Dept. of Ag. Eng., Ohio State University 1986 B.S.Ag.Eng., Ohio State University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Agricultural Engineering Studies in: Agronomy - Dr. Ed McCoy, Dr. Norm Fausey, Dr. Terry Logan Civil Engineering - Dr. Vincent Ricca, Dr. Alan Rubin, Dr. Charles Moore, Dr. Robert Sykes, Dr. Robert Steiffel Geology and Minerology - Dr. E. Scott Bciir Natural Resources - Dr. William Mitsch iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 11 VITA lii LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vii CHAPTER PAGE I. INTROOUCTION 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 3 INFILTRATION 3 RUNOFF 8 EROSION 13 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 15 DRAINAGE 17 PESTICIDE TRANSPORT , 20 MODELS CURRENTLY IN USE 24 III. THE THEORY OF GLEAMS AND DRAINMOD 27 GLEAMS 28 DRAINMOD 34 DISCUSSION 38 IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE ADAPT MODEL 40 INTRODUCTION 40 BASIC CONCEPTS 43 MATHEMATICS AND LOGIC 48 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 48 INFILTRATION 50 DRAINAGE..... 52 WATER CONTENT 54 INPUT REQUIREMENTS 56 MODEL OUTPUT 57 V. VERIFICATION STUDY 58 iv VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 65 APPENDICES A. USER'S GUIDE TO ADAPT. 68 B. GLOSSARY OF TERMS 88 C. PROGRAM SOURCE CODE , 96 D. INPUT AND OUTPUT FILES 223 LIST OF REFERENCES 237 BIBLIOGRAPHY 240 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Fate of pesticides in an agricultural field 21 2. A comparison of GLEAMS, DRAINMOD, and ADAPT 42 modeling methods. 3. Hydraulic conductivities for a soil profile 59 in north-central Ohio. 4. Summary of drainage system input parameters for a 59 soil profile in north-central Ohio. 5. Direct runoff for varying curve numbers and 59 rainfall amounts. 6. Average simulated values of runoff and drainage 61 from 1962 to 1971 using ADAPT. 7. Simulated runoff and drainage values for 1970 61 using ADAPT. VI LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Soil moisture profiles during infiltration 5 (a) at the moment of surface saturation, and (b) at a later time. 2. Parameters used in estimating flux to subsurface drains ....18 3. Equivalent lateral hydraulic conductivity 38 determination for five layers. 4. Hydrologic processes simulated by ADAPT 41 5. Volume relations of a soil 43 6. Water content relations by volume for a soil layer ,...45 7. Soil moisture profile (a) for an actual soil profile, 46 and (b) as modeled by ADAPT. 8. Soil profile zones for ADAPT 47 9. Daily calculations performed by ADAPT 49 10. Soil moisture profile when infiltration causes 53 a rise in water table. 11. Example soil profile when infiltration has occurred 55 12. Simulated and observed values plotted for: (a) runoff, ....63 (b) drainage, and (c) combined drainage and runoff. vn CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Over the past several years, pesticide migration into groundwater has become a major environmental concern. Studies done in various states have shown persistent appearances of pesticides such as atrazine and aldicarb in groundwater. Studies done in Iowa in the past five years by Hallberg and others (1985) suggest that although levels are now generally less than 5 percent of that applied, they are likely increasing. The presence of pesticides in groundwater is a health concern as well as an economic concern. Although the low levels being found at present will likely not cause acute toxicity problems, there is the potential for long-term chronic problems such as cancer. And although losses to groundwater are usually 5 percent or less, certain soils and tillage conditions may cause losses of 10-15 percent. This is an economic inefficiency that, combined with environmental and health concerns, is a clear incentive to investigate more into the matter of pesticide migration to groundwater. To reduce chemical losses through management practices requires that enough data be available to base management strategies upon. The least time-consuming and costly method of providing these data is through computer simulations, rather than spending years in the field 1 2 collecting data for various soil and crop types. Hallberg (1985) found that pesticide concentrations in drain tile effluent is indicative of the amount reaching the local groundwater system. A model, then, that estimates pesticide concentration in drainage water would be a useful tool in determining what constitutes a best management practice. Although there are several computer models available to simulate pesticide transport in runoff or through the plant root zone» there are no models to estimate pesticide concentrations in subsurface tile effluent. The objective o* this study was to develop such a model, using two previously tested models as the building blocks. To this end, the GLEAMS (Groundwater Loading Effects on Agricultural Management Systems) (Leonard et.al. 1986) model and the DRAINMOD (Skaggs, 1978) model were combined and given a new infiltration model to predict pesticide concentrations in subsurface drainage as well as in runoff. The resulting model, ADAPT (Agricultural Drainage And Pesticide Transport) requires input very similar to the GLEAMS model. Calculations are done on a daily basis and are based primarily on a physically-based conceptual model. A review of the factors considered in modeling water and pesticide movement through the soil profile is included in this report, as well as a description of the new model. The appendices provide a listing of the program along with a guide for its use. CHAPTER II Literature Review Infiltration Infiltration is the process of water entering through the soil, generally through downward flow. The rate of infiltration that can occur, or the infiltrability, depends on the following (Hillel, 1982): - Time from start of rainfall or irrigation - Soil hydraulic conductivity - Initial soil-water content - Soil surface conditions - Presence of impeding layers within the profile In general, infiltrability in the early stages of infiltration is high, decreasing and eventually approaching asymptotically a "steady-state infiltrability" as the precipitation event continues. Several methods of predicting infiltration have been developed, both empirically and from solutions of physically-based theories. One of the first equations introduced was the Green-Ampt equation: f = Ks[I+(es-8i)S/F] (1) where f is steady-state infiltrability, Ks is saturated hydraulic conductivity, 6S is saturated soil-water content, 9j is initial soil water content, S is capillary suction at the wetting front, and F is cumulative infiltration from the beginning of the event. This equation was derived from Darcy's Law with the following assumptions: 1) an excess of surface-water supply existed from time zero; 2) the soil 3 4 profile is homogeneous; 3) infiltration is one dimensional; and 4) rainfall intensity is constant. Mein and Larson (1978) modified the Green-Ampt equation to consider infiltration before surface ponding occurs. Figure la illustrates the soil-moisture profile at the moment of soil saturation. At this time, by definition, Fs - (9S - 9i)Ls (2) Using Darcy's Law in finite-difference form we can derive, I = Ks(Sav + Ls)/Ls (3) where I is the rainfall intansity, Sav is the average capillary suction at the wetting front, and the other parameters are as previously defined. Combining (2) and (3) results in: which can predict the amount of infiltration prior to runoff and the time (Fs/I) to beginning of runoff. Figure lb represents the soil - moisture profile after the soil surface has become saturated. Applying Darcy's Law again for an infiltration rate equal to the steady-state rate results in: fp = Ks[l + Sav(6s - 9i)/F] (5) which is identical to the Green-Ampt equation except that Sav is more easily defined than the S in the Green-Ampt equation. Philips (1957) derived another physically-based equation that commonly is used. A solution to Richards Equation was found to be the infinite series: x =0tl/2 + jit + ^3/2 + ujt2 +...fm(Q)tni/2 + (6) where <p, y., If,u), and fm(0) are functions of the water content (0) MOISTURE CONTENT (9) 0. 0 0. 0 1 surface F - F W Pi i (a) Figure 1: Soil moisture profiles during infiltration (a) at the moment of surface saturation, and (b) at a later time. From Mein and Larson, 1973. 6 which are solutions to a series of ordinary differential equations. For the range of t and D- and K-functions of interest for the infiltration process, equation (6) converges rapidly so that generally the first two terms are considered sufficient. The equation for infiltration capacity then may be written in the form: f = St!/2/2 + C (7) where C and S are dependent on the initial soil-water content. For very large time spans, this equation fails because C is not equal to hydraulic conductivity, which f should approach.