DOCSLIB.ORG

A New Streamflow-Routing (SFR1) Package to Simulate Stream-Aquifer Interaction with MODFLOW-2000 a NEWU.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A New Streamflow-Routing (SFR1) Package to Simulate Stream-Aquifer Interaction with MODFLOW-2000 a NEWU.S A new streamflow-routing (SFR1) package to simulate stream-aquifer interaction with MODFLOW-2000 A NEWU.S. Geological STREAMFLOW-ROUTING Survey (SFR1) PACKAGE TO Open-FileSIMULATE Report 2004-1042STREAM-AQUIFER INTERACTION WITH125 yearsMODFLOW-2000 of science for America 1879-2004 U.S. Department of the Interior U. S Geological Survey U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OPEN-FILE REPORT 2004-1042 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Map showing simple stream network and cross section through representative stream segment illustrating some of the nomenclature used in the Streamflow-Routing Package. (See figs. 1 and 4 of this report and related discussions for more details.) A NEW STREAMFLOW-ROUTING (SFR1) PACKAGE TO SIMULATE STREAM-AQUIFER INTERACTION WITH MODFLOW-2000 A new streamflow-routing (SFR1) package to simulate stream- By David E. Prudic, Leonard F. Konikow, and Edward R. Banta aquifer interaction with MODFLOW-2000 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OPEN-FILEBy REPORT David 2004-1042 E. Prudic, Leonard F. Konikow, and Edward R. Banta U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1042 Carson City, Nevada 2004 Carson City, Nevada 2004 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES G. GROAT, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government For additional information Copies of this report can be contact: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Information Services 333 West Nye Lane, Room 203 Building 810 Carson City, NV 89706–0866 Box 25286, Federal Center Denver, CO 80225–0286 email: [email protected] http://nevada.usgs.gov iii CONTENTS Abstract.................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose and Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Approach to Streamflow Routing ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Ordering and Numbering of Streams ......................................................................................................................... 2 Stream-Aquifer Connection ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Stream Water Budgets................................................................................................................................................ 6 Computing Stream Depth........................................................................................................................................... 6 Diverting Streamflow ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Stream-Lake Interconnections ................................................................................................................................... 9 Solute Transport ......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Assumptions and Limitations..................................................................................................................................... 12 Test Simulations..................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Test 1: Stream-Aquifer Interaction............................................................................................................................ 13 Test 2: Stream-Lake Interaction with Solute Transport ............................................................................................ 24 Implementation of SFR1 Package with MODFLOW-2000................................................................................................... 29 Integration of MODFLOW-GWT with SFR1 and LAK3 Packages...................................................................................... 30 Summary................................................................................................................................................................................ 34 References Cited.................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Appendix 1—Data Input Instructions for Streamflow-Routing (SFR1) Package ................................................................ 39 Appendix 2—Selected Input Data and Printed Results for Test Simulation 1 ...................................................................... 55 Appendix 3—Selected Input Data and Printed Results for Test Simulation 2 ...................................................................... 77 FIGURES 1. Diagram showing simple stream network having three segments and six reaches in a finite-difference model grid consisting of three rows and three columns.................................................................................................... 3 2. Diagrams showing (A) multiple connected reaches in a model cell, (B) two parallel reaches in a model cell, and (C) only one reach connected to a single model cell even if stream is wider than the cell............................. 4 3. Diagram showing example of a segment-numbering scheme in relation to direction of flow and a finite-difference model grid ................................................................................................................................... 5 4. Diagram illustrating an eight-point cross section used to compute depth, width, and wetted perimeter for a stream segment....................................................................................................................................................... 8 5. Diagram illustrating bisection-secant method used to determine depth of stream from Manning’s equation assuming an eight-point cross section.................................................................................................................... 8 6. Map showing hypothetical basin-fill aquifer with model grid, land-surface contours, and stream segment and reach numbering scheme for test simulation 1................................................................................................ 14 7. Model grid showing elevation of top of consolidated rocks beneath basin-fill aquifer and distribution of hydraulic conductivity and specific yield of the basin-fill aquifer used in test simulation 1................................. 15 8. Model grid showing steady-state simulation of water-table contours, distribution of ground-water evapotranspiration, and locations of perennial-flow reaches used as initial conditions for the transient part of test simulation 1.......................................................................................................................................... 16 9. Graphs showing stream cross sections used in computing stream depth for segments 7 and 8 in test simulation 1............................................................................................................................................................ 18 iv 10. Model grid showing simulated water-table contours, distribution of ground-water evapotranspiration, and locations of perennial-flow reaches after 50 years of pumping for test simulation 1 ............................................ 20 11. Graphs comparing changes in stream depth, width, and flow in last reach of selected stream segments during a 50-year pumping period in test simulation 1 followed by a 50-year recovery period ............................. 22 12. Graphs showing changes in streambed conductance in last reach of selected stream segments during a 50-year pumping period in test simulation 1 followed by a 50-year recovery period......................................... 25 13. Diagram showing finite-difference model grid of layer 1, boundary conditions, and locations of lakes and streams used in test simulation 2............................................................................................................................ 26 14. Diagrams showing contours of simulated steady-state heads in (A) layer 1 and (B) layer 2 for test simulation 2............................................................................................................................................................ 28 15. Diagram showing distribution of vertical flow velocity between layers 1 and 2 for steady-state conditions in test simulation 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 16. Graphs showing changes in simulated boron concentrations in lake
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fully Conservative Coupling of HEC-RAS with MODFLOW to Simulate Stream–Aquifer Interactions in a Drainage Basin
    Journal of Hydrology (2008) 353, 129– 142 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol Fully conservative coupling of HEC-RAS with MODFLOW to simulate stream–aquifer interactions in a drainage basin Leticia B. Rodriguez a,*, Pablo A. Cello b,1, Carlos A. Vionnet a,2, David Goodrich c a Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ USA b Facultad de Ingenierı`a y Ciencias Hı`dricas, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, CC 217, 3000 Santa Fe, Argentina c Southwest Watershed Research, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2000 East Allen Road, Tucson, AZ 85719, USA Received 20 September 2007; received in revised form 10 January 2008; accepted 6 February 2008 KEYWORDS Summary This work describes the application of a methodology designed to improve the Groundwater–surface representation of water surface profiles along open drain channels within the framework water interaction; of regional groundwater modelling. The proposed methodology employs an iterative pro- Hydrologic modelling; cedure that combines two public domain computational codes, MODFLOW and HEC-RAS. In MODFLOW; spite of its known versatility, MODFLOW contains several limitations to reproduce eleva- HEC-RAS tion profiles of the free surface along open drain channels. The Drain Module available within MODFLOW simulates groundwater flow to open drain channels as a linear function of the difference between the hydraulic head in the aquifer and the hydraulic head in the drain, where it considers a static representation of water surface profiles along drains. The proposed methodology developed herein uses HEC-RAS, a one-dimensional (1D) com- puter code for open surface water calculations, to iteratively estimate hydraulic profiles along drain channels in order to improve the aquifer/drain interaction process.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Streamflow Variability and Trends in the Meta River, Colombia
    water Article Analysis of Streamflow Variability and Trends in the Meta River, Colombia Marco Arrieta-Castro 1, Adriana Donado-Rodríguez 1, Guillermo J. Acuña 2,3,* , Fausto A. Canales 1,* , Ramesh S. V. Teegavarapu 4 and Bartosz Ka´zmierczak 5 1 Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad de la Costa, Calle 58 #55-66, Barranquilla 080002, Atlántico, Colombia; [email protected] (M.A.-C.); [email protected] (A.D.-R.) 2 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Instituto de Estudios Hidráulicos y Ambientales, Universidad del Norte, Km.5 Vía Puerto Colombia, Barranquilla 081007, Colombia 3 Programa de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad Sergio Arboleda, Escuela de Ciencias Exactas e Ingeniería (ECEI), Calle 74 #14-14, Bogotá D.C. 110221, Colombia 4 Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatics Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA; [email protected] 5 Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Environmental Engineering, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (F.A.C.); [email protected] (G.J.A.); Tel.: +57-5-3362252 (F.A.C.) Received: 29 March 2020; Accepted: 13 May 2020; Published: 20 May 2020 Abstract: The aim of this research is the detection and analysis of existing trends in the Meta River, Colombia, based on the streamflow records from seven gauging stations in its main course, for the period between June 1983 to July 2019. The Meta River is one of the principal branches of the Orinoco River, and it has a high environmental and economic value for this South American country.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Discharge (Streamflow)
    The Importance of Streamflow in California’s Southern Sierra Nevada Mountains Kings River Experimental Watersheds Because 55 to 65 percent of California’s developed water comes from small streams in the Sierra Nevada, it is important to under- stand the role the snowpack has in the distribution and quantity of stream discharge (streamflow). In the southern Sierra, more than 80 percent of precipitation falls December through April. However, owing to the delay in snowmelt, there is a lag in runoff until the spring. At higher elevation sites, the spring melt does not peak until May or even June. This makes mountain water available to California during the summer months. The Kings River Experi- mental Watersheds (KREW) sites demonstrate that precipitation in the form of snow generates greater yearly discharge in a given watershed. The difference in discharge between the KREW Provi- dence site and Bull site is as much as 20 percent per year. C. Hunsaker Research Area Figure 1—KREW’s double flume system. The large flume KREW is a watershed-level, integrated ecosystem project for (background) accurately captures high flows, and the small flume headwater streams in the Sierra Nevada. Eight watersheds at two is successful at measuring lower base flows. study sites are fully instrumented to monitor ecosystem changes. Stream discharge data, just one component of the project, have been collected since 2002 from the Providence site and since 2003 from the Bull site. What is Stream Discharge? Discharge is the amount of water leaving each watershed within the stream channel. It is represented as a rate of flow such as cubic feet per second (cfs), gallons per minute (gpm), or acre-feet per year.
    [Show full text]
  • From the River to You: USGS Real-Time Streamflow Information …From the National Streamflow Information Program
    From the River to You: USGS Real-Time Streamflow Information …from the National Streamflow Information Program This Fact Sheet is one in a series that highlights information or recent research findings from the USGS National Streamflow Information Program (NSIP). The investigations and scientific results reported in this series require a nationally consistent streamgaging network with stable long-term monitoring sites and a rigorous program of data, quality assurance, management, archiving, and synthesis. NSIP produces multipurpose, unbiased surface-water information that is readily accessible to all. Introduction Collecting and Transmitting data are stored in a data logger in Streamflow Information the gagehouse. As part of the National Stream- On a preset schedule, typically flow Information Program, the U.S. The streamflow information every 1 to 4 hours, the streamgage Geological Survey (USGS) operates collected at most streamgages transmits all the stage information more than 7,400 streamgages nation- is stream stage (also called gage recorded since the last transmission to wide to provide streamflow informa- height). This is the height of the a Geostationary Operational Envi- tion for a wide variety of uses. These water surface above a reference level ronmental Satellite (GOES). Many uses include prediction of floods, or datum. Stream stage is measured streamgages have predetermined management and allocation of water by a variety of methods including stage thresholds. When these thresh- resources, design and operation of floats, pressure transducers, and olds are exceeded, the time between engineering structures, scientific acoustic or optical sensors (fig. 1). transmissions to the satellite will research, operation of locks and Stage data are measured at the decrease from 1 to 4 hours to every dams, and for recreational safety and time interval necessary to monitor the 15 minutes to provide more timely enjoyment.
    [Show full text]
  • Streamflow-Routing (SFR2) Package with Unsaturated Flow Beneath Streams (MODFLOW 2005 Version 1.12.00)
    Streamflow-Routing (SFR2) Package with Unsaturated Flow beneath Streams (MODFLOW 2005 Version 1.12.00) MODFLOW Name File The Streamflow-Routing Package is activated automatically by including a record in the MODFLOW-2005 name file using the file type (Ftype) “SFR” to indicate that relevant calculations are to be made in the model and to specify the related input data file. The user can optionally specify that stream gages and monitoring stations are to be represented at one or more locations along a stream channel by including a record in the MODFLOW-2005 name file using the file type (Ftype) “GAGE” that specifies the relevant input data file giving locations of gages. Data input for SFR1 works without modification if unsaturated flow is not simulated. Input Data Instructions The modification of SFR2 to simulate unsaturated flow relies on the specific yield values as specified in the Layer Property Flow (LPF) Package, the Hydrogeologic-Unit Flow (HUF) Package, or the Block-Centered Flow (BCF) Package. If MODFLOW-2005 is run with the option to use vertical hydraulic conductivity in the LPF Package, the layer(s) that contain cells where unsaturated flow will be simulated must be specified as convertible. That is, the variable LAYTYP specified in LPF (or variable LTHUF in HUF) must not be equal to zero, otherwise the model will print an error message and stop execution. Additional variables that must be specified to define hydraulic properties of the unsaturated zone are all included within the SFR2 input file. All values are entered in as free format. Parameters can be used to define streambed hydraulic conductivity only when data input follows the SFR1 input structure (Prudic and others, 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Monolith Materials Inc. Groundwater Flow Model
    Review of the Monolith Materials Inc. Groundwater Flow Model Prepared for: Lower Platte South Natural Resource District February 2021 The technical material in this report was prepared by or under the supervision and direction of the undersigned: ___________________________________________________ Jacob Bauer, P.G. (WY #3902) Hydrogeologist | Project Manager LRE Water Clinton Meyer – Staff Hydrogeologist, LRE Water Dave Hume P.G. (NE # 0186) – Sr. Project Manager and VP Midwest Operations, LRE Water Page | 2 Monolith Model Review- February 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4 1.1 Purpose of Review ............................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Model Background ............................................................................................................... 5 Section 2: Model Objective and Choice of Modeling Code .................................................................... 5 Section 3: Model Inputs ................................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Extent, Spatial Discretization, and Temporal Discretization ............................................................ 6 3.2 Geology, Model Thickness, and Bedrock Flow Interactions ............................................................ 6 3.3 Wells and Targets ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Distributed Hydrologic Modeling for Streamflow Prediction at Ungauged Basins
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2008 Distributed Hydrologic Modeling For Streamflow Prediction At Ungauged Basins Christina Bandaragoda Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Bandaragoda, Christina, "Distributed Hydrologic Modeling For Streamflow Prediction At Ungauged Basins" (2008). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 62. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/62 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGIC MODELING FOR STREAMFLOW PREDICTION AT UNGAUGED BASINS by Christina Bandaragoda A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Civil and Environmental Engineering UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, UT 2007 ii ABSTRACT Distributed Hydrologic Modeling for Prediction of Streamflow at Ungauged Basins by Christina Bandaragoda, Doctor of Philosophy Utah State University, 2008 Major Professor: Dr. David G. Tarboton Department: Civil and Environmental Engineering Hydrologic modeling and streamflow prediction of ungauged basins is an unsolved scientific problem as well as a policy-relevant science theme emerging as a major
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction and Characteristics of Flow
    Introduction and Characteristics of Flow By James W. LaBaugh and Donald O. Rosenberry Chapter 1 of Field Techniques for Estimating Water Fluxes Between Surface Water and Ground Water Edited by Donald O. Rosenberry and James W. LaBaugh Techniques and Methods Chapter 4–D2 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................5 Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................................................6 Characteristics of Water Exchange Between Surface Water and Ground Water .............................7 Characteristics of Near-Shore Sediments .......................................................................................8 Temporal and Spatial Variability of Flow .........................................................................................10 Defining the Purpose for Measuring the Exchange of Water Between Surface Water and Ground Water ..........................................................................................................................12 Determining Locations of Water Exchange ....................................................................................12 Measuring Direction of Flow ............................................................................................................15 Measuring the Quantity of Flow .......................................................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Streamflow Data
    Part 630 Hydrology National Engineering Handbook Chapter 5 Streamflow Data (210–VI–NEH, Amend. 76, November 2015) Chapter 5 Streamflow Data Part 630 National Engineering Handbook Issued November 2015 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, em- ployees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disabil- ity, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Pro- gram Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/com- plaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adju- dication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 690-7442 or email at [email protected] Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and you wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877- 8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish).
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Binary Baseflow Separation: a Delayed-Flow Index for Multiple Streamflow Contributions
    Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 849–867, 2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-849-2020 © Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Beyond binary baseflow separation: a delayed-flow index for multiple streamflow contributions Michael Stoelzle1,*, Tobias Schuetz2, Markus Weiler1, Kerstin Stahl1, and Lena M. Tallaksen3 1Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany 2Department of Hydrology, Faculty VI Regional and Environmental Sciences, University of Trier, Trier, Germany 3Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway *Invited contribution by Michael Stoelzle, recipient of the EGU Outstanding Student Poster Awards 2015. Correspondence: Michael Stoelzle ([email protected]) Received: 14 May 2019 – Discussion started: 28 May 2019 Revised: 18 November 2019 – Accepted: 20 January 2020 – Published: 25 February 2020 Abstract. Understanding components of the total streamflow the primary contribution, whereas below 800 m groundwa- is important to assess the ecological functioning of rivers. Bi- ter resources are most likely the major streamflow contri- nary or two-component separation of streamflow into a quick butions. Our analysis also indicates that dynamic storage in and a slow (often referred to as baseflow) component are of- high alpine catchments might be large and is overall not ten based on arbitrary choices of separation parameters and smaller than in lowland catchments. We conclude that the also merge different delayed components into one baseflow DFI can be used to assess the range of sources forming catch- component and one baseflow index (BFI). As streamflow ments’ storages and to judge the long-term sustainability of generation during dry weather often results from drainage streamflow.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Flow Alteration?
    Flow Alteration What is Flow Alteration? Flow alteration is any change in the natural flow regime of a river or stream or water level of a lake or reservoir induced by human activities. As illustrated below, five components of the natural flow regime are now recognized as requiring protection to maintain healthy river and lake ecosystems (Figure 1). They are: Magnitude – the amount of water flowing in the stream at any given time; Frequency – how often a given flow occurs over time; Duration – the length of time that a given flow occurs; Timing – how predictable or regular a given flow can be expected to occur; Rate of change – how quickly flows rise or fall. Figure 1: Hydrographs of a river (A) and lake (B) that illustrate the general seasonal pattern and the variability seen in Vermont rivers and lakes, with increased streamflow and water level in the spring followed by receding levels in the summer and an increase in streamflow and water level in the fall. A natural flow regime refers to a range that each of these five components can be expected to fall within due to the variability of precipitation and other natural hydrologic processes. Significant flow alteration can push these components of flow outside the expected range, leading to environmental degradation. Climate change is another potential driver of shifting flow regimes, and must also be considered in a well- informed approach to addressing flow alteration. These same five components influence lake water level and changes from the natural condition in one or more of these components affect the health of lake ecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis
    HYSEP: A COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR STREAMFLOW HYDROGRAPH SEPARATION AND ANALYSIS U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040 HYSEP: A COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR STREAMFLOW HYDROGRAPH SEPARATION AND ANALYSIS by Ronald A. Sloto and Michèle Y. Crouse U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 1996 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information Copies of this report may be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 840 Market Street Box 25286 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-1586 Denver, Colorado 80225-0286 ii CONTENTS Page Abstract . .1 Introduction . .1 Purpose and scope . .2 Limitations and cautions. .2 Hydrograph-separation methods . .3 Fixed-interval method . .5 Sliding-interval method . .6 Local-minimum method . .7 Program input requirements . .8 Program output . .9 Hydrograph separation. .9 Cumulative annual base-flow distribution . .9 Flow duration . 11 Seasonal flow distribution . 12 Daily-values files . 12 How HYSEP works. 13 User interface . 13 Commands . 13 Data panel . 15 Assistance panel. 16 Instruction panel . 16 Special files . 16 System defaults—TERM.DAT. 16 Session record—HYSEP.LOG . 17 Error and warning messages—ERROR.FIL . 17 Program options . 17 Default settings . 18 Specifying input files. 20 Selecting WDM file data sets. 20 Add . 20 Browse . 21 Find . 23 Selecting program output . 24 Tables. 24 Data files.
    [Show full text]