View
229
Download
4
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Capture 1
The Interaction between Groundwater Pumping, Surface Water and Evapotranspiration:
The Concept of Capture
Tom Maddock
Capture 2
Talk Outline
• Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions
• What is Capture?
• Is Capture of Critical Interest?
• How do you calculate Capture?
• Capture calculation example
• What are the capture model basic parts?
• Modeling mischief
Capture 3
Capture 4
• If the water level in the aquifer is above the above the stream stage elevation, the stream is a gaining stream (I).
• If the water level in the in the aquifer is below the stream stage elevation (Dw<3W), the stream is a losing stream (II).
• For these two systems, QRIV=CRIV(HRIV−hA)
That is, the flow is proportional to the head difference between the stream (HRIV) and the aquifer (hA).
DW is an indicator of the difference between aquifer water level and stream stage elevation .
Capture 5
• As the water level in in the aquifer drops, the seepage becomes less dependent upon the head in the aquifer (III).
• Ultimately the hydraulic connection between the bottom of the stream bed and the water table will break (IV).
• The interval below the stream bed is unsaturated, but the stream bed is assumed to remain saturated.
DW is an indicator of the difference between aquifer water level and stream stage elevation .
Capture 6
Capture 7
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
“Under natural conditions…previous to the development of wells, aquifers are in a state of approximate dynamic equilibrium.”
PRE-DEVELOPMENT
R
D
Average recharge R = Average discharge D
Capture 8
CONCEPT OF CAPTUREPre-development Recharge and Discharge
Recharge:
Losing stream (LS)Underflow in (UI)Mountain front recharge (MFR
Discharge:Gaining stream (GS)Underflow out (UO)Evapotranspiration (ET)
Capture 9
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE“Discharge by wells is thus a new discharge superimposed upon a
previously stable system, and it must be balanced by an increase in recharge of the aquifer, or a decrease in the old natural discharge, or by a loss of storage in the aquifer, or by a combination of these.”
DEVELOPMENT
R+ΔR
D-ΔDQ
Stress Q is introduced
The system may respond in three different ways: increase in recharge R→R+ ΔR
decrease in discharge D→D ΔDchange in aquifer storage ΔS
Capture 10
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
There is a new equilibrium:
remembering
gives
the term ΔR+ΔD is called capture.
( ) ( ) SR R D D Q t
R D
SR D Q t
Capture 11
Reduced water table
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Stream
Evapotranspiration
Capture 12
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Capture 13
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Capture 14
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Capture 15
Capture 16
Nearly all water US Supreme Court cases in the western United States directly or indirectly involve issues of Capture.
• Arkansas • Pecos• Rio Grande• Republican• Platte• Colorado
Federal
Capture 17
State
Nearly all issues of interactions between ground and surface water involve Capture.
• Prior-Appropriation v Reasonable Use
• Conjunctive management
• Domestic wells
Capture 18
Capture 19
Capture Is Calculated with Models
• There will be a surface water model and a groundwater model.
• There will be a historical model and a base case model.
• The models will consist of control variables, state variables and parameters.
• There is no capture data values to compare or calibrate with calculated values.
Capture 20
MODEL CHARACTERISTICS
S Ariv
H HQ KWL
M
• Surface water model is usually an accounting model that matches stress periods of the groundwater model.
• Groundwater model is distributed parameter (Two or Three Dimensional). MODFLOW is an example.
• Interaction between surface and ground- waters if governed by Darcy’s law
Capture 21
HISTORICAL MODEL
• Attempts to match historical processes
• Can be calibrated with temporal and spatial data
• Used to demonstrate the viability, accuracy and robustness of the model
• Does not calculate capture.
Capture 22
BASE MODEL
• Based on little or no data
• May be fictional or artificial in nature
• May be the result of a negotiation process or imposed by the court
• Should be composed of the same physical based parameters as the historical model
Examples: Classical (Steady State), Seasonal (Steady Oscillatory), Complex (Constrained Process)
Capture 23
ClassicalSTEADY STATE
• The natural recharge and discharge are equal for all time periods (R=D)
• Time steps are annual
• There is no loss of groundwater storage
Capture 24
SeasonalSTEADY OSCILLATORY
• Like the steady state but recharge and discharge can vary from season-to-season but these variations are the same each year (Ri≠Di).
• There may be a storage loss or a storage gain each season but the total season storage loss plus the total seasonal storage gain is zero and .
i i
i i
R D
Capture 25
ComplexCONSTRAINED PROCESS
• Recharge and discharge may vary from time step to time step but are the same for both the base and historical models.
• Some process such as pumping or diversions is constrained and is different from the historical model.
Capture 26
Surface Water Model
Subtracting the historical streamflows from the base streamflows provides an estimate of surface water capture by groundwater pumping.
Groundwater ModelA capture is the increase to a previous [base-case] recharge and/or the decrease to a previous [base-case] discharge due to groundwater withdrawal from wells
Capture 27
Capture 28
Classical
Predevelopment Stream
Gaining Stream (GS)
inSF
preoutSF
Losing Stream (LS)
Pr eout inSF SF LSGS
Capture 29
Stream with Groundwater Development
Gaining Stream (GS-ΔGS)
inSF
deloutSF
Losing Stream (LS+ ΔLS)
delout inSF SF GS LSLGS S
Capture 30
Pr eout inSF SF LSGS
delout inSF SF GS LSLGS S
Thus the Capture Calculation is:
From
Subtract
Giving
Capture GS LS
Capture 31
Classical
Predevelopment Aquifer
Gaining Stream (GS)
Losing Stream (LS)
DischargRecharg e
UI LS
e
U GSMFR O
Underflow Out (UO)
Mountain Front Recharge (MFR)
Underflow In (UI)
Capture 32
Aquifer with Groundwater Development
Gaining Stream (GS-ΔGS)
Losing Stream (LS+ΔLS)
UOUI LS MFRLS GSS Q
S
t
G
Underflow Out (UO)
Mountain Front Recharge (MFR)
Underflow In (UI)
Well (Q)
Capture
Gt
QS
LS S
which becomes
Capture 33
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Capture 34
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
R D R+ΔR DΔD ΔR ΔD
Losing Stream Reaches 2.64 4.52 1.88
Mountain Front Recharge 17.33 17.33 0.00
Basin Inflow (from Mexico) 5.54 5.85 0.31
Gaining Stream Reaches 13.70 9.25 4.45
Evapotranspiration 10.91 7.97 2.94
Basin Outflow (to Benson Sub-Watershed) 0.90 0.90 0.00
Totals 25.51 25.51 27.70 18.12 2.19 7.39
Classical global capture (1980 values, Vionnet & Maddock)
Capture 35
CONCEPT OF CAPTUREFlow between stream and aquifer at selected locations
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Years
cfs
Near Palaminas Near Hereford Near lewis Springs Near Charl. Bridge
Capture 36
CONCEPT OF CAPTURE
Classical Capture From Stream Reaches (1980, Vionnet & Maddock)Steady State Transient States
Reach Losing Reach Gaining Reach Losing Reach Gaining Reach ΔR ΔD
1 0.621 0.016 0.605
2 0.106 0.462 0.356
3 0.076 0.719 0.643
4 0.162 0.680 0.680 0.162
5 0.635 0.540 0.540 0.635
6 0.924 0.351 0.351 0.924
7 0.677 0.210 0.467
8 0.548 0.277 0.271
9 0.164 0.068 0.096
10 0.027 0.430
Capture 37
Capture 38
STATE VARIABLES• Is a variable that describes the state of the
system (e.g. water levels, stream discharge, precipitation)
• Water managers have no direct control over state variables
Capture 39
CONTROL VARIABLES
• Is a variable that describes something that can be controlled (e.g. Well pumping, streamflow diversions)
Capture 40
PARAMETERS• Variable specified by the modeler and are
determine by the calibration process• Physically or scientifically based parameters –
Actual measurements• Calibration Factors – No measurements (or
bounds)• Calibration of the models’ physically based
parameters provides a measure of the natural error of the model.
• Calibration factors mask the natural error of the model and may improperly influence the Base Model
Capture 41
Capture 42
KANSAS v COLORADO
Capture 43
Crops
Riv
er
CanalEntity A
Entity B
Wells
Capture 44
Crops
Riv
er
Canal
Entity A
Entity B
Wells
Div
ersi
on
Red
uct
ion
Fac
tor
Capture 45
Crops
Riv
er
Canal
Entity A
Entity B
Wells
Div
ersi
on
Mag
nif
icat
ion
Fac
tor
Recommended