May 14, 2009

1

Placer County Water AgencyPlacer County Water AgencyMiddle Fork American River ProjectMiddle Fork American River Project

AQ 4 –AQ 4 – Temperature ModelingTemperature Modeling(Status Report)(Status Report)

May 14, 2009May 14, 2009

2

Progress ReportProgress Report Recap of Upper MF applicationRecap of Upper MF application MF – Interbay to RalstonMF – Interbay to Ralston

Geometry Geometry FlowFlow TemperatureTemperature

RubiconRubicon Geometry Geometry FlowFlow TemperatureTemperature

MF – Below RalstonMF – Below Ralston Progress Progress ScheduleSchedule

3

Recap of Upper MF applicationRecap of Upper MF application

Continued to refine modelContinued to refine model Updated flowsUpdated flows ResultsResults

4

Temperature Modeling Approach: Temperature Modeling Approach: RecapRecap

Low Flows: < 10 cfs in upper Low Flows: < 10 cfs in upper reachesreaches

Model Features Model Features Habitat type cross sectionsHabitat type cross sections Pool Volume below Stage of Zero FlowPool Volume below Stage of Zero Flow Bed conductionBed conduction Topographic shadingTopographic shading Riparian shadingRiparian shading Terrestrial long-wave radiationTerrestrial long-wave radiation Groundwater accretionGroundwater accretion

5

MF American Below French Meadows MF2-MF American Below French Meadows MF2-RM46.6RM46.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 141 191 241 291

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 36Meas_MF2

0

5

10

15

20

25

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 36Meas_MF2

0.700.720.86

4388

Mean BiasMean absolute error (MAE)

Root mean squared error (RMSE)COUNT

6

MF American Below French Meadows MF2-MF American Below French Meadows MF2-RM46.6RM46.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 141 191 241 291

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 36Meas_MF2

0.700.720.86

4388



0

5

10

15

20

25

220 222 224 226 228 230

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 36Meas_MF2168 per. Mov. Avg. (Sim_Node 36)168 per. Mov. Avg. (Meas_MF2)

7

MF American MF 12-RM44.6MF American MF 12-RM44.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 174Meas_MF12

0

5

10

15

20

25

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.381.081.32

4388



8

MF American MF 12-RM44.6MF American MF 12-RM44.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.381.081.32

4388



0

5

10

15

20

25

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


9

MF American MF 11-RM39.4 (above Duncan MF American MF 11-RM39.4 (above Duncan Cr)Cr)

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0

5

10

15

20

25

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0.001.261.57

4388



10

MF American MF 11-RM39.4 (above Duncan MF American MF 11-RM39.4 (above Duncan Cr)Cr)

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0.001.261.57

4388



0

5

10

15

20

25

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


11

MF American MF 3-RM36.1 (above Interbay)MF American MF 3-RM36.1 (above Interbay)

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0

5

10

15

20

25

220 222 224 226 228 230

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.190.831.03

4388



12

MF American MF 3-RM36.1 (above Interbay)MF American MF 3-RM36.1 (above Interbay)

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.190.831.03

4388



0

5

10

15

20

25

220 222 224 226 228 230

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


13

Middle Fork American – Interbay to Middle Fork American – Interbay to RalstonRalston

RepresentationRepresentation GeometryGeometry FlowFlow TemperatureTemperature

14

Middle Fork American – Interbay to Middle Fork American – Interbay to RalstonRalston

Interbay

Ralston

15

Middle Fork American – Interbay to Middle Fork American – Interbay to Ralston: GeometryRalston: Geometry

Profile (25 meter node spacing)Plan (UTM Coordinates)

4315400

4317400

4319400

4321400

4323400

4325400

4327400

4329400

695000 697000 699000 701000 703000 705000 707000 709000

RiverRM (from Ralston)

Ralston

Interbay Reservoir

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

050100150200250300350400450500550600650700

Node No. (25 m)

Ele

vatio

n, m

River Profile

RM (from Ralston)

Interbay Reservoir

Ralston

16

Middle Fork American – Interbay to Middle Fork American – Interbay to Ralston: HabitatRalston: Habitat

Habitat % Habitat BreakHGR 20.2%LGR 5.9%RUN 26.2%

POOL 41.8%CAS* 5.9%

*Cascades were assumed as HGR.

-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

- 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Wetted Area, ft 2̂

Sta

ge

, ft

POOL

RUN

LGR

HGR

17

Flow Flow

Inflows to InterbayInflows to Interbay MFMF Hell Hole Reservoir (HH-MF Tunnel)Hell Hole Reservoir (HH-MF Tunnel) AccretionAccretion

Outflows from Interbay Outflows from Interbay MFMF Ralston TunnelRalston Tunnel

Change in storage – assumed Change in storage – assumed zerozero

18

TemperatureTemperature

Three monitoring locations Three monitoring locations between Interbay Dam and between Interbay Dam and RalstonRalston RM35.5 (MF4)RM35.5 (MF4) RM29.4 (MF13)RM29.4 (MF13) RM26.0 (MF10)RM26.0 (MF10)

Time series from May - SeptemberTime series from May - September Graphical and statistical performance measuresGraphical and statistical performance measures

4315400

4317400

4319400

4321400

4323400

4325400

4327400

4329400

695000 697000 699000 701000 703000 705000 707000 709000

UTM-X Coordinates

UT

M-Y

Coo

rdin

ates

River

RM(from Ralston)MF4 Tw Station_RM35.5

MF13 Tw Station_RM29.4MF10 Tw Station_RM26.0

19

MFAR (Interbay-Ralston) MF4-RM35.5MFAR (Interbay-Ralston) MF4-RM35.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

91 141 191 241 291

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 5Meas_MF4

0

5

10

15

20

25

182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189

JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Sim_Node 5Meas_MF4

-0.520.771.01

4392



20


0

5

10

15

20

25

91 111 131 151 171 191 211 231 251 271 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0

5

10

15

20

25

182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.161.161.37

4392



21


0

5

10

15

20

25

182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


0

5

10

15

20

25

91 141 191 241 291JDAY (2007)

Tem

pera

ture

, C


-0.981.531.84

4392



22

Rubicon RiverRubicon River

Implementation assumptionsImplementation assumptions Flow: from Hell Hole Reservoir Flow: from Hell Hole Reservoir

simulationsimulation Water temperatures: from Hell Hole Water temperatures: from Hell Hole

Reservoir simulationReservoir simulation Relationship to span alluviumRelationship to span alluvium

23

Rubicon model representationRubicon model representation

4308000

4310000

4312000

4314000

4316000

4318000

4320000

4322000

4324000

4326000

695000 700000 705000 710000 715000 720000 725000

x

y

Upper Rubicon

Middle Rubicon

Lower Rubicon

RM

RM 3.62RM 24.69

RM 28.8

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000

Distance from RM 0 (m)

Ele

vati

on

(m

)

24

Rubicon habitat type Rubicon habitat type distributiondistribution

HabitatHabitat

Habitat break

Upper Middle Lower

Total % of Rubicon River

POOL 4% 31% 6% 41%

RUN 2% 14% 3% 20%

LGR 2% 3% 1% 6%

HGR 2% 17% 2% 21%

NOXSEC - 10% 1% 12%

Reach % of Total Rubicon River 11% 76% 13% 100%

Note:

a) NOXSEC were assumed as HGR

b) Values rounded to whole percentages

25

Upper Rubicon: HabitatUpper Rubicon: Habitat

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Wetted area (ft2)

Sta

ge

(ft)

POOL

RUN

LGR

HGR

Habitat % Habitat break

POOL 39%

RUN 21%

LGR 20%

HGR 16%

NOXSEC 4%

Total 100%

26

Middle Rubicon: HabitatMiddle Rubicon: Habitat


POOL 41%

RUN 19%

LGR 4%

HGR 23%

NOXSEC 13

Total 100%

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Wetted area (ft2)

Sta

ge

(ft)

POOL

RUN

LGR

HGR

27

Lower Rubicon: HabitatLower Rubicon: Habitat


POOL 50%

RUN 23%

LGR 8%

HGR 13%

NOXSEC 6%

Total 100%

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Wetted area (ft2)

Sta

ge

(ft)

POOL

RUN

LGR

HGR

28

Temperature stationsTemperature stations

RR 3.7

RR 0.7

RR 5.3

RR 14.3

RR 22.5

RR 22.7

RR 25.3

RR 28.8

29

Rubicon River Boundary Rubicon River Boundary ConditionsConditions

4324000

4324500

4325000

4325500

4326000

4326500

721500 722000 722500 723000 723500 724000 724500

UTM-X Coordinates

UT

M-Y

Coo

rdin

ates

River

RR2

RR3

30


-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1/1/06 2/20/06 4/11/06 5/31/06 7/20/06 9/8/06 10/28/06 12/17/06

Tem

pera

ture

, oC

0

6

12

18

24

30

36

42

48

54

60

66

Flo

w, c

ms

RR2RR3Sim HH outflow TwRR3-HHSpillRelease

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1/1/07 2/20/07 4/11/07 5/31/07 7/20/07 9/8/07 10/28/07 12/17/07

Tem

pera

ture

, oC

0

6

12

18

24

30

36

42

48

54

60

66

Flo

w, c

ms

RR2RR3Sim HH outflow TwRR3-HHSpillRelease

RR 30.2RR28.8

RR 30.2RR28.8

31


Objective: Estimate appropriate boundary condition in Objective: Estimate appropriate boundary condition in alluvial section at headwater under spill and non-spill alluvial section at headwater under spill and non-spill condition. condition. Headwater of the Rubicon River model was placed at RR28.8 Headwater of the Rubicon River model was placed at RR28.8

because of the dry alluvial reach upstream.because of the dry alluvial reach upstream. Develop dual criteria to provide river inflow temperature Develop dual criteria to provide river inflow temperature

boundary conditionboundary condition When Hell Hole Dam is spilling:When Hell Hole Dam is spilling:

1.1. RR28.8 Tw is similar to Hell Hole spill Tw – Large flows RR28.8 Tw is similar to Hell Hole spill Tw – Large flows overwhelm small releases from the dam and short transit time overwhelm small releases from the dam and short transit time yields minimum opportunity for heating.yields minimum opportunity for heating.

2.2. Potential lag effect at RR28.8 Tw – Due to the spill filling Potential lag effect at RR28.8 Tw – Due to the spill filling alluvium and then slowly released.alluvium and then slowly released.

When Hell Hole Dam is not spilling:When Hell Hole Dam is not spilling:1.1. Between RR30.2 and RR28.8, Tw difference of about 2Between RR30.2 and RR28.8, Tw difference of about 2

ooF in F in

June. It diminishes to nearly 0June. It diminishes to nearly 0ooF by October 1F by October 1stst..

Linear relationship assumed from terminus of spill to mid-Linear relationship assumed from terminus of spill to mid-OctoberOctober

32

Model Temperature Boundary Model Temperature Boundary Condition: HeadwaterCondition: Headwater

5

6

7

8

9

10

7/17/07 7/19/07 7/21/07 7/23/07 7/25/07 7/27/07 7/29/07 7/31/07 8/2/07 8/4/07 8/6/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

RR3 Obs

5

6

7

8

9

10

5/1/07 5/21/07 6/10/07 6/30/07 7/20/07 8/9/07 8/29/07 9/18/07

Date - Time

Wa

ter

tem

pe

ratu

re (

o C)

RR3 Obs

33

Temperature: RR 25.3Temperature: RR 25.3

Mean Bias -0.41

Mean absolute error (MAE) 1.37

Root mean squared error (RMSE) 1.74

COUNT 4391

0

5

10

15

20

5/1/07 5/21/07 6/10/07 6/30/07 7/20/07 8/9/07 8/29/07 9/18/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 228

Obs - RR 25.3

0

5

10

15

20

7/17/07 7/19/07 7/21/07 7/23/07 7/25/07 7/27/07 7/29/07 7/31/07 8/2/07 8/4/07 8/6/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 228

Obs - RR 25.3

34

Mean Bias -0.75



COUNT 4391

Temperature: RR 22.7Temperature: RR 22.7

0

5

10

15

20

7/17/07 7/19/07 7/21/07 7/23/07 7/25/07 7/27/07 7/29/07 7/31/07 8/2/07 8/4/07 8/6/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 397

Obs - RR 22.7

0

5

10

15

20

5/1/07 5/21/07 6/10/07 6/30/07 7/20/07 8/9/07 8/29/07 9/18/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 397

Obs - RR 22.7

35

Mean Bias -0.42



COUNT 4391

Temperature RR 22.5Temperature RR 22.5

0

5

10

15

20

5/1/07 5/21/07 6/10/07 6/30/07 7/20/07 8/9/07 8/29/07 9/18/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 410

Obs - RR 22.5

0

5

10

15

20

7/17/07 7/19/07 7/21/07 7/23/07 7/25/07 7/27/07 7/29/07 7/31/07 8/2/07 8/4/07 8/6/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 410

Obs - RR 22.5

36

Mean Bias -1.02



COUNT 4391

Temperature RR 14.3Temperature RR 14.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

5/1/07 5/21/07 6/10/07 6/30/07 7/20/07 8/9/07 8/29/07 9/18/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 942

Obs - RR 14.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

7/17/07 7/19/07 7/21/07 7/23/07 7/25/07 7/27/07 7/29/07 7/31/07 8/2/07 8/4/07 8/6/07

Date - Time

Wat

er te

mpe

ratu

re (o

C)

Sim - Node 942

Obs - RR 14.3

37

Lower MF American RiverLower MF American River

Geometry FileGeometry File Flow FilesFlow Files Temperature FilesTemperature Files

38

River Modeling StatusRiver Modeling Status

Successful implementation of several Successful implementation of several temperature components important to temperature components important to small streamssmall streams

Effectively modeled small flowsEffectively modeled small flows Limitations based on available system Limitations based on available system

representationrepresentation Rubicon test case suggests good model Rubicon test case suggests good model

performance as wellperformance as well Model sensitivity testing provides insight Model sensitivity testing provides insight

on boundary conditions, model on boundary conditions, model parameters, system responseparameters, system response

39

Next StepsNext Steps

Assess objective of flow and Assess objective of flow and temperature modeling on individual temperature modeling on individual reachesreaches

Implement modeling method globally Implement modeling method globally throughout project area and formally throughout project area and formally calibrate modelscalibrate models

40

ProgressProgress

Upper Basin River model testingUpper Basin River model testing Upper MF American – Test Reach: draft Upper MF American – Test Reach: draft

calibrationcalibration Upper MF American – Interbay to Upper MF American – Interbay to

Ralston: precalibration Ralston: precalibration Rubicon River: precalibrationRubicon River: precalibration

Lower Basin model implementation: Lower Basin model implementation: startedstarted

41

Estimated ScheduleEstimated Schedule

Upper Basin River model calibration (May-Upper Basin River model calibration (May-June)June) Upper MF American – Test Reach Upper MF American – Test Reach Upper MF American – Interbay to RalstonUpper MF American – Interbay to Ralston Rubicon RiverRubicon River

Ralston calibration (June)Ralston calibration (June) Lower American River model calibration Lower American River model calibration

(July)(July) Overall system calibration refinement Overall system calibration refinement

(July/August)(July/August)

42

Rubicon RiverRubicon River

Documents

May 14, 2009