John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Two Example Ground Water Mounding Situations John L. Nieber Department of Biosystems.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Yhd Subsurface Hydrology

Advertisements

Ground Water Mounding & P Evaluations

Drainage Setback Tables Minnesota Wetlands Conference January 30, 2013

Groundwater Mounding and Minnesota ISTS Rules MPCA 2/21/06.

Bliss Area Sewage System Groundwater Monitoring Pete Ganzel Washington County Department of Public Health & Environment.

Roamingwood Wellhead Protection Capture Zone Prepared by: Mr. Brian Oram, PG, MS Mr. Bill Toothill, MS Wilkes University Geo Environmental Sciences and.

Conductivity Testing of Unsaturated Soils A Presentation to the Case Western Reserve University May 6, 2004 By Andrew G. Heydinger Department of Civil.

STABILITY ANALYSIS IN PRESENCE OF WATER Pore pressures Rainfall Steady state flow and transient flow.

z = -50 cm, ψ = -100 cm, h = z + ψ = -50cm cm = -150 cm Which direction will water flow? 25 cm define z = 0 at soil surface h = z + ψ = cm.

Minnesota Watershed Nitrogen Reduction Planning Tool William Lazarus Department of Applied Economics University of Minnesota David Mulla Department of.

UW LID Workshop Bioretention Flow Control Modeling May 2008

Chapter 4- Leaky Aquifers

Oak Hill Case Soil Physical Problems. Poor Drainage Surface Drainage Reflects the ease with which water can move downslope. Reflects access to catch.

Runoff Processes Reading: Applied Hydrology Sections 5.6 to 5.8 and Chapter 6 for Tuesday of next week.

Influence of Groundwater flows on Wetland Restoration Project at Juniper Bay Swamy Pati Bio. & Ag. Engineering Dept., NCSU SSC Wetland Soils Term.

SCOPE & EFFECT EQUATIONS Chapter 7

Ground-Water Flow and Solute Transport for the PHAST Simulator Ken Kipp and David Parkhurst.

Improved Soil Moisture Variability in CLM 3.5 Sean Swenson NCAR Advanced Study Program in collaboration with Keith Oleson and David Lawrence.

By Saleh A. Al-Hassoun Associate Professor Department of Civil Engineering College of Engineering King Saud University Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Life Impact The University of Adelaide Water Balance and the Influence of Soil Structural Changes on Final.

HYDRUS_1D Sensitivity Analysis Limin Yang Department of Biological Engineering Sciences Washington State University.

Engineering Hydrology (ECIV 4323)

A Process-Based Transfer Function Approach to Model Tile Drain Hydrographs Mazdak Arabi, Jennifer Schmidt and Rao S. Govindaraju World Water & Environmental.

Groundwater Hydraulics Daene C. McKinney

Water Systems Mrs. Bader. Water Systems In this exercise, you will learn more about what makes up a watershed, track the movement of water through the.

Uses of Modeling A model is designed to represent reality in such a way that the modeler can do one of several things: –Quickly estimate certain aspects.

1 GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY AND CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT CEVE 518 P.C. de Blanc C.J. Newell 1.Porosity and Density Continued 2.Saturation and Water Content 3.Darcy.

Garey A. Fox, Ph.D., P.E., Derek M. Heeren, Michael A. Kizer, Ph.D. Oklahoma State University Evaluation of Alluvial Well Depletion Analytical Solutions.

Unit 01 : Advanced Hydrogeology Review of Groundwater Flow Malcolm Reeves Civil and Geological Engineering.

Predicting Vapor Intrusion Risks in the Presence of Soil Heterogeneities and Anthropogenic Preferential Pathways Brown University Ozgur Bozkurt, Kelly.

International Groundwater Modeling Center Colorado School of Mines

Rush River Assessment Project Hydrologic Flow Study Sibley County SWCD Presentation to the Minnesota River Research Forum March 10, 2005.

What Can Models Tell Us About On-Site Systems? David Radcliffe & Larry West University of Georgia Presented at the On-Site Wastewater Treatment Conference.

“Soil Wetness Modeling Rules for Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems in North Carolina” by Barrett L. Kays, Ph.D., NCCHS Steven Berkowitz, P.E., NCDENR.

CE 394K.2 Hydrology Infiltration Reading AH Sec 5.1 to 5.5 Some slides were prepared by Venkatesh Merwade Slides 2-6 come from

Unsaturated-Zone Case Study at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory: Can Darcian Hydraulic Properties Predict Contaminant Migration?

GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION. IMPORTANCE OF GROUND WATER Approximately 99 percent of all liquid fresh water is in underground aquifers At least a quarter.

Ground Water. Makes up 0.397% of Earth’s Water. - song.

Drainage Management for Water Quality and Crop Production Benefits Don Pitts Agricultural Engineer NRCS USDA Champaign, IL.

DRAINMOD APPLICATION ABE 527 Computer Models in Environmental and Natural Resources.

Miami. Miami: Climate Miami’s client is similar to Houston in several ways. It has one of the highest levels of rainfall of any major U.S. city. It receives.

Groundwater & Wetlands

ATM 301 Lecture #7 (sections ) Soil Water Movements – Darcy’s Law and Richards Equation.

Estimating Groundwater Recharge in Porous Media Aquifers in Texas Bridget Scanlon Kelley Keese Robert Reedy Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of.

Conclusions The states of the surface and root zoon soil moisture are considered as key variables controlling surface water and energy balances. Force-restore.

Final Project I. Calibration Drawdown Prediction Particle Tracking

CE 3354 Engineering Hydrology Lecture 21: Groundwater Hydrology Concepts – Part 1 1.

(Z&B) Steps in Transport Modeling Calibration step (calibrate flow & transport model) Adjust parameter values Design conceptual model Assess uncertainty.

6. Drainage basins and runoff mechanisms Drainage basins Drainage basins The vegetation factor The vegetation factor Sources of runoff Sources of runoff.

Groundwater Systems D Nagesh Kumar, IISc Water Resources Planning and Management: M8L3 Water Resources System Modeling.

4.6 INTRODUCING ‘SWAM’ (SOIL WATER ACCOUNTING MODEL)

Simulation of the Dynamics of Surface Water-Groundwater Interactions in a Coastal Environment During a 25-Year/72- Hour Storm by SWIM20 Meeting (2008)

CE 3354 Engineering Hydrology Lecture 2: Surface and Groundwater Hydrologic Systems.

 Water Quality Variability in a Bioswell and Concrete Drainage Pipe, Southwest Lincoln, Nebraska Jessica Shortino, B.S. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

1. CHAPTER 3 SUB-SURFACE DRAINAGE THEORY ERNST EQUATION 2.

Soil wetting patterns under porous clay pipe subsurface irrigation A. A. Siyal 1 and T. H. Skaggs 2 1 Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam, Sindh, Pakistan.

R.A. Chavez | G.O. Brown LRGV Stormwater– South Padre Island May 18, 2016 The Impact of Variable Hydraulic Conductivity on Bioretention Cell Performance.

Near-surface Geologic Environments

Development and Application of a Groundwater-Flow Model of the Atlantic Coastal Plain aquifers, Aiken County, South Carolina to Support Water Resource.

The Institute of Hydrology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences,

Methods Used to Determine Hydraulic Conductivity

The Calibration Process

CON 101 Waters Frank Smith ><<{{{(‘>

Uses of Modeling A model is designed to represent reality in such a way that the modeler can do one of several things: Quickly estimate certain aspects.

Image courtesy of NASA/GSFC

Dewatering Solutions using MODFLOW

Quiz 7 Answers 1. Soil A has a Ksat value of 8 cm/h, Soil B has a Ksat value of cm/h, and Soil C is shallow and rocky and has a Ksat value of.

Mathematical modeling techniques in the engineering of landfill sites.

(1) Amphos 21 Consulting S.L. (2) Grupo Tragsa - SEPI, Spain.

Hydrogeology of Ledgeview

Presentation transcript:

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Two Example Ground Water Mounding Situations John L. Nieber Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering University of Minnesota

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Model Evaluation of Auxiliary Drainage for On- Site Septic Systems John L. Nieber and David M. Gustafson Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Dept. James L. Anderson Soil, Water and Climate Dept. Originally presented at the 8 th National Drainage Symposium American Society of Agricultural Engineers Orlando, Florida March 1998

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum What are Auxiliary Drainage Systems for On-Sites? Drainage system used to lower water table when the water table is higher than allowed by health code (Minnesota requires a 3’ separation distance) Viable (hopefully) alternative to use of mound designs Significantly less expensive than mound designs

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Are Auxiliary Drainage Systems Effective? Field experiments are being conducted for various soil and climate conditions to test this question (in Minnesota and elsewhere) Some modeling has been done; mostly with Boussinesq equation formulations

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Objectives of Current Study Experimentally test effectiveness of an auxiliary drainage system on the performance of an on-site system located in east-central Minnesota Test a model of water flow in the soil at the experimental site and compare measured water table levels with simulated water table levels

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Experimental Site Located near Waverly, Minnesota; in the east-central part of the state For a private home with family of four Septic system designed for 450 gpd Water table within 1-2 feet of disposal trench prior to placement of auxiliary drainage system

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Trenches Tile drain Solid pipe to county ditch Piez. #5 Piez. #6 Piez. #3 Piez. #4 Piez. #1 Piez. #2 Well # m 30.5 m 3.1 m3.1 m 1,000 gal septic tank Drop boxes Home

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 0.45 m 4.0 m 1.56 m 0.95 m V V Piezometers Rainfall/ET Boundary Drain Tile Wastewater Trenches Natural Boundary

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Field Site Location

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Field Site Location

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Day since January 1, D a i l y R a i n f a l l ( m m ) Winter 95/96 Winter 96/9 7

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Days since January 1, W a t e r T a b l e D e p t h ( m ) Winter 95/96 Winter 96/97 Piezometers between trench; average Piezometers next to drain; average Piezometer #7 Depth required Minnesota code

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Simulation Model Based on dual-porosity concept for variably saturated porous media Equations for each pore domain (matrix and macropores) described by a Richards’ equation; these equations are coupled Considers plant transpiration, vapor movement in the soil and soil evaporation Finite element solution in two-dimensions

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Volumetric Water Content (m 3 / m 3 ) C a p i l l a r y P r e s s u r e ( m ) Ap Horizon Ab Horizon Bt Horizon Bk Horizon C Horizon

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 1E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+1 Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity (m/day ) C a p i l l a r y P r e s s u r e ( m ) Ap Horizon Ab Horizon Bt Horizon Bk Horizon C Horizon

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Days since January 1, W a t e r T a b l e D e p t h ( m ) Winter 95/96 Winter 96/97 Piezometer between trenches Piezometer next to drain Depth required Minnesota code Without Evapotranspiration

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Days since January 1, W a t e r T a b l e D e p t h ( m ) Winter 95/96 Winter 96/97 Piezometer between trenches Piezometer next to drain Depth required Minnesota code With Evapotranspiration

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Days since January 1, W a t e r T a b l e D e p t h ( m ) Winter 95/96 Winter 96/97 Piezometers between trench; average Piezometers next to drain; average Piezometer #7 Depth required Minnesota code Measured

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Limitations The State Code ignores the unsaturated part of the profile; impact will depend on soil type We considered only flow in the soil matrix; macropore flow may be important for some conditions Did not examine chemical transport and transformations

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Ground Water Mounding Beneath a Stormwater Basin Study conducted in Washington Co. by Emmons & Olivier Associates Results presented here are from a report to the MPCA and also from the M.S. thesis (May 2005) of Jennifer Olson.

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum CD-P85 Natural infiltration basin 30 acres in extent 29 feet deep Outwash material 7 wells Pump station links CD-P85 with City stormwater system

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Topographic characteristic of CD-P85

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum X-section through CD-P85

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Sample infiltration curves for CD-P85

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Monitoring well locations near CD-P85

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Water levels during 2002 in CD-P85

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Water levels in monitoring wells near CD-P85 Note the two scales for water levels

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Models Used for Simulations Hantush mounding model – simple analytical model, most common ground water mounding equation Multi Layer Analytic Element Model (MLAEM) – has been used at this site in past, regional flow model in TCMA FEMWATER – unsaturated/saturated flow model, recommended in literature for complex systems

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Model Input Identical parameters used when applicable Measured parameters –Recharge area, recharge rate, duration (transient vs. steady state models), depth to water table, saturated thickness, initial ground water elevation, bedrock elevation, nearby lake elevations Literature value (unknown) parameters –Saturated hydraulic conductivity (calibrated model, slug test) –Porosity (effective and fillable) –Unsaturated flow characteristics Used first dataset (July 2002) to determine unknown parameters

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Model Input (July event)

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum MLAEM

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Hantush Equation

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Hantush

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum FEMWATER

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Initial Model Result Comparison

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Model Selection Sum of square differences MLAEM model – closest to observed values –Unable to calibrate porosity and Ksat to desired accuracy – steady state Hantush model – second best –Calibration parameters include Ksat and porosity – most variable and unknown parameters

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Calibrated Model (Hantush)

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Some WSAS Mounding Effects Analysis performed with COMSOL MP3.2 Finite Element Solution of the Richards Equation

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Vertical section showing five leach trenches and a perching layer

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 120 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K perch layer = 0.28 feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 120 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K perch layer = 0.28 feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 18 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K perch layer = feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 7 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K perch layer = feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 246 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K perch layer = 2.8 feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum 175 gallons/day/foot; K s = 2.8 feet/day K ellipses = 0.28 feet/day

John L. Nieber Biosystems and Ag. Eng. Feb. 21, 2006 GW Mounding Forum Summary Low perm layers do not need to be continuous to affect septic infiltration rate Perm of low perm layer (ft/day) Infiltration (gal/ft/day) ellipses175