estimating groundwater recharge using the oklahoma mesonet sam wallace undergraduate, osu dept....
TRANSCRIPT
Estimating Groundwater Recharge Using the Oklahoma Mesonet
Sam WallaceUndergraduate, OSU Dept. Environmental Science
Dr. Tyson OchsnerAssistant Professor of Soil Physics, OSU Dept. Plant and Soil
Sciences
Source: Oklahoma Water Atlas, 1983
Groundwater Monitoring
• USGS monitoring wells/streamflow gauges– Real-time monitoring wells– Daily groundwater monitoring– Real-time stream flow gauges
• Water Table Fluctuation Method• Water Budget Method
Groundwater Recharge Evaluation through Soil Moisture
• Established statewide monitoring network• Long history of monitoring (since 1994)• Soil moisture monitoring at 5, 25, and 60 cm
Our Study
• Five Mesonet stations: Acme, El Reno, Fittstown, Shawnee, Spencer
• Chosen for availability of both soil moisture sensors and groundwater wells.
Methods• Mesonet temperature
reference values converted to matric potential
• Soil hydraulic parameters calculated using ROSETTA
Source: Illston et al., 2008
Methods• Volumetric Water Content
• Effective Saturation
• Hydraulic Conductivity
• Buckingham-Darcy Equation
)1(*)( dz
dhSeKq
Where:•q= water flux- groundwater recharge•K(Se)= hydraulic conductivity•Se= water content•h= matric potential•z= depth•θ(h) = volumetric water content θr = residual water contentθs =saturated water contentα = fitting parameter n = a measure of the pore-size distribution •K0 = a fitting matching point at saturation •L = empirical parameter
nn
rsr
h
h1
1))*(1(
)(
rs
re
hS
)(
21
1)1/(0 ))1(1(**)( nnn
eLee SSKSK
Results
StationPrecip.
(P)Drainage
(D) D/PAquifer
Prior R/P Reference
mm mm % %
Acme 768 77 10 Rush Springs 10 Tanaka and Davis (1963)
El Reno 817 42 5.1 N. Canadian 4.7 Daniel (1999)
Fittstown 917 97 11 Arbuckle-Simpson
12-14 Fairchild et al. (1990)Christenson et al. (2011)
Shawnee 864 28 3.2 Garber-Wellington
5-10 Wood and Burton (1968)Carr and Marcher (1977)
Spencer 895 108 12 Garber-Wellington
5-10 Wood and Burton (1968)Carr and Marcher (1977)
Mean 852 70 8.3 8.5
Table 1: Mean annual precipitation (P), drainage at 60 cm (D), and the ratio D/P for five Mesonet stations using data from 1999 through 2011. For comparison, prior estimates of the ratio of groundwater recharge (R) to P are also shown.
Results
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
-45.00
-44.50
-44.00
-43.50
-43.00
ACME Groundwater Recharge and Mean Daily Groundwater Well Levels for the 2005 Water Year
Daily
Dra
inag
e (m
m)
Mea
n Da
ily D
epth
to W
ater
Tab
le (ft
)
10/1/2
006
10/11/2
006
10/21/2
006
10/31/2
006
11/10/2
006
11/20/2
006
11/30/2
006
12/10/2
006
12/20/2
006
12/30/2
006
1/9/2
007
1/19/2
007
1/29/2
007
2/8/2
007
2/18/2
007
2/28/2
007
3/10/2
007
3/20/2
007
3/30/2
007
4/9/2
007
4/19/2
007
4/29/2
007
5/9/2
007
5/19/2
007
5/29/2
007
6/8/2
007
6/18/2
007
6/28/2
007
7/8/2
007
7/18/2
007
7/28/2
007
8/7/2
007
8/17/2
007
8/27/2
007
9/6/2
007
9/16/2
007
9/26/2
0070
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
-140.0
-120.0
-100.0
-80.0
-60.0
-40.0
-20.0
0.0
FITT Groundwater Recharge and Mean Daily Groundwater Well Levels for the 2007 Water Year
Daily
Dra
inag
e (m
m)
Mea
n Da
ily D
epth
to W
ater
Tab
le (ft
)
Discussion
• Limitations in this new method– No upward water flow– Time lag varies with site, weather
• Promising results– Comparable to historical averages– Calculated drainage events
correspond to observed water table rises
• As always, further research needed– Does this method work in the
extremes of the state?– Mechanics of time lag
Source: Wikimedia
AcknowledgementsI would like to thank the following sponsors:•Oklahoma State University Freshman Research Scholars Program•Oklahoma State University Wentz Research Project•EPA Greater Research Opportunities for Undergraduates Fellowship