Groundwater Modelling Advice - Revision history

Anne.Kolega: /* How can interflow behaviour be better aligned with observed conditions? */ changed XDMF to XMDF

2026-02-23T03:14:02Z

How can interflow behaviour be better aligned with observed conditions?: changed XDMF to XMDF

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:14, 23 February 2026
Line 128:		Line 128:
	* Ensuring groundwater inputs and outputs are balanced is key.		* Ensuring groundwater inputs and outputs are balanced is key.
	* Comparing groundwater accumulation areas with surface water flooding can help verify results.		* Comparing groundwater accumulation areas with surface water flooding can help verify results.
	* Using the groundwater ~~XDMF~~ output can assist in visualising flow behaviour and refining parameter selection.		* Using the groundwater XMDF output can assist in visualising flow behaviour and refining parameter selection.

	Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.		Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.

Tuflowduncan: /* Python */

2025-12-03T14:56:16Z

Python

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:56, 4 December 2025
Line 22:		Line 22:

	=== Python ===		=== Python ===
	The following python code can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D.		The following python code, also available [https://gitlab.com/tuflow-user-group/tuflow/data-pre-processing/orifice_depth_discharge/-/blob/main/Orifice_Depth_Discharge_Curve.py here], can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D.

	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>

Tuflowduncan: /* How should peat soils be represented in a direct rainfall model? */

2025-12-03T10:05:57Z

How should peat soils be represented in a direct rainfall model?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 3 December 2025
Line 73:		Line 73:

	== How should peat soils be represented in a direct rainfall model? ==		== How should peat soils be represented in a direct rainfall model? ==
	If observed flow data is available, calibrating the model to these measurements would be the best approach. If not, using ~~ReFH2~~ as a comparison for flow estimates is recommended. Since peat is often saturated, infiltration rates may be low, but lateral water movement could still occur. In this case, using the interflow functionality in TUFLOW may help better represent water movement within the catchment.		If observed flow data is available, calibrating the model to these measurements would be the best approach. If not, using a lumped hydrology model as a comparison for flow estimates is recommended. Since peat is often saturated, infiltration rates may be low, but lateral water movement could still occur. In this case, using the interflow functionality in TUFLOW may help better represent water movement within the catchment.

	== How can a French drain (filter drain) be represented? ==		== How can a French drain (filter drain) be represented? ==

Pavlina Monhartova: /* Why does the groundwater lateral flux calculation include porosity, and what changes are planned? */

2025-09-03T07:31:05Z

Why does the groundwater lateral flux calculation include porosity, and what changes are planned?

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:31, 3 September 2025
Line 132:		Line 132:
	Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.		Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.

	== Why does the groundwater lateral flux calculation include porosity~~, and what changes are planned~~? ==		== Why does the groundwater lateral flux calculation include porosity? ==
	Benchmarking tests have identified that the current sub surface flow equation in TUFLOW underestimates steady state discharge rates due to the inclusion of porosity. While the steady state water level gradient is correct, transient state simulations show discrepancies.		Benchmarking tests have identified that the current sub surface flow equation in TUFLOW underestimates steady state discharge rates due to the inclusion of porosity. While the steady state water level gradient is correct, transient state simulations show discrepancies.

Pavlina Monhartova: /* Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) */

2025-09-03T01:49:43Z

Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:49, 3 September 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:

	= Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) =		= Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) =
	'''<font size=3><font color=red>This section is under construction</font></font>'''<br>

	Since the 2025.2.0 release, TUFLOW supports connecting the 1D domain (either ESTRY or SWMM) to 2D groundwater layers. This enables users to model features such as detention basins with subsurface drainage or other green infrastructure directly within a TUFLOW model and represent groundwater and surface water impacts. The physical infrastructure collecting the groundwater varies, but is typically a perforated or slotted pipe in loose fill such as gravel or sand.		Since the 2025.2.0 release, TUFLOW supports connecting the 1D domain (either ESTRY or SWMM) to 2D groundwater layers. This enables users to model features such as detention basins with subsurface drainage or other green infrastructure directly within a TUFLOW model and represent groundwater and surface water impacts. The physical infrastructure collecting the groundwater varies, but is typically a perforated or slotted pipe in loose fill such as gravel or sand.

Emilie Nielsen: /* Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) */

2025-08-18T05:13:51Z

Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:13, 18 August 2025
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Since the 2025.2.0 release, TUFLOW supports connecting the 1D domain (either ESTRY or SWMM) to 2D groundwater layers. This enables users to model features such as detention basins with subsurface drainage or other green infrastructure directly within a TUFLOW model and represent groundwater and surface water impacts. The physical infrastructure collecting the groundwater varies, but is typically a perforated or slotted pipe in loose fill such as gravel or sand.		Since the 2025.2.0 release, TUFLOW supports connecting the 1D domain (either ESTRY or SWMM) to 2D groundwater layers. This enables users to model features such as detention basins with subsurface drainage or other green infrastructure directly within a TUFLOW model and represent groundwater and surface water impacts. The physical infrastructure collecting the groundwater varies, but is typically a perforated or slotted pipe in loose fill such as gravel or sand.

	The discharge through the connection is typically modeled using a depth vs discharge curve where the depth applied is the pressure in the groundwater at the location of the connection. This relationship is often defined using the orifice equation where the coefficient depends on the configuration. This section below contains guidance for generating a curve based on the orifice equation.		The discharge through the connection is typically modeled using a depth vs discharge curve where the depth applied is the pressure in the groundwater at the location of the connection. This relationship is often defined using the orifice equation where the orifice coefficient depends on the configuration. This section below contains guidance for generating a curve based on the orifice equation.

	== Depth vs Discharge Curves ==		== Depth vs Discharge Curves ==
Line 14:		Line 14:
	[[File: orifice_equation.png]]<br>		[[File: orifice_equation.png]]<br>
	Where:		Where:
	*'''''C<sub>d</sub>''''' is the ~~discharge~~ coefficient		*'''''C<sub>d</sub>A''''' is the orifice coefficient
	*'''''A''''' is the ~~cross-sectional~~ ~~area of the orifice~~		:*'''''C<sub>d</sub>''''' is the discharge coefficient
			:*'''''A''''' is the cross-sectional area of the orifice
	*'''''H<sub>up</sub>''''' is the upstream water level		*'''''H<sub>up</sub>''''' is the upstream water level
	*'''''H<sub>down</sub>''''' is the higher of the downstream obvert or downstream water level		*'''''H<sub>down</sub>''''' is the higher of the downstream obvert or downstream water level<br>


			The following link provides some guidance on how to select the orifice coefficient: https://wiki.sustainabletechnologies.ca/wiki/Flow_through_perforated_pipe

	=== Python ===		=== Python ===

Emilie Nielsen: /* Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) */

2025-08-14T04:10:15Z

Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:10, 14 August 2025
Line 43:		Line 43:
	=== Excel ===		=== Excel ===
	The following excel file can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D. The file contains a two examples, one for Metric and one for US Customary.		The following excel file can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D. The file contains a two examples, one for Metric and one for US Customary.

			<u>[https://downloads.tuflow.com/Private_Download/depth_vs_discharge.xlsx Depth vs Discharge - Excel]</u>

	= Common Questions Answered (FAQ) =		= Common Questions Answered (FAQ) =

Emilie Nielsen: /* Depth vs Discharge Curves */

2025-08-13T05:58:30Z

Depth vs Discharge Curves

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 13 August 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:

	=== Python ===		=== Python ===
	The following python code can be used to generate depth vs discharge ~~curve~~, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D.		The following python code can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D.

	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>
	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> numpy<span style="color:#3776ab"> '''as'''</span> np</span><br>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> numpy<span style="color:#3776ab"> '''as'''</span> np</span><br>
Line 41:		Line 42:

	=== Excel ===		=== Excel ===
			The following excel file can be used to generate depth vs discharge curves, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D. The file contains a two examples, one for Metric and one for US Customary.

	= Common Questions Answered (FAQ) =		= Common Questions Answered (FAQ) =

Emilie Nielsen: /* Python */

2025-08-13T04:02:29Z

Python

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:02, 13 August 2025
Line 34:		Line 34:
	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''if'''</span><span style="color:black"> __name__ == </span><span style="color:green">"__main__"</span><span style="color:black">:</span>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''if'''</span><span style="color:black"> __name__ == </span><span style="color:green">"__main__"</span><span style="color:black">:</span>
	<span style="color:black"> use_us_units = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">False</span>		<span style="color:black"> use_us_units = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">False</span>
	<span style="color:black"> orifice_coefficent_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">0.002</span>		<span style="color:black"> orifice_coefficent_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">0.002 </span><span style="color:#808080"># Orifice coefficient</span>
	<span style="color:black"> depth_max_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">2.0</span>		<span style="color:black"> depth_max_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">2.0 </span><span style="color:#808080"># Maximum depth (in meters or feet)</span>
	<span style="color:black"> depth_step_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">0.02</span><br>		<span style="color:black"> depth_step_value = </span><span style="color:#3776ab">0.02 </span><span style="color:#808080"># Value to increment by (in meters or feet)</span><br>
	<span style="color:black"> out_filename = </span><span style="color:green">"orifice_depth_vs_discharge.csv"</span><br>		<span style="color:black"> out_filename = </span><span style="color:green">"orifice_depth_vs_discharge.csv"</span><br>
	<span style="color:black"> generate_orifice_depth_vs_discharge(use_us_units, orifice_coefficent_value, depth_max_value, depth_step_value, out_filename)</span>		<span style="color:black"> generate_orifice_depth_vs_discharge(use_us_units, orifice_coefficent_value, depth_max_value, depth_step_value, out_filename)</span>

Emilie Nielsen: /* Depth vs Discharge Curves */

2025-08-13T03:58:14Z

Depth vs Discharge Curves

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:58, 13 August 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:

	=== Python ===		=== Python ===
			The following python code can be used to generate depth vs discharge curve, which can then be input into a model with groundwater linking to 1D.
	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> math </span>
	<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> numpy<span style="color:#3776ab"> '''as'''</span> np</span><br>		<span style="color:#3776ab">'''import'''</span><span style="color:black"> numpy<span style="color:#3776ab"> '''as'''</span> np</span><br>