Groundwater Modelling Advice: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 22:
 
=== Python ===
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>
Line 73:
 
== 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 ReFH2a 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? ==
Line 128:
* Ensuring groundwater inputs and outputs are balanced is key.
* Comparing groundwater accumulation areas with surface water flooding can help verify results.
* Using the groundwater XDMFXMDF 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.