Groundwater Modelling Advice: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Anne.Kolega (talk | contribs) m →How can interflow behaviour be better aligned with observed conditions?: changed XDMF to XMDF |
|||
| (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
== 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
Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.
| |||