Groundwater Modelling Advice: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Tuflowduncan (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 3:
= Groundwater Linking to 1D (ESTRY or SWMM) =
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.
Line 24 ⟶ 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 75 ⟶ 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 134 ⟶ 132:
Fine-tuning soil properties, hydraulic conductivity, and boundary conditions will improve interflow simulation accuracy.
== 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.
| |||