250 likes | 335 Views
Effects of Including Hysteresis when Simulating Infiltration. Swen Magnuson AgE 558 April 13, 2001. Overview. Background Purpose Approach Results. Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Infiltration Assignment for SDA Modeling. <1 cm/y. 4 cm/y. 24 cm/y. Purpose.
E N D
Effects of Including Hysteresis when Simulating Infiltration Swen Magnuson AgE 558 April 13, 2001
Overview • Background • Purpose • Approach • Results
Infiltration Assignment for SDA Modeling <1 cm/y 4 cm/y 24 cm/y
Purpose • Determine possible effects of neglecting hysteresis • Generally neglected as inconsequential compared to spatial variability • Hysteresis now more commonly included in simulation codes • HYDRUS-2D (Simunek et al 1999)
Approach • Select location used in Martian (1995) • NAT-8, middle infiltration range: ~4 cm/yr • Average hydraulic properties from inverse modeling results at NAT-8 • Simulate with and without hysteresis • Difference of >20% in net annual infiltration may be important enough to investigate
Problem Description • NAT-8 hydrologic properties arithmetically averaged with weights based on interval thicknesses =>homogenous soil profile • ~6 meter deep surficial sediments • Free-drainage bottom boundary condition • Initial conditions, h=-30 cm. • Meteorologically driven surface boundary using site-specific conditions from 1999, used repetitively for 5 years
Problem Description • NAT-8 hydrologic properties arithmetically averaged with weights based on interval thicknesses =>homogenous soil profile • ~6 meter deep surficial sediments • Free-drainage bottom boundary condition • Initial conditions, h=-30 cm. • Meteorologically driven surface boundary using site-specific conditions from 1999, used repetitively for 5 years
Problem Description • NAT-8 hydrologic properties arithmetically averaged with weights based on interval thicknesses =>homogenous soil profile • ~6 meter deep surficial sediments • Free-drainage bottom boundary condition • Initial conditions, h=-30 cm. • Meteorologically driven surface boundary using site-specific conditions from 1999, used repetitively for 5 years
Cumulative PPT: 19.5 cm Cumulative PET: 127 cm Snow cover: 0-80 days and 340-365 days
Treatment of Hysteresis Usinghae = 2 * hwe and hae = 1/a results in hae=50 cm and hwe=25 cm
More on Hysteresis • Uses something closely approximating the independent domain model: completely specify both wetting and draining curves. • HYDRUS-2D has options to consider hysteresis in the q-y relationship and in the K-y relationship (both tested) • Initial conditions must be associated with either the draining or wetting curve.
time Moisture Content DRY WET
Daily flux from bottom boundary in Yr 1 with hysteresis in q-y in q-K Drainage ICs
Daily flux from bottom boundary in Yr 1 with hysteresis only in q-y
Daily flux from bottom boundary in Yr 2 with hysteresis only in q-y
Simulation Results End-of-year Instantaneous Flux at Bottom of Domain
Simulation Results End-of-year Instantaneous Flux at Bottom of Domain All fluxes given in cm/day
Simulation Results Cumulative Annual Drainage All fluxes given in cm
Observations on Running HYDRUS-2D • GUI post-processing difficulties • Do not currently trust result for drainage in case w/o hysteresis • Problems suspected to be associated with installation
Conclusions • Premature • Appears that hysteresis can influence net infiltration by greater than 20%