420 likes | 575 Views
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project AQ 4 – Temperature Modeling (Status Report). May 14, 2009. Progress Report. Recap of Upper MF application MF – Interbay to Ralston Geometry Flow Temperature Rubicon Geometry Flow Temperature MF – Below Ralston Progress
E N D
Placer County Water AgencyMiddle Fork American River ProjectAQ 4 –Temperature Modeling(Status Report) May 14, 2009
Progress Report • Recap of Upper MF application • MF – Interbay to Ralston • Geometry • Flow • Temperature • Rubicon • Geometry • Flow • Temperature • MF – Below Ralston • Progress • Schedule
Recap of Upper MF application • Continued to refine model • Updated flows • Results
Temperature Modeling Approach: Recap • Low Flows: < 10 cfs in upper reaches • Model Features • Habitat type cross sections • Pool Volume below Stage of Zero Flow • Bed conduction • Topographic shading • Riparian shading • Terrestrial long-wave radiation • Groundwater accretion
Middle Fork American – Interbay to Ralston • Representation • Geometry • Flow • Temperature
Middle Fork American – Interbay to Ralston Interbay Ralston
Middle Fork American – Interbay to Ralston: Geometry Plan (UTM Coordinates) Profile (25 meter node spacing)
Flow • Inflows to Interbay • MF • Hell Hole Reservoir (HH-MF Tunnel) • Accretion • Outflows from Interbay • MF • Ralston Tunnel • Change in storage – assumed zero
Temperature • Three monitoring locations between Interbay Dam and Ralston • RM35.5 (MF4) • RM29.4 (MF13) • RM26.0 (MF10) • Time series from May - September • Graphical and statistical performance measures
Rubicon River • Implementation assumptions • Flow: from Hell Hole Reservoir simulation • Water temperatures: from Hell Hole Reservoir simulation • Relationship to span alluvium
Rubicon habitat type distribution • Note: • NOXSEC were assumed as HGR • Values rounded to whole percentages
Temperature stations RR 28.8 RR 25.3 RR 0.7 RR 3.7 RR 22.7 RR 22.5 RR 5.3 RR 14.3
Rubicon River Boundary Conditions RR 30.2 RR28.8 RR 30.2 RR28.8
Rubicon River Boundary Conditions • Objective: Estimate appropriate boundary condition in alluvial section at headwater under spill and non-spill condition. • Headwater of the Rubicon River model was placed at RR28.8 because of the dry alluvial reach upstream. • Develop dual criteria to provide river inflow temperature boundary condition • When Hell Hole Dam is spilling: • RR28.8 Tw is similar to Hell Hole spill Tw – Large flows overwhelm small releases from the dam and short transit time yields minimum opportunity for heating. • Potential lag effect at RR28.8 Tw – Due to the spill filling alluvium and then slowly released. • When Hell Hole Dam is not spilling: • Between RR30.2 and RR28.8, Tw difference of about 2oF in June. It diminishes to nearly 0oF by October 1st. • Linear relationship assumed from terminus of spill to mid-October
Lower MF American River • Geometry File • Flow Files • Temperature Files
River Modeling Status • Successful implementation of several temperature components important to small streams • Effectively modeled small flows • Limitations based on available system representation • Rubicon test case suggests good model performance as well • Model sensitivity testing provides insight on boundary conditions, model parameters, system response
Next Steps • Assess objective of flow and temperature modeling on individual reaches • Implement modeling method globally throughout project area and formally calibrate models
Progress • Upper Basin River model testing • Upper MF American – Test Reach: draft calibration • Upper MF American – Interbay to Ralston: precalibration • Rubicon River: precalibration • Lower Basin model implementation: started
Estimated Schedule • Upper Basin River model calibration (May-June) • Upper MF American – Test Reach • Upper MF American – Interbay to Ralston • Rubicon River • Ralston calibration (June) • Lower American River model calibration (July) • Overall system calibration refinement (July/August)