Calibration and validation of an integrated nitrate transport model within a well capture zone

Bonton, Alexandre; Bouchard, Christian; Rouleau, Alain; Rodriguez, Manuel J.; Therrien, René

doi:10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.10.007

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These are 12 parameters out of 44 parameters. The saturated hydraulic conductivities have the largest impact on the simulated hydraulic heads and on the hydrograph, as found in other sensitivity analyses related to surface-subsurface modeling (Bonton et al, 2012). The van-Genuchten parameters of the zones close to the surface and the porosity ranked second in sensitivity.…”

Section: Sensitivity Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

“…To reduce the number of simulations needed, model calibration of pde-based models is often limited to a trialand-error process (e.g., Bonton et al, 2012;Calderhead et al, 2011;Goderniaux et al, 2009;Li et al, 2008;Pérez et al, 2011;Xevi et al, 1997), even though Blasone et al (2008) and McMichael et al (2006) have also proposed ensemble-based approaches. In the latter approaches, multiple parameters sets are generated by Monte-Carlo methods and weighted or modified depending on the likelihood of model outcomes in comparison to measurement (Beven and Binley, 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficient calibration of a distributed pde -based hydrological model using grid coarsening

Gunten

Wöhling

Haslauer

et al. 2014

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Sensitivity Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient calibration of a distributed pde -based hydrological model using grid coarsening

Gunten

Wöhling

Haslauer

et al. 2014

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The manual trial‐and‐error calibration of an IFM against a combination of observations of H and C was successful in reproducing the propagation of I of river water into the floodplain and allowed recommendations for water and floodplain salinity management to be defined. Bonton et al () used an IFM to simulate nitrate transport and transformation in the capture zone of a drinking water well in an agricultural area. The authors showed that through the manual trial‐and‐error calibration of the IFM against not only observations of H but also against observations of C, changes in nitrate in the drinking water well as a function of agricultural use could be more accurately simulated compared to a calibration against only one of the two observation types.…”

Section: Review Of the Use Of Unconventional Observation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Classical Observations in Hydrogeology: The Advantages of Including Exchange Flux, Temperature, Tracer Concentration, Residence Time, and Soil Moisture Observations in Groundwater Model Calibration

Schilling

Cook

Brunner

2019

Reviews of Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, groundwater and surface water flow models have been calibrated against two observation types: hydraulic heads and surface water discharge. It has repeatedly been demonstrated, however, that these classical observations do not contain sufficient information to calibrate flow models. To reduce the predictive uncertainty of flow models, the consideration of other observation types constitutes a promising way forward. Despite the ever-increasing availability of other observation types, however, they are still unconventional when it comes to flow model calibration. By reviewing studies that included nonclassical observations in flow model calibration, benefits and challenges associated with their integration in flow model calibration were identified, and their information content was analyzed. While explicit simulation of mass transport processes in flow models poses challenges, even simplified approaches to integrate tracer concentrations yield significantly better calibration results than using only classical observations. For a majority of calibrated flow models, observations of tracer concentrations and of exchange fluxes were beneficial. Temperature observations improved the simulation of heat transport but often worsened all other model outcomes. Only when temperature observations were made within 2 m of the surface water-groundwater interface did they have the potential to also improve flow and mass transport simulations. Surprisingly, many models were calibrated manually rather than with the widely available, mathematically robust and automated tools. There is a clear need for more systematic implementation of unconventional observations and automated flow model calibration as well as for more systematic quantification of the information content of unconventional observations. Plain Language Summary Traditionally, groundwater and surface water flow models, which are critical for water resources assessment, have been calibrated against only two classical observation types: groundwater levels and surface water discharge. In the past, it has repeatedly been demonstrated that these classical observations do not contain sufficient information to calibrate the parameters required for the simulation of groundwater and surface water flow systems. Owing to the rapid development of measurement techniques throughout the last three decades, however, many other observations of hydrological systems have become widely available. Despite this, observation types other than the classical ones are still unconventional when it comes to flow model calibration. The overall goal of this review is to identify optimal observation types and procedures for flow model calibration and hydrological predictions. We found that observations of tracer concentrations and exchange fluxes are beneficial for most flow models. Temperatures improve the simulation of heat transport but often worsen other flow model outcomes, unless temperatures are measured within 2 m of the surface water-groundwater interface. We identified a need for...

show abstract

“…HGS has been successfully applied in many different contexts and at many different spatial and temporal scales. Investigations on the interactions between groundwater, surface water, and vegetation (e.g., Ala‐Aho et al [], Schilling et al [], Schomburg et al []), on the development of unsaturated zones between rivers and aquifers in heterogeneous systems (e.g., Irvine et al [], Schilling et al [], Tang et al []), or on contaminant transport and tile drainage in agricultural contexts (e.g., Bonton et al [], De Schepper et al []) are just some recent examples for which HGS was used. HGS has recently been coupled to the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model for the integrated simulation of atmosphere, surface, and subsurface interactions (Davison et al ), to particle tracking and flow tracking tools (Partington et al ; Partington et al ; Chow et al ; Schilling et al ), and to the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) data assimilation tool (Kurtz et al ; Tang et al ; Tang et al ).…”

Section: Winter Hydrological Processes In Hgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wang et al (2009) further noted that several models rely on inadequate representations of winter processes, although they demonstrated that spring runoff simulations can be significantly improved by modeling snow accumulation, melt, and pore water freeze-thaw. The MIKE SHE model (Graham and Butts 2005;DHI 2017) and the Hydrological Simulation Program -FORTRAN (HSPF) model (Bicknell et al 1997) are among the models capable of simulating winter hydrologic processes in a more integrated manner. In MIKE SHE, the rate of snowmelt is calculated using the modified degree-day approach, and frozen soil is mimicked using a time-varying leakage coefficient during the early melting season.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Surface and Subsurface Hydrological Modeling with Snowmelt and Pore Water Freeze–Thaw

Schilling¹,

Park²,

Therrien

et al. 2018

Groundwater

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the simulation of winter hydrological processes a gap in the availability of flow models existed: one either had the choice between (1) physically‐based and fully‐integrated, but computationally very intensive, or (2) simplified and compartamentalized, but computationally less expensive, simulators. To bridge this gap, we here present the integration of a computationally efficient representation of winter hydrological processes (snowfall, snow accumulation, snowmelt, pore water freeze–thaw) in a fully‐integrated surface water‐groundwater flow model. This allows the efficient simulation of catchment‐scale hydrological processes in locations significantly influenced by winter processes. Snow accumulation and snowmelt are based on the degree‐day method and pore water freeze–thaw is calculated with a vertical heat conduction approach. This representation of winter hydrological processes is integrated into the fully‐coupled surface water‐groundwater flow model HydroGeoSphere. A benchmark for pore water freeze–thaw as well as two illustrative examples are provided.

show abstract

Calibration and validation of an integrated nitrate transport model within a well capture zone

Cited by 18 publications

References 61 publications

Efficient calibration of a distributed pde -based hydrological model using grid coarsening

Efficient calibration of a distributed pde -based hydrological model using grid coarsening

Beyond Classical Observations in Hydrogeology: The Advantages of Including Exchange Flux, Temperature, Tracer Concentration, Residence Time, and Soil Moisture Observations in Groundwater Model Calibration

Integrated Surface and Subsurface Hydrological Modeling with Snowmelt and Pore Water Freeze–Thaw

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About