Abstract

Lowland river basins are characterised by complex hydrologic and hydraulic interactions between the different subsystems (aerated zone, groundwater, surface water), which may require physically-based dynamically-coupled surface water and groundwater hydrological models to reliably describe these processes. Exemplarily, for a typical north-eastern Germany lowland catchment (Tollense river with about 400 km²), an integrated hydrological model, MIKE SHE, coupled with a hydrodynamic model, MIKE 11, was developed and assessed. Hydrological and hydraulic processes were simulated from 2010 to 2018, covering strongly varying meteorological conditions. To achieve a highly reliable model, the calibration was performed in parallel for groundwater levels and river flows at the available monitoring sites in the defined catchment. Based on sensitivity analysis, saturated hydraulic conductivity, leakage coefficients, Manning’s roughness, and boundary conditions (BCs) were used as main calibration parameters. Despite the extreme soil heterogeneity of the glacial terrain, the model performance was quite reasonable in the different sub-catchments with an error of less than 2% for water balance estimation. The resulted water balance showed a strong dependency on land use intensity and meteorological conditions. During relatively dry hydrological years, actual evapotranspiration (ETa) becomes the main water loss component, with an average of 60%–65% of total precipitation and decreases to 55%–60% during comparatively wet hydrological years during the simulation period. Base flow via subsurface and drainage flow accounts for an approximate average of 30%–35% during wet years and rises up to 35%–45% of the total water budget during the dry hydrological years. This means, groundwater is in lowland river systems the decisive compensator of varying meteorological conditions. The coupled hydrologic and hydraulic model is valuable for detailed water balance estimation and seasonal dynamics of groundwater levels and surface water discharges, and, due to its physical foundation, can be extrapolated to analyse meteorological and land use scenarios. Future work will focus on coupling with nutrient transport and river water quality models.

Highlights

  • Hydrological processes in moderate climate lowland catchments can be complicated due to complex surface water (SW) and groundwater (GW) interactions, and due to this complexity, precise hydrological water balance information is a prerequisite to develop management practices for the sustainable use ofAppl

  • The defined method takes into account the processes of canopy interception, ponding, and ET and considers the whole unsaturated zone (UZ) to consist of two layers representing average conditions in the UZ, where vegetation data is defined as Leaf area index (LAI) and root depth (RD)

  • The two-layer UZ method fulfils the main objectives to account for ETa and the saturated zoneareas (SZ) recharge mainly required in this study

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Hydrological processes in moderate climate lowland catchments can be complicated due to complex surface water (SW) and groundwater (GW) interactions, and due to this complexity, precise hydrological water balance information is a prerequisite to develop management practices for the sustainable use of. This may lead to direct hydraulic interactions between the different subsystems which are not adequately described by pure hydrologic model approaches Human interventions such as land use, artificial drainage, GW abstraction via pumps, river hydraulic structures, etc., effect the natural water balance in lowlands. By focusing mainly on moderate climate lowland catchments with intensive agriculture, high GW tables and decreased retention times, these models were compared on the basis of their data requirement, desired complexity level, and their ability to simulate relevant hydrologic and hydraulic processes. SWAT on simulation similar governing the model does not take into account hydraulic structures and their operational and control equations and input data requirements, but SWIM does not simulate ponds, lakes, wetlands, and strategies Both SWAT the requirea more inputsolution data into comparison to HSPF drainage systems.

Ability
Study Area
Groundwater Data
Climate Data
Literature
Numerical Methods
Coupling of MIKE
Sensitivity Analyses and Calibration Procedure
Groundwater Dynamics
Selected
Stream Flow Dynamics
Discussions
Coupled
GW and SW Interaction
Key Problems Associated with Coupled Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling
Transfer of Methodology to Other Lowland Catchments
Key Contributions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call