USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70202028

Groundwater modeling

Abstract

The state of the science and practice in groundwater modeling brings to mind highly sophisticated computer models that are running in parallel on many multi-processor machines. These models are expected to incorporate many different processes of both saturated and unsaturated groundwater flow and transport and possibly the media to which it connects, like surface waters and the atmosphere. We are increasingly aware we cannot study groundwater flow in isolation if we are to make useful predictions of, for instance, the impacts of climate change on the groundwater regime. We have come a long way. Today we are no longer limited to equations for flow toward a well, perhaps near an infinitely long straight canal (method of images), to sandbox models in the laboratory, or to simple steady state models of flow in a single aquifer. We now have computer models that solve groundwater flow and transport in multi-aquifer settings under transient conditions and with a user-friendly graphical user interface that allows widespread use. Additionally, multi-media models are now leaving the research environment and becoming available to mainstream consultants. So in that sense the science of groundwater modeling has matured. The practice of groundwater modeling, however, has also matured. We have come to realize that model output, being a necessary simplification of an unknowably complex natural world, has inherent limitations. That is, a model of reality is not reality itself. There is uncertainty associated with all facets of our model—parameterization, aquifer geometry and discretization, boundary conditions, and future hydrologic drivers such as future pumping regimes and climates. Today a model is now more appropriately seen as a tool that provides a quantitative framework to make supportable forecasts rather than an oracle that gives us all the answers. In this chapter we set out to briefly review the state of the science and practice in modeling. In doing so, we augment existing assessments from the journal Groundwater (e.g., Hunt and Zheng 2012; Langevin and Panday 2012; Molz 2017a,b; White 2017), specifically in terms of modeling approach. An effective modeling approach is critical. If a modeler does not decompose the societal problem correctly, the model will not be fit-for-purpose, no matter how sophisticated the code’s capabilities. Moreover, capabilities of codes will be ever improving; good modeling practices have a timelessness that is more robust. How best to decompose the problem and provide models that are accepted? We lay out here some approaches for today’s applied groundwater modeling. Specifically, we suggest: (1) a step-wise modeling process; (2) including a two-dimensional areal model within this process; (3) keeping abreast of industry standards; and (4) ways to increase acceptance of the models we produce.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Henk M. Haitjema, Randall J. Hunt. 2018. Groundwater modeling. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70202028

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Ground failure resulting from earthquake ground motions

The ground failure resulting from an earthquake, at all scales, is ultimately controlled by the details of near-surface earthquake ground motions, the spatially distributed mechanical characteristics of surface materials and how the two interact. This chapter introduces the aspects of ground-motion seismology that are most relevant to the triggering of different types of ground failure, such as landslides and liquefaction. In particular, the chapter focuses on different sources of local modification (e.g. amplification) of earthquake ground motions in the shallow subsurface, known as site effects. The chapter ends with an overview of the controls on, general spatial patterns of, and approaches to regional modelling of the manifestation of ground failure that may be triggered by an earthquake.

Book chapter↗

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter↗

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter↗