Numerical simulation of ground-water flow through glacial deposits and crystalline bedrock in the Mirror Lake area, Grafton County, New Hampshire

Claire R. Tiedeman; Daniel J. Goode; Paul A. Hsieh

doi:10.3133/pp1572

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · pp1572

Numerical simulation of ground-water flow through glacial deposits and crystalline bedrock in the Mirror Lake area, Grafton County, New Hampshire

Claire R. Tiedeman·Daniel J. Goode·Paul A. Hsieh

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This report documents the development of a computer model to simulate steady-state (long-term average) flow of ground water in the vicinity of Mirror Lake, which lies at the eastern end of the Hubbard Brook valley in central New Hampshire. The 10-km2 study area includes Mirror Lake, the three streams that flow into Mirror Lake, Leeman's Brook, Paradise Brook, and parts of Hubbard Brook and the Pemigewasset River. The topography of the area is characterized by steep hillsides and relatively flat valleys. Major hydrogeologic units include glacial deposits, composed of till containing pockets of sand and gravel, and fractured crystalline bedrock, composed of schist intruded by granite, pegmatite, and lamprophyre. Ground water occurs in both the glacial deposits and bedrock. Precipitation and snowmelt infiltrate to the water table on the hillsides, flow downslope through the saturated glacial deposits and fractured bedrock, and discharge to streams and to Mirror Lake. The model domain includes the glacial deposits, the uppermost 150m of bedrock, Mirror Lake, the layer of organic sediments on the lake bottom, and streams and rivers within the study area. A streamflow routing package was included in the model to simulate baseflow in streams and interaction between streams and ground water. Recharge from precipitation is assumed to be areally uniform, and riparian evapotranspiration along stream banks is assumed negligible. The spatial distribution of hydraulic conductivity is represented by dividing the model domain into several zones, each having uniform hydraulic properties. Local variations in recharge and hydraulic conductivities are ignored; therefore, the simulation results characterize the general ground-water system, not local details of ground-water movement. The model was calibrated using a nonlinear regression method to match hydraulic heads measured in piezometers and wells, and baseflow in three inlet streams to Mirror Lake. Model calibration indicates that recharge from precipitation to the water table is 26 to 28 cm/year. Hydraulic conductivities are 1.7 x 10-6 to 2.7 x 10-6 m/s for glacial deposits, about 3 x 10-7 m/s for bedrock beneath lower hillsides and valleys, and about 6x10-8 m/s for bedrock beneath upper hillsides and hilltops. Analysis of parameter uncertainty indicates that the above values are well constrained, at least within the context of regression analysis. In the regression, several attributes of the ground-water flow model are assumed perfectly known. The hydraulic conductivity for bedrock beneath upper hillsides and hilltops was determined from few data, and additional data are needed to further confirm this result. Model fit was not improved by introducing a 10-to-1 ration of horizontal-to-vertical anisotropy in the hydraulic conductivity of the glacial deposits, or by varying hydraulic conductivity with depth in the modeled part (uppermost 150m) of the bedrock. The calibrated model was used to delineate the Mirror Lake ground-water basin, defined as the volumes of subsurface through which ground water flows from the water table to Mirror Lake or its inlet streams. Results indicate that Mirror Lake and its inlet streams drain an area of ground-water recharge that is about 1.5 times the area of the surface-water basin. The ground-water basin extends far up the hillside on the northwestern part of the study area. Ground water from this area flows at depth under Norris Brook to discharge into Mirror Lake or its inlet streams. As a result, the Mirror Lake ground-water basin extends beneath the adjacent ground-water basin that drains into Norris Brook. Model simulation indicates that approximately 300,000 m3/year of precipitation recharges the Mirror Lake ground-water basin. About half the recharge enters the basin in areas where the simulated water table lies in glacial deposits; the other half enters the basin in areas where the simulated water table lies in be

Explore related subjects

Professional Paper Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 43.5281° to 44.4047° latitude; -72.3333° to -71.3468° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Claire R. Tiedeman, Daniel J. Goode, Paul A. Hsieh. 1997. Numerical simulation of ground-water flow through glacial deposits and crystalline bedrock in the Mirror Lake area, Grafton County, New Hampshire. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1572

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona↗

USGS2026

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona↗

USGS2026

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper↗