USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20095183

Description and evaluation of numerical groundwater flow models for the Edwards Aquifer, south-central Texas

Richard J. Lindgren·Charles J. Taylor·Natalie A. Houston
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A substantial number of public water system wells in south-central Texas withdraw groundwater from the karstic, highly productive Edwards aquifer. However, the use of numerical groundwater flow models to aid in the delineation of contributing areas for public water system wells in the Edwards aquifer is problematic because of the complex hydrogeologic framework and the presence of conduit-dominated flow paths in the aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, evaluated six published numerical groundwater flow models (all deterministic) that have been developed for the Edwards aquifer San Antonio segment or Barton Springs segment, or both. This report describes the models developed and evaluates each with respect to accessibility and ease of use, range of conditions simulated, accuracy of simulations, agreement with dye-tracer tests, and limitations of the models. These models are (1) GWSIM model of the San Antonio segment, a FORTRAN computer-model code that pre-dates the development of MODFLOW; (2) MODFLOW conduit-flow model of San Antonio and Barton Springs segments; (3) MODFLOW diffuse-flow model of San Antonio and Barton Springs segments; (4) MODFLOW Groundwater Availability Modeling [GAM] model of the Barton Springs segment; (5) MODFLOW recalibrated GAM model of the Barton Springs segment; and (6) MODFLOW–DCM (dual conductivity model) conduit model of the Barton Springs segment. The GWSIM model code is not commercially available, is limited in its application to the San Antonio segment of the Edwards aquifer, and lacks the ability of MODFLOW to easily incorporate newly developed processes and packages to better simulate hydrologic processes. MODFLOW is a widely used and tested code for numerical modeling of groundwater flow, is well documented, and is in the public domain. These attributes make MODFLOW a preferred code with regard to accessibility and ease of use. The MODFLOW conduit-flow model incorporates improvements over previous models by using (1) a user-friendly interface, (2) updated computer codes (MODFLOW–96 and MODFLOW–2000), (3) a finer grid resolution, (4) less-restrictive boundary conditions, (5) an improved discretization of hydraulic conductivity, (6) more accurate estimates of pumping stresses, (7) a long transient simulation period (54 years, 1947–2000), and (8) a refined representation of high-permeability zones or conduits. All of the models except the MODFLOW–DCM conduit model have limitations resulting from the use of Darcy’s law to simulate groundwater flow in a karst aquifer system where non-Darcian, turbulent flow might actually dominate. The MODFLOW–DCM conduit model is an improvement in the ability to simulate karst-like flow conditions in conjunction with porous-media-type matrix flow. However, the MODFLOW–DCM conduit model has had limited application and testing and currently (2008) lacks commercially available pre- and post-processors. The MODFLOW conduit-flow and diffuse-flow Edwards aquifer models are limited by the lack of calibration for the northern part of the Barton Springs segment (Travis County) and their reliance on the use of the calibrated hydraulic conductivity and storativity values from the calibrated Barton Springs segment GAM model. The major limitation of the Barton Springs segment GAM and recalibrated GAM models is that they were calibrated to match measured water levels and springflows for a restrictive range of hydrologic conditions, with each model having different hydraulic conductivity and storativity values appropriate to the hydrologic conditions that were simulated. The need for two different sets of hydraulic conductivity and storativity values increases the uncertainty associated with the accuracy of either set of values, illustrates the non-uniqueness of the model solution, and probably most importantly demonstrates the limitations of using a one-layer model to represent the heterogeneous hydrostratigraphic units composing the Edwards aquifer. In general, the best matches or agreement between groundwater flow directions inferred by numerical model simulation, and by dye-tracer tests, are observed where model outputs accurately reproduce the configuration of the potentiometric surface with regard to the positions of major and minor groundwater troughs and divides. None of the models, with the possible exception of the MODFLOW–DCM conduit model, has a documented capability to accurately simulate travel times for conduit-dominated velocities in the Edwards aquifer. Public water system assessments of wells in the Barton Springs segment of the Edwards aquifer, and elsewhere where conduit-flow conditions are thought to dominate aquifer hydraulic behavior, might be enhanced by use of either the MODFLOW–DCM model or the newly developed U.S. Geological Survey MODFLOW Conduit-Flow Process module for MODFLOW–2005, because each incorporates a type of dual or triple hydraulic conductivity approach and has the capability to explicitly simulate turbulent flow and conduit hydraulic characteristics.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations ReportReport
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 28° to 31° latitude; -101° to -97° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Richard J. Lindgren, Charles J. Taylor, Natalie A. Houston. 2009. Description and evaluation of numerical groundwater flow models for the Edwards Aquifer, south-central Texas. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20095183

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Karst hydrologic processes in carbonate fensters of the western Great Smoky Mountains, Tennessee, 2017–18

The geology of the Great Smoky Mountains in Tennessee and North Carolina is dominated by metamorphic strata. Along the western extent of the range, however, several carbonate fensters expose the Ordovician Jonesboro Limestone along the western edge of the Great Smoky Fault. The fensters (Cades Cove, Tuckaleechee Cove, and Wear Cove) create opportunities for allogenic recharge at the contact between the surrounding, relatively insoluble, strata and the underlying soluble formations, resulting in the development of karst systems. Karst environments have a high degree of connectivity between surface streams and groundwater systems; thus, karst aquifers are inherently vulnerable to contamination from surface activities. Karst environments also provide a specific environment for sensitive biota. Protection of the unique resources of karst environments requires an understanding of the behavior of karst aquifers, knowledge of karst recharge areas, and the mapping of groundwater flow paths. A study began in 2017 to characterize the hydrologic behavior of the karst systems in Great Smoky Mountains National Park through hydrologic monitoring, dye tracing, and seepage investigations. Hydrologic monitoring equipment was installed at several karst hydrogeologic features: two in-cave sites, two major springs, Abrams Creek in Cades Cove, and a karst depression wetland. Dye tracing was conducted to determine resurgences for the cave systems, to delineate spring recharge areas, and to estimate karst groundwater velocities. Seepage investigations along Abrams Creek helped determine if streams were sinking into the Jonesboro Limestone, either at the contact with insoluble strata or as streams flowed across the carbonate fenster. Study results indicate considerable differences in groundwater behavior between the conduit-dominated flow systems in Tuckaleechee Cove compared to the lower-gradient, colluvium-covered karst systems in Cades Cove. Study results also indicate that contaminants in the area of Bull sink and Whiteoak Sink could be rapidly transported through karst groundwater towards springs in Tuckaleechee Cove. Karst resources in Cades Cove are most likely to be affected by local events or activities taking place within the cove itself or in upper Abrams Creek upstream of the Great Smoky Fault. This study provides information on the vulnerability and uniqueness of the karst systems in the western Great Smoky Mountains, which are characterized by complex geology, high-gradient subterranean streams, deep caves, and carbonate fensters.

Tennessee↗
USGS2026

Analysis of groundwater geochemistry in the Lansing, Michigan, area

Groundwater resources in the Lansing, Michigan, area are protected by a wellhead protection plan, but previous studies have indicated that groundwater in this area may be susceptible to surface contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Lansing Board of Water & Light, analyzed geochemical and aquifer characteristics to assess the potential for contamination of groundwater resources. Recharge age categories were determined from tritium concentrations for some wells, and by using ternary diagrams and principal component analysis for other wells. These age classifications, combined with hydrogeologic and geochemical data, were analyzed by using statistical methods to identify trends that may indicate areas of increased groundwater susceptibility. Wells with modern recharge tended to have higher sodium, chloride, and chloride:bromide ratios than did wells with mixed recharge, suggesting greater surface connectivity and potential influence from anthropogenic sources such as road salt. In contrast, wells in the mixed age category exhibited more stable geochemistry and lower constituent concentrations. Classification and regression tree models identified aquifer geometry—particularly the thickness of the uppermost bedrock unit and presence of confining layers—as key predictors of recharge age and geochemical indicators. The trends identified from these analyses could help to reveal locations in the Lansing area that are among the most susceptible to contamination.

Michigan↗
USGS2026

Evaluating the number of realizations (train-test splits) necessary to ensure robust estimates of conventional hydrothermal resource favorability using Monte Carlo cross-validation, the Great Basin, Western USA

Supervised machine learning approaches used to produce favorability maps in resource assessments commonly partition an input dataset into training and testing subsets (that is, through train-test splits). However, if a single split is not representative of underlying resource conditions, the resulting favorability map may be biased, particularly with sparse or heterogeneous datasets. To mitigate the potential for unrepresentative favorability maps, recent works by U.S. Geological Survey researchers have used Monte Carlo cross-validation to implement a large number ( n) of randomized train-test splits to produce n realizations. The realizations are then aggregated using cell-wise median predictions to produce the resulting final favorability map, recognizing that the median will remove extreme values that might have been estimated from a comparatively few unrepresentative realizations. Theoretically, the median prediction at every cell converges to a single estimate as n approaches infinity, and the question addressed herein is: How many realizations are necessary to get a robust estimate (that is, an estimate unaffected by additional realizations)? Therefore, convergence metrics are described to identify the number of train-test splits and realizations needed to make a reliable map using the data and supervised machine learning workflow for conventional hydrothermal resource assessment of the Great Basin of the Western United States. For this study, robust prediction occurs with n approximately equal to 600 realizations, and smaller ensembles (for example, n is approximately equal to 200 or even 100) may be suitable during preliminary or exploratory analyses. Although the resulting threshold numbers will vary depending on the data and modeling approach used, the convergence metrics proposed and applied herein are applicable to other supervised machine learning studies that use Monte Carlo cross-validation.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗