Groundwater-flow model and analysis of groundwater and surface-water interactions for the Big Sioux aquifer, Sioux Falls, South Dakota

Kyle W. Davis; William G. Eldridge; Joshua F. Valder; Kristen J. Valseth

doi:10.3133/sir20195117

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20195117

Groundwater-flow model and analysis of groundwater and surface-water interactions for the Big Sioux aquifer, Sioux Falls, South Dakota

Kyle W. Davis·William G. Eldridge·Joshua F. Valder·Kristen J. Valseth

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The city of Sioux Falls, in southeastern South Dakota, is the largest city in South Dakota. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Sioux Falls, completed a groundwater-flow model to use for improving the understanding of groundwater-flow processes, estimating hydrogeologic properties, and analyzing groundwater and surface-water interactions for the Big Sioux aquifer in the model area. The model area includes the Big Sioux aquifer and the underlying hydrogeologic units from Dell Rapids, South Dakota, to the confluence of the Big Sioux River and the outlet of the Sioux Falls Diversion Channel in eastern Sioux Falls, S. Dak. The Big Sioux aquifer is the primary aquifer in the model area and the focus of the groundwater-flow model. The Big Sioux River is the largest stream in the model area and is in hydraulic connection with the Big Sioux aquifer. A conceptual model for the area was constructed and includes a characterization of the hydrogeologic framework, analysis and construction of potentiometric surfaces, and summary of estimated water budget components in the model area. The primary hydrogeologic units in the model area consist of (1) the Big Sioux aquifer, (2) a glacial till confining unit, and (3) bedrock aquifers (Split Rock Creek and Sioux Quartzite aquifers). Sources of groundwater recharge included infiltration of precipitation, stream seepage, and groundwater exchanges among the hydraulically connected Big Sioux aquifer, glacial till confining unit, and bedrock aquifers. Groundwater losses included evapotranspiration, groundwater discharge to streams, and groundwater withdrawal to supply water-use needs. A numerical groundwater-flow model (numerical model) was constructed and was used to simulate all aspects of the conceptual model for predevelopment (steady-state) and time-varying (transient) monthly conditions for 1950–2017. The numerical model was constructed using the USGS modular hydrologic simulation program, MODFLOW–6, and was calibrated using the Parameter ESTimation software, PEST++. The transient numerical model was calibrated for steady-state and transient monthly conditions for 1950–2017. Calibration targets were observations of hydraulic head, changes in hydraulic head, monthly mean streamflow (as a rate), and cumulative monthly stream discharge (as a volume). Parameters adjusted during model calibration were horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity, specific storage, specific yield, recharge and evapotranspiration multipliers, and streambed hydraulic conductivity. Horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity were estimated at pilot points distributed within the model area; specific storage and specific yield were assigned to uniform values in each layer in the model area; recharge and evapotranspiration multipliers were assigned uniformly for every stress period in the numerical model; and streambed hydraulic conductivity values were assigned uniformly between stream confluences. The final calibrated parameter values of horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity, specific yield, specific storage, streambed hydraulic conductivity, recharge, and evapotranspiration were considered reasonable for the hydrogeologic materials and conditions in the model area for 1950–2017. Overall, simulated hydraulic head altitudes had a linear regression coefficient of determination (R 2 ) of 0.48. Hydraulic head altitude residuals for the glacial till confining unit and bedrock aquifers were typically greater in magnitude when compared to residuals in the Big Sioux aquifer, but simulated hydraulic head altitudes in the Big Sioux aquifer compared favorably with mean observed hydraulic head altitudes and had a linear regression R 2 of 0.93. Simulated streamflow hydrographs matched the general trends of observed increases and decreases in streamflow for USGS streamgages 06482000 (Big Sioux River at Sioux Falls, S. Dak.) and 06482020 (Big Sioux River at North Cliff Avenue at Sioux Falls, S. Dak.), but larger streamflows were overestimated at the first streamgage and underestimated at the second streamgage. The numerical model reasonably estimated cumulative monthly stream discharge for the first 10–15 years of available streamflow records at both USGS streamgages. After the first 10–15 years of available streamflow record, cumulative monthly stream discharge was closely estimated for USGS streamgage 06482000 and underestimated at USGS streamgage 06482020. Composite sensitivities without regularization were calculated by PEST++ for the calibrated numerical model parameters and were averaged by parameter group. The parameter group with the highest mean composite sensitivity was the recharge multiplier parameter group. Model simplifications, assumptions, and limitations were necessary for construction of the conceptual and numerical models and for calibration efficiency. Spatial simplification of hydraulic properties could cause the numerical model to misrepresent reactions to changes in localized stresses, such as additional demands for groundwater withdrawal. The numerical model was temporally discretized into monthly periods and required scaling daily rates into representative monthly rates for model input and calibration targets. Based on the comparison between the observed and simulated groundwater levels, monthly mean streamflow and cumulative monthly stream discharge, and general groundwater distribution and flow, the numerical model favorably simulated the flow in the Big Sioux aquifer. Eventual capture was calculated in the model area using a steady-state numerical groundwater-flow model. The eventual capture map shows areas of higher streamflow capture adjacent to the Big Sioux River north of the city of Sioux Falls and along the lower part of the Sioux Falls Diversion Channel, and areas of lower streamflow capture along aquifer boundaries and near the southern Sioux Quartzite barrier. The timing of capture was determined using a transient numerical groundwater-flow model to determine the likely captured water sources for 30 years of groundwater withdrawal at three hypothetical wells using three continuous withdrawal rates (112.5, 450.0, and 900.0 gallons per minute). Supply for all three hypothetical wells became capture-dominated after only a short period of continuous withdrawal. Capture stabilized after about 10–15 years for well A, and after 20–25 years for well B, and after about 10–15 years for well C. The groundwater-flow model is a suitable tool to use for improving the understanding of groundwater-flow processes, estimating hydrogeologic properties, and analyzing groundwater and surface-water interactions for the Big Sioux aquifer near Sioux Falls, S. Dak. The numerical model can be used to simulate hydrologic scenarios, advance understanding of groundwater budgets, compute system response to stress, and determine likely sources of water supplied to wells.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 43.29919735147067° to 43.757208878849376° latitude; -97.06146240234375° to -96.42425537109375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Kyle W. Davis, William G. Eldridge, Joshua F. Valder, Kristen J. Valseth. 2019-11-27. Groundwater-flow model and analysis of groundwater and surface-water interactions for the Big Sioux aquifer, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195117

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗