Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Model Calibration and Simulation <br />1. Target head - The only data on Trout Creek sandstone water levels <br />within the regional basin were obtained from the Seneca IIW test and <br />observation wells (test well steady-state water level = 7232 feet <br />AMSL). However, an unpublished thesis (Stewart, 1983) and structural <br />data found in Bass et al (1955), provided some information concerning <br />the top of the sandstone and the configuration of the potentiometric <br />surface (Figures 3a and 3b). <br /> <br />2. Recharge - The main parameter adjusted for steady-state calibration <br />was the recharge rate. The recharge rate chosen for best fit with <br />one target well is .21 in/yr. This value does not represent the <br />actual recharge rate in the outcrop areas. It does, however, <br />represent that calibrated in the model, based on transmissivity of <br />the Trout Creek and grid size in recharge areas. Because the grid <br />blocks represent a larger area than the actual outcrop area, the <br />actual recharge rate for the Trout Creek sandstone outcrop area is <br />probably greater. <br />3. Constant Heads - The heads at the constant-head nodes along the <br />downgradient boundary were adjusted to ensure that water exited the <br />model from these nodes, i.e. flow is to the north. Constant-head <br />nodes were placed in areas where perennial streams cross a Trout <br />Creek outcrop, and land-surface elevations were used as a guide to <br />setting these constant-head elevations. A constant-head node was not <br />placed at the head of Hubberson Gulch where it crosses the Trout <br /> <br />6333003.004 <br />5 <br />GeoTrans,inc. <br />