Lin S.D. Water and Wastewater Calculations Manual
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
The following values are given for each of these factors for Nashville City
Reservoir:
䊏 The rainfall factor (R) is set to 200, the value applicable for southern Illinois.
䊏 The soil classifications for the watershed and related information are pre-
sented in Table 2.15.
䊏 The soil erodibility factor (K ), the slope length (L), slope steepness (S),
and the cropping factor (C ) are provided in Table 2.16 by the Washington
County Soil and Water Conservation District.
䊏 The conservation factor (P) is one.
solution: (Assistance in developing these estimates can be obtained through
the county conservation district or directly from the Soil and Water Conservation
District of US Department of Agriculture. Both are in the same office.)
Step 1. Determine watershed boundary
The watershed boundary of the lake can be determined from a 7.5-minute US
Geological Survey topographic map and digitized into a GIS coverage.
Lakes and Reservoirs 175
TABLE 2.16 Summary of Soil Losses in the Nashville City Reservoir Watershed Due
to Precipitation Runoff
Annual Total
Areal soil loss annual
Soil coverage rate loss
type (acres) KL(ft) S (%) LS C (tons/acre) (tons)
2 38.0 0.37 175 0.5 0.11 0.37 3.0 114
3A 14.9 0.32 175 1.1 0.24 0.20 3.1 46
3B 11.9 0.32 125 3.5 0.37 0.13 3.1 37
5C2 36.1 0.37 100 7.5 0.91 0.06 4.0 146
5C3 31.0 0.37 100 7.0 0.82 0.05 3.0 94
5D3 9.8 0.37 75 12.5 1.67 0.02 2.5 24
8D2 6.2 0.37 75 12.5 1.67 0.04 4.9 31
12 186.0 0.43 175 0.5 0.11 0.32 3.0 563
13A 208.4 0.43 175 1.1 0.24 0.15 3.1 645
13B 73.7 0.43 125 3.5 0.37 0.09 2.9 211
13B2 17.5 0.43 100 4.0 0.40 0.09 3.1 54
14B 14.2 0.43 125 3.5 0.37 0.13 4.1 59
48 7.5 0.32 175 0.5 0.11 0.71 5.0 37
912A 61.4 0.37 175 1.1 0.24 0.17 3.0 185
912B2 164.7 0.37 125 3.5 0.37 0.11 3.0 496
991 32.6 0.43 175 0.5 0.11 0.21 2.0 65
1334 10.9 0.43 175 0.5 0.11 0.57 5.4 59
3415 17.5 0.37 175 0.5 0.11 0.61 5.0 87
Water 42.0
Total 984.3 2953
Average 0.38 3.5
Note: Blank spaces—not applicable
SOURCE: Lin, 2001
Step 2. Obtain the values for, K, L, S, and C
Obtain “Soil Survey of Washington County, Illinois’’ from the USDA office. The
soil types, values of K and S, and soil classifications, etc. are listed in the book.
Values for L and C can be obtained by consultation with USDA or the county’s
Soil and Water Conservation District personnel. These values for each type
of soil are presented in Table 2.16.
Step 3. Measure the area coverage for each type of soil
The area coverage for each type of soil in the watershed can be directly meas-
ured from “Soil Survey of Washington County, Illinois.” The area coverage for
each type of soil is listed in Table 2.15.
Step 4. Find LS value
The LS value can be determined from tables of topographic factor based on
L, S, R, and land use; and then listed in Table 2.16 for calculations.
Step 5. Calculate annual soil loss rate for a type of soil
For soil type 2: Using Eq. (2.20), A ⫽ R ⫻ K ⫻ LS ⫻ C ⫻ P
⫽ 200 ⫻ 0.37 ⫻ 0.11 ⫻ 0.37 ⫻ 1.0
⫽ 3.0 (tons/acre ⭈ yr) (see Table 2.16)
Step 6. Calculate total annual soil loss for each type of soil
The total annual soil loss for each type of soil is calculated from annual soil
loss rates for that soil type multiplying by the area coverage, such as
For soil type 2: Total soil loss ⫽ 3.0 tons/acre ⭈ yr ⫻ 38 acres
⫽ 114 tons/yr
Step 7. The total annual soil loss for other soil types can be determined in
the same manner as above and listed in Table 2.16.
Step 8. Calculate the total annual soil loss (2.953 tons from Table 2.16) in
the watershed
References
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water
Environment Federation. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater, 18th edn. Washington, DC: APHA.
Bogner, W. C., Lin, S. D., Hullinger, D. L. and Raman, R. K. 1997. Diagnostic—feasibil-
ity study of Vienna Correctional Center Lake Johnson County, Illinois. Contract report
619. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Borah, D. K., Raman, R. K., Lin, S. D., Knapp, H. V. and Soong, T. W. D. 1997. Water qual-
ity evaluations for Lake Springfield and proposed Hunter Lake and proposed Lick Creek
Reservoir. Contract Report 621. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Carlson, R. E. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes. Limnology and Oceanography 22(2):
361–369.
176 Chapter 2
Chapra, S. C. and Reckhow, K. H. 1983. Engineering approaches for lake management.
Vol. 2: Mechanistic modeling. Woburn, Massachusetts: Butterworth.
Clark, J. W., Viessman, Jr., W. and Hammer, M. J. 1977. Water supply and pollution con-
trol, 3rd edn. New York: Dun-Donnelley.
Cole, G. A. 1979. Textbook of limnology, 2nd edn. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby.
Dillon, P. J. and Rigler, F. H. 1974. The phosphorus-chlorophyll relationship in lakes.
Limnology Oceanography 19(5): 767–773.
Fair, G. M., Geyer, J. C. and Okun, D. A. 1966. Water and Wastewater Engineering,
Vol. 1: Water supply and wastewater removal. New York: John Wiley.
Hudson, H. L., Kirschner, R. J. and Clark, J. J. 1992. Clean Lakes Program, Phase 1:
Diagnostic/feasibility study of McCullom Lake, McHenry County, Illinois. Chicago:
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1983. Illinois Water Quality Report 1990–1991.
IEPA/WPC/92-055. Springfield, Illinois: IEPA.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1984. Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program—
Report for 1983 Wolf Lake/Cook Co. IEPA/WPC/84-015. Springfield, Illinois: IEPA.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1990. Title 35: Environmental protection, Subtitle
C: Water pollution. State of Illinois, Rules and Regulations, Springfield, Illinois: IEPA.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1992. Illinois Water Quality Report 1990–1991.
IEPA/WPC/92-055. Springfield, Illinois: IEPA.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1996. Illinois Water Quality Report 1994–1995.
Vol. 1. Springfield, Illinois: Bureau of Water, IEPA.
Illinois State Water Survey. 1989. Using copper sulfate to control algae in water supply
impoundment. Misc. Publ. 111. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
James, A. 1993. Modeling water quality in lakes and reservoirs. In: James, A. (ed.), An
introduction to water quality modeling, 2nd edn. Chichester: John Wiley.
Kohler, M. A., Nordenson, T. J. and Fox, W. E. 1955. Evaporation from pan and lakes.
US Weather Bureau Research Paper 38. Washington, DC.
Kohler, M. A., Nordenson, T. J. and Baker, D. R. 1959. Evaporation maps for the United
States. US Weather Bureau Technical Paper 37. Washington, DC.
Kothandaraman, V. and Evans, R. L. 1983. Diagnostic-feasibility study of Lake Le-Aqua-Na.,
Contract Report 313. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Lamoreux, W. M. 1962. Modern evaporation formulae adapted to computer use. Monthly
Weather Review, January.
Lin, S. D. 1994. Protocol for diagnostic/feasibility study of a lake. Proc. Aquatech Asia ‘94,
November 22–24, 1994, Singapore, pp. 165–176.
Lin, S. D. and Raman, R. K. 1997. Phase III, Post-restoration monitoring of Lake Le-Aqua-na.
Contract Report 610. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Lin, S. D. et al. 1996. Diagnostic feasibility study of Wolf Lake, Cook County, Illinois, and
Lake County, Indiana. Contract Report 604. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Lin, S. D., Bogner, W. C. and Raman, R. K. 1998. Diagnostic-feasibility study of Otter Lake,
Macoupin County, Illinois. Contract Report 652. Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Lin, S. D. 2001. Diagnostic-feasibility study of Nashville City Reservoir, Washington
County, Illinois. Contract Report (draft). Champaign: Illinois State Water Survey.
Linsley, R. K. and Franzinni, J. B. 1964. Water resources engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reckhow, K. H. and Chapra, S. C. 1983. Engineering approaches for lake management.
Vol. 1: Data analysis and empirical modeling. Woburn, Massachusetts: Butterworth.
Robert, W. J. and Stall, J. B. 1967. Lake evaporation in Illinois. Report of Investigation
57. Urbana: Illinois State Water Survey.
Sawyer, C. N. 1952. Some aspects of phosphate in relation to lake fertilization. Sewage
and Industrial Wastes 24(6): 768–776.
Lakes and Reservoirs 177
Shuttleworth, W. J. 1993. Evaporation. In: Maidment, D. R. (ed.) Handbook of hydrology.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tchobanoglous, G. and Schroeder, E. D. 1985. Water quality. Reading, Massachusetts:
Addison-Wesley.
US Army Corps of Engineers. 1986. HEC-5: Simulation of flood control and conservation
systems: Appendix on Water Quality Analysis. Davis, California: Hydrologic Engineering
Center, US Army Corps of Engineers.
US Army Corps of Engineers. 1989. HEC-5: Simulation of flood control and conservation
systems: Exhibit 8 of user’s manual: input description. Davis, California: Hydrologic
Engineering Center, US Army Corps of Engineers.
US Department of Agriculture. 1998. Soil survey of Washington County, Illinois. Washington,
DC: USDA.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Clean Lakes Program Guidance Manual.
USEPA-440/5-81-003. Washington, DC: USEPA.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1990. The lake and reservoir restoration guidance
manual, 2nd edn. USEPA-440/4-90-006. Washington, DC: USEPA.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. The watershed protection approach—an
overview. USEPA/503/9-92/002. Washington, DC: USEPA.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. The watershed protection approach—annual
report 1992. USEPA840-S-93-001. Washington, DC: USEPA.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. The quality of our nation’s water: 1992.
USEPA841-S-94-002. Washington, DC: USEPA.
US Geological Survey. 1954. Water loss investigations: Lake Hefner Studies. Technical
Report, Professional paper 269.
Walker, Jr., W. W. 1981a. Empirical methods for predicting eutrophication in impound-
ments. Part 1. Phase I: data base development. Environmental Engineers. Tech. Report
E-81-9, Concord, Massachusetts.
Walker, Jr., W. W. 1981b. Empirical methods for predicting eutrophication in impound-
ments. Part 2. Phase II: model testing. Environmental Engineers Tech. Report E-81-9,
Concord, Massachusetts.
Wetzel, R. G. 1975. Limnology. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Saunders.
Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D. 1965. Predicting rainfall—erosion losses from crop-
land east of the Rocky Mountains. Agriculture Handbook 282. Washington, DC: US
Department of Agriculture.
Wischmeier, W. H., Johnson, C. B. and Cross, B. V. 1971. A soil-erodibility monograph for
farmland and construction sites. J. Soil and Water Conservation 26(5): 189–193.
178 Chapter 2
Chapter
3
Groundwater
1 Definition 180
1.1 Groundwater and aquifer 180
1.2 Zones of influence and capture 182
1.3 Wells 183
2 Hydrogeologic Parameters 184
2.1 Aquifer porosity 184
2.2 Storativity 185
2.3 Transmissivity 185
2.4 Flow nets 186
2.5 Darcy’s law 187
2.6 Permeability 191
2.7 Specific capacity 195
3 Steady Flows in Aquifers 195
4 Anisotropic Aquifers 197
5 Unsteady (Nonequilibrium) Flows 198
5.1 Theis method 198
5.2 Cooper–Jacob method 202
5.3 Distance-drawdown method 204
5.4 Slug tests 206
6 Groundwater Contamination 211
6.1 Sources of contamination 211
6.2 Contaminant transport pathways 212
6.3 Underground storage tank 214
6.4 Groundwater treatment 216
7 Setback Zones 217
7.1 Lateral area of influence 218
7.2 Determination of lateral radius of influence 219
7.3 The use of volumetric flow equation 222
References 224
179
Copyright © 2007, 2001 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Click here for terms of use.
1 Definition
1.1 Groundwater and aquifer
Groundwater is subsurface water which occurs beneath the earth’s sur-
face. In a hydraulic water cycle, groundwater comes from surface waters
(precipitation, lake, reservoir, river, sea, etc.) and percolates into the
ground beneath the water table. The groundwater table is the surface
of the groundwater exposed to an atmospheric pressure beneath the
ground surface (the surface of the saturated zone). A water table may
fluctuate in elevation.
An aquifer is an underground water-saturated stratum or formation
that can yield usable amounts of water to a well. There are two differ-
ent types of aquifers based on physical characteristics. If the saturated
zone is sandwiched between layers of impermeable material and the
groundwater is under pressure, it is called a confined aquifer (Fig. 3.1).
If there is no impermeable layer immediately above the saturated zone,
that is called an unconfined aquifer. In an unconfined aquifer, the top
of the saturated zone is the water table defined as above.
Aquifers are replenished by water infiltrated through the earth above
from the upland area. The area replenishing groundwater is called the
recharge area. In reverse, if the groundwater flows to the lower land
area, such as lakes, streams, or wetlands, it is called discharge.
On the earth, approximately 3% of the total water is freshwater. Of
this, groundwater comprises 95%, surface water 3.5%, and soil moisture
1.5%. Out of all the freshwater on earth, only 0.36% is readily available
to use (Leopold, 1974).
Groundwater is an important source of water supply. Fifty-three
percent of the population of the United States receives its water supply
from groundwater or underground sources (US EPA, 1994). Groundwater
is also a major source of industrial uses (cooling, water supply, etc.) and
agricultural uses (irrigation and livestock). The quantity of groundwa-
ter available is an important value. The so-called safe yield of an aquifer
is the practicable rate of withdrawing water from it perennially. Such
a safe amount does not exist, however.
The quantity of groundwater is also affected by water engineering. For
decades and centuries, through improper disposal of wastes (solid, liquid,
and gaseous) to the environment and subsurface areas, many ground-
waters have become contaminated. Major sources of contaminants are
possibly from landfill leachate, industrial wastes, agricultural chemicals,
wastewater effluents, oil and gasoline (underground tanks, animal
wastes, acid-mine drainage, road salts, hazardous wastes spillage,
household and land chemicals, etc.). Illegal dumping of wastes and toxic
chemicals to waterways and to lands are major environmental problems
in many countries. Water quality problem is grown in the United States
and in global.
180 Chapter 3
Groundwater 181
Efforts to protect the quantity and quality of groundwater have been
made by cooperation between all government agencies, interested par-
ties, and researchers. Most states are responsible for research, educa-
tion, establishment of minimum setback zones for public and private
water supply wells, and contamination survey and remediation.
Figure 3.1 Drawdown, cone of depression, and radius of influence in unconfined
and confined aquifers (Illinois EPA, 1995).
1.2 Zones of influence and capture
The withdrawal of groundwater by a pumping well causes a lowering
of the water level. Referring to Fig. 3.2, the difference between water
levels during nonpumping and pumping is called drawdown. The pattern
of drawdown around a single pumping well resembles a cone. The area
182 Chapter 3
Figure 3.2 Relationship between the cone of depression and the zone of capture within a
regional flow field (Illinois EPA, 1995).
affected by the pumping well is called the cone of depression, the radius
of influence, or lateral area of influence (LAI). Within the LAI, the flow
velocity continuously increases as it flows toward the well due to grad-
ually increased slope or hydraulic gradient.
As a well pumps groundwater to the surface, the groundwater with-
drawn from around the well is replaced by water stored within the
aquifer. All water overlaid on the nonpumping potentiometric surface
will eventually be pulled into the well. This area of water entering the
area of influence of the well is called the zone of capture (ZOC), zone of
contribution, or capture zone (Fig. 3.2). The ZOC generally extends
upgradient from the pumping well to the edge of the aquifer or to a
groundwater divide. The ZOC is usually asymmetrical. It is important
to identify the ZOC because any pollution will be drawn toward the
well, subsequently contaminating the water supply.
A ZOC is usually referred to the time of travel as a time-related cap-
ture zone. For instance, a “10-year” time-related capture zone is the
area within which the water at the edge of the zone will reach the well
within 10-years. The state primacy has established setback zones for
wells which will be discussed later.
Example 1: Groundwater flows into a well at 4 in/d (10 cm/d) and is 365 ft
(111 m) from the well. Estimate the capture time.
solution:
Time ⫽ 365 ft/(4/12 ft/d)
⫽ 1095 days
or ⫽ 3-year time-related capture zone
Example 2: Calculate the distance from a well to the edge of the 3-year cap-
ture zone if the groundwater flow is 2 ft/d (0.61 m/d).
solution:
Distance ⫽ 2 ft/d ⫻ 3 years ⫻ 365 d/yr
⫽ 2190 ft
or ⫽ 668 m
1.3 Wells
Wells are classified according to their uses by the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). A public well is defined as having a minimum
of 15 service connections or serving 25 persons at least 60 d/yr.
Community public wells serve residents the year round. Noncommunity
public wells serve nonresidential populations at places such as schools,
factories, hotels, restaurants, and campgrounds. Wells that do not meet
the definition of public wells are classified as either semiprivate or private.
Groundwater 183
Semiprivate wells serve more than one single-family dwelling, but fewer
than 15 connections or serving 25 persons. Private wells serve an owner-
occupied single-family dwelling.
Wells are also classified into types based on construction. The most
common types of wells are drilled and bored dependent on the aquifer
to be tapped, and the needs and economic conditions of the users (Babbitt
et al., 1959; Forest and Olshansky, 1993).
2 Hydrogeologic Parameters
There are three critical aquifer parameters: porosity, specific yield (or
storativity for confined aquifers), and hydraulic conductivity (including
anisotropy). These parameters required relatively sophisticated field
and laboratory procedures for accurate measurement.
Porosity and specific yield/storativity express the aquifer storage
properties. Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) and transmissivity
describe the groundwater transmitting properties.
2.1 Aquifer porosity
The porosity of soil or fissured rock is defined as the ratio of void volume
to total volume (Wanielista, 1990; Bedient and Huber, 1992):
(3.1)
where n ⫽ porosity
V
v
⫽ volume of voids within the soil
V ⫽ total volume of sample (soil)
V
s
⫽ volume of the solids within the soil
⫽ dry weight of sample/specific weight
The ratio of the voids to the solids within the soil is called the void ratio
e expressed as
e ⫽ V
v
/V
s
(3.2)
Then the relationship between void ratio and porosity is
(3.3)
or
(3.4)n 5
e
1 1 e
e 5
n
1 2 n
n 5
V
v
V
5
sV 2 V
s
d
V
5 1 2
V
s
V
184 Chapter 3