1 / 21

Estimation of Truckee Canal Losses

Estimation of Truckee Canal Losses. Truckee Canal Mass Balance. TRD = Truckee River Diversion (Gage nr Wadsworth) – Canal Inflow TDD = Truckee Division Diversion TCL = Truckee Canal Losses (Seepage + Evaporation) TCH = Truckee Canal Hazen (Gage nr Hazen)

guy
Download Presentation

Estimation of Truckee Canal Losses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Estimation of Truckee Canal Losses

  2. Truckee Canal Mass Balance TRD = Truckee River Diversion (Gage nr Wadsworth) – Canal Inflow TDD = Truckee Division Diversion TCL = Truckee Canal Losses (Seepage + Evaporation) TCH = Truckee Canal Hazen (Gage nr Hazen) Canal Outflow to Lahontan Reservoir Flow to Pyramid TDD Gage nr Hazen TCL TRD Truckee River TCH Gage nr Wads Inflow Vol. = Outflow Vol. TRD = TDD + TCL + TCH

  3. Modeling Canal Losses • For RW Model – Ideally would like to relate losses canal flow • Normal depth flow – as flow ^, depth ^, wetted perim ^, seepage^ • Early attempts failed to establish good correlation due to many • reasons: • Normal depth conditions do not exist for much of the year with check structures. • Several lateral diversions along 18 mi. length. • Compounding gage errors.

  4. Estimation of Truckee Canal Losses in the Current RiverWare TROF Model • Study by Coors and Mann: Modeled combination of • TDD + TCL (total depletion). • For the Ops model at time – no reason to separate. • TDD + TCL (Depletions) = TRD (Wads) – TCH (Hazen). • Analyzed 34 years of data (1970 – 2003).

  5. Canal Flow and Depletion Characterization • TDD + TCL does not vary much from year to year. • Temporal seasonal pattern is very regular. • Irrigated acreage decreasing over time.

  6. Verification of Modeled Depletions • The model averages the last 3 years of daily gage data to forecast TDD + TCL for the remainder of the year. • Accounts for decreasing irrigation acreage.

  7. Comparison of Actual vs. Simulated TDD+TCL • Avg Annual Deviation = 7.1 KAF (16.8%)

  8. Current Analysis to Improve Truckee Canal Loss Estimation • (Preliminary – for discussion) • Objective: Separate TDD and TCL to allow for • flexibility in changing TDD over time. • - Use of additional data to improve TCL/Flow • relationship (through 2010). • - Try monthly regression to account for variability • in checking, evaporation, and seepage rates.

  9. Previous Work in 1996 for OCAP • Analysis of Truckee Canal Losses from 1967-1995 • TCL vs. Truckee Division Diversion + Truckee Canal Flow at Hazen • Three seasonal groups: • Summer (May-Sept) • Spring and Fall (March, April, Oct, Nov) • Winter (Dec-Feb) • Results

  10. Previous Work in 1996 – Fig. 1 R2 =0.12 (Summer)

  11. Previous Work in 1996 – Fig. 2 R2 =0.07 (Spring & Fall)

  12. Previous Work in 1996 – Fig. 3 R2 =0.01 (Winter)

  13. Hypothesis: • Truckee Canal Losses Increase with Increased Wetted Perimeter and Depth • Used a monthly break down to improve correlation between flow and loss • Tried to correlate canal loss with Wadsworth • gage flow • Two sets of data: 1967-1995 and 2001-2010

  14. Hypothesis: Truckee Canal Losses Increase with Increased Wetted Perimeter and Depth

  15. Results – Monthly Regression

  16. Results – Monthly Regression

  17. Results – Monthly Regression

  18. Monthly Results • Did not use TC losses that were 0’s, negative numbers, or outliers • We tried a power function fit, linear produced a better R-value • Significant improvement over previous seasonal regression

  19. Results – Daily Regression

  20. Data Issues / Sources of Error • Checking uncertainty • Compounding gage errors with lateral data • Long canal with diversions distributed along • the length of the canal • 12 hour travel time between TC Wadsworth gage and TC Hazen gage • Varying operational strategies

  21. Moving Forward - Ideas for future improvements: • Try regressing to Hazen gage (TCID operates the TC differently with water running to Lahontan. If there is no water running to Lahontan then the TC is full checked up) • Try breaking data out by different operating periods: • Past-Feb 1999 • March 1999-Jan 5, 2008 (Dave Overvold Era) • Feb 2008-Present (After breach) • Fortran canal loss equation • Physical model? • Additional regressors? • Suggestions from group?

More Related