Leveraging XPSWMM and ICM Modeling for Water Quality Projects
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•21 views
11th International Drainage Symposium August 30-September 2, 2022 Des Moines, Iowa
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Leveraging XPSWMM and ICM Modeling for Water Quality Projects
Similar to Leveraging XPSWMM and ICM Modeling for Water Quality Projects (20)
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Leveraging XPSWMM and ICM Modeling for Water Quality Projects
- 1. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM + ICM Modeling Leveraging Support for Water Quality Projects Bailey Griffin, PE ISGWater Resources Engineer 2022 International Drainage Symposium
- 2. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com ISG Representative Bailey Griffin, PE, ISGWater Resources Engineer 507.387.6651 | Bailey.Griffin@ISGInc.com
- 3. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Firm Overview Business Units Commercial Education Food + Industrial Government + Cultural Healthcare Housing Mining PublicWorks Sports + Recreation Telecommunications + Energy Transportation Water 450+ Multi-Disciplinary Professionals 11 Midwest Offices One Profit Center
- 4. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Modeling Goals Evaluate hydraulic changes • Peak flow rates • Water elevations • Detention times • Velocities Evaluate downstream effects Display drainage benefits Display Multi-purpose Drainage Management (MDM) and water quality benefits
- 5. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM + InfoWorks ICM These Modeling Powerhouses • Are useful in urban systems and agricultural watersheds • Provide dynamic 1D and 2D flow calculations • Account for topography, land use, soil types, and infiltration • Have multiple features for hydrology and visualize complex systems and impacts to hydrology • Can be integrated into other software's such as GIS and AutoCAD for: • Hydrology inputs • Pipe Networks • Terrain Models • Powerful visual results
- 6. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM
- 7. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM
- 8. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM Existing Proposed
- 9. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com
- 10. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com InfoWorks ICM
- 11. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com InfoWorks ICM
- 12. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com
- 13. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Model Differences XPSWMM • Free XPSWMM viewer • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved model • 2D grid • Rigid 2D grids with entire grid at one elevation InfoWorks ICM • Data queries • Faster model setup • Analysis of results for viewing results • Transportable databases • 2D results • Flows, elevation, depths, and other information are collected along 2D mesh without requiring rerun of the model • 2D meshing • Triangular dynamic meshing can be modified with breaklines to increase accuracy of important features • Varies based on terrain sensitivity • Faster run times
- 14. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Grids
- 15. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Case Study: Jackson County Judicial Ditch No. 3 Watershed size • 17,058 acres Existing capacity • Drainage coefficient averages 0.15 inches per day at tile outlets System issues • Outlet channel failing • Undersized tiles • Inadequate tile depths • 100+ year old tile
- 16. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Case Study: Jackson County Judicial Ditch No. 3
- 17. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com Case Study: Jackson County Judicial Ditch No. 3 Proposed project • Clean all public ditches • Improve 50% of public tile • Incorporate 72 acre-feet of storage volume • Incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs)
- 18. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com
- 19. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com $86,500 grant funds utilized for water quality improvements Case Study: Jackson County Judicial Ditch No. 3 Projects in Progress • Wetlands • Riparian buffer Partners • Landowners • Heron Lake Watershed District • Jackson County • Minnesota Board ofWater + Soil Resources • ISG
- 20. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com XPSWMM + InfoWorks ICM Benefits This technology helps us to design better • Controlled drainage • Storage • Bioreactors • Saturated buffers • Wetlands • Water recycling • And more! XPSWMM models and drone footage are used to verify water storage and pothole areas in watersheds – helping us to properly size improvements and put storage and BMPs in the correct areas.
- 21. Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning | ISGInc.com THANK YOU! Bailey Griffin, PE, ISGWater Resources Engineer 507.387.6651 | Bailey.Griffin@ISGInc.com
Editor's Notes
- Welcome to the presentation for XPSWMM + InfoWorks ICM Modeling – Leveraging support for water quality projects
- My name is Bailey Griffin – I am a water resources engineer at ISG
- ISG is a multi- disciplinary consulting firm with 11 offices in the upper Midwest. We offer services under a variety of business units for architecture, engineering, environmental and planning services – I am based on out of the Minneapolis office and primarily work in the rural water resources spaces working on variety of projects that range from watershed planning, culvert sizing, wetland restoration, and agricultural drainage mostly within southern Minnesota.
- Most if not all the projects that I work on have some sort of modeling component. Today’s presentation will focus on the use of XP SWMM and InfoWorks ICM software's – which can also be called ICM for shorthand – and the use of these looking particularly at public drainage improvements. Public drainage systems in the Midwest for those that may not be familiar are public infrastructure the is maintained and governed by Local Government and are larger mainline tiles and open ditches that allow for outlets and conveyance ways for private tiling at the field scale – When analyzing these systems, we are looking at the sub - watershed scale (over a 1000-acres up to 50K acres at the largest system we have modeled , not necessarily field scale Modeling for drainage improvement is required by the law the governs public drainage - which would include any changes in hydraulic capacity which that would increase tile sizes or slopes – however there are many caveats in the drainage law that I will not get into today. When modeling we are looking to evaluate those hydraulic changes based on the design including comparing changes I peak flow rates, water elevations, detention times, and velocities throughout the system. We are doing this to determine what the impacts might be to downstream waters and downstream landowners. We are also evaluating this throughout the system to ensure there is a drainage benefit resulting in the proposed project looking to aid in the cost – benefit analysis. We have also use these models to help leverage support and show benefits of the inclusion of Multipurpose drainage management and water quality practices on these large scale drainage improvements.
- As I mentioned – today’s presentation will focus on XPSWMM and InfoWorks ICM. These modeling software's are very similar in their capabilities – The both provide dynamic and simultaneous 1D / 2D modeling. This means the 1D components such as open channels and tile flow and 2D components such as over land flow are modeled together. The 2D components are modeled using gridded surface data that can be both lidar or surveyed data or a combination of both – so this is relatively accurate. There are features to account for and manipulate the land use, soil types, and infiltration that is present throughout the watershed to account for that spatially across a watershed. Multiple options are available for how the hydrology is modeled and calculated within the watershed. Each have the ability to use data from other software's such as GIS and AutoCAD for assistance with hydrology, pipe networks, and terrain models – which can save lots of time and be integrated in other processes in design and development of construction In addition – both also have powerful visual results
- Here is an example of the XP Interface where the Nodes are are the hydrology inputs for each subcatchment with in the watershed. The 1D calculation are conducted on the tiles and open ditches which are represented on by the blue and black lines – and the 2D calculation will be conducted across the surface
- While there are traditional output within XP that such as hydrographs and hydraulic grade lines that are very useful to engineers – this information is not common knowledge to people that we are working with staff, elected officials, and farmers.
- The power visuals that are shown by XP – This shows the maximum water depth after a rain event on the same location clearly showing the reduction and benefit to the landowner.
- We can also develop videos that clearly show not just the maximum depths – but allows the addition of time and the different in the duration. Existing is the as-constructed model.
- Similarly ICM also includes 1D link and nodes with hydrology inputs with the use of surface for 2D modeling.
- There are also traditional output – A little more dynamic analyzing features. We can move the time throughout the rain event to see the changes in flood extents, hydraulic gradient and where that falls within the hydrograph. Another benefit of ICM is that these windows can all be viewed at the same time to show comparisons between results.
- ICM also has the ability to develop videos that are very similar that can compare existing and proposed conditions within the watershed. F On left – as constructed = existing and proposed to show how the project will impact flow extents, depths and duration of flooding.
- There are a couple of difference that I would like to highlight between the two software. XP SWMM does have a free viewer which does come into play if client or agency would like to review any models, this gives them the ability to do so without having to purchase program software. XPSWMM is also approved model for FEMA. Currently ICM is not FEMA approved, but it does have some regional approvals ICM also has some unique features including data queries that can be used for building models and inputting data as well as for reviewing results. This can help for faster model setup and faster high-level model reviews. With results this can also be used for helping to identifying and troubleshooting modeling builds Model data can also be very large to store – transferable database for the model itself and the results files make it much easier to manage the data files. 2D results for ICM are also calculated throughout the model – where as in XPSWMM locations need to be determine before hand and model re-ran to acquire those results Overall model run times are faster in ICM – cutting down time allowing for faster turn and more intentions and options that can be run in the same about of time allowing for better designs.
- In all one of largest differences in the models from a person that is a modeler is the way models are setup for 2d meshing or gridding. In XP SWMM it utilized a standard rigid grid across the surface. The grid takes the average elevation across that section. So in areas that are flat it does a great job, but areas that have great variation in elevation such as along open ditch or on slopes - these are usually the features that we want to model – the standard gridding can be difficult to capture the surfaces true elevations. In ICM the 2D meshing is triangulated TIN meshing that evaluates the elevation along each TIN line. The TINs can be set up to vary based on terrain sensitivity. So areas where there is a lot of elevation variability there will be more cells and areas that are flat will have. This helps with model run time. If you are ramping down on the cell size to accommodate one area it can greatly increase the run time. The number of cells the model needs to calculate greatly changes the run time of the model. For this reason, ICM has much more sophisticated surface abilities that allow modelers to be more accurate in what is actually on the ground surface.
- Next, we will be going through the case study of Jackson County Judicial Ditch No. 3. This is large public drainage system located in Jackson County in Southern MN. The watershed has about 17,058 acres. The system consists of tile and open ditch with the tiles having an average drainage coefficient of 0.15 inches per day at the tile outlets which is about 30% of the recommended capacity. For meeting the drainage needs of today’s farming practices in Southern MN we recommend achieving a drainage coefficient of 0.5 inches per day. Many other issues that needed to be address in the system including failing open ditch outlet that had substantial bank failures as well as under inadequate tile depths and old tiles that had began to fail due to it running it full life span. Insteady of being reactive and reapiring items as needed – which can become expensive when continually conducting repairs – the landowner opted to petition for improvement. PN 17285 Originally constructed in 1907 with multiple major repairs to the open ditch with cleaning and bank repairs. Continual spot repairs to tile. Large improvement in 1915 that added a multiple supplementary tiles to the west half of the system. Entire project is 15.5M for the entire project
- Above is a map for the watershed with the red outlining the watershed boundary, the black lines are the existing tiles, and the green are the areas that the tiles were improved by upsizing the tiles capacities. The teal line is the open ditch . Due to the fact that this was an improvement project – we were required by law to model how the drainage project may impact the watershed and its outlet – Heron Lake. In additional to the drainage improvement there was also multiple multi-purpose drainage management practices that were included in the project. There were two wetlands and a riparian storage areas included in the project. Wetland / pond (10 – acres) Wetland (photo on next slide) Riparian storage area Future project may include potential expansion of wetland area on the wetland / Pond area to include an additional 110-acres Pink is deepening ditch, teal is cleaning, orange is abandoned
- In summary the project included cleaning or improvement all public drainage ditched, improving 50% of public tiles, and incorporated f 72 acre-feet of storage in the system through implementation of wetlands and riparian storage area.
- One of the main ways we were able to “sell” storage to the system was through the use of our storage videos using XPSWMM. The video above shows
- Currently the projects are getting constructed. With partners of the Heron Lake Watershed District, Jackson County, and the MN board of water and soil resources we were able to leverage $86,500 of grant funds for inclusion of these MDM practices. This allowed ability enhance designs and go above and beyond for enhancements in water quality.
- Jackson JD 3 is just one example of how these models helped to leverage support for MDM practices to improve water quality and implement storage on a drainage project.
- Thank you – and if time allows I would be happy to answer any questions. Questions: Jackson JD 36 Run time slide difference – Run times were about half changing the run time 2 hours to run on XP and under an hour ICM. There are many caveats with this – what was the difference in cells and density of cells and what was the timestep for both models? Both are dynamic timesteps that change based on the model needs.